cieties of Harplane and Grace-street church in London. In the progress of these contentions, a party arose, who carried the principles of one of these sects into their full length. The one had reasoned that as each had his Christ in him, there was no need for discipline: the new sect argued that on the same principle there can be no real necessity for meetings for worship. We have the perfect rule in us; why should we meet in public, to give or to receive instruction from any man? Shackleton and his adherents in Ireland, have lately revived this idea, and have created serious troubles in the body in that country.*

Near the close of the 17th century, the Keithian controversy arose: it affected one of the most important doctrines of christianity. In the year 1692, Keith, a zealous Quaker, being in Philadelphia, discovered that the society used the greatest licentiousness, in doing away, by allegory, the narrative of the real Y sufferings of Christ; and consequently the doctrine of a real atonement. He suspected them of being infected with the spirit of deism. He drew on him the resentment of the body. Penn was at this time in London. Not understanding the true cause of the dispute, he addressed a letter to Turner, a justice in Philadelphia. He defends "honest G. Keith and his Platonic studies." Keith returned to London. He soon discovered that these sentiments, which he had attacked, were not confined to the transatlantic Quakers. Penn had spoken from the text, "the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sins." This exposition was strictly orthodox on their principles. "The blood is the life, and the life is the light within them." Keith, at a subsequent meeting, took up this subject, and showed that "sin was cleansed by the blood of the true Christ actually shed on Calvary." Penn started from his seat; and, as he afterwards stated in the annual meeting, being so "transported by the power of God, that he was carried out of himself, and did not know whether he was sitting, or standing, or on his knees: he thundered forth this anathema," “I pronounce thee an apostate, over the head of thee." The great body followed Penn. Keith was condemned by an edict of the

* See Shack. Lett. to the Monthly Meeting of Carlow, 1801, and Rathbone's Nar. p. 164.

"Snake, &c." p. 71 and 282.

annual meeting, but was not tardy in his own defence: he denounced the society as Deists, under the disguise of allegory, and he went as far as arguments can go to establish the fact.*

In 1711, a dissention arose in the annual meeting in London. It was in consequence of an attempt, by a strong party, to have a general review of the Friend's books; and to expunge any errors that might be found in them. Whitehead was the head of the other party. He argued, that a project of this kind, was a virtual surrender of their infallibility and inspiration. His party prevailed. Hence it is, that the polemics of the society defend every expression that dropt from the pen of their ancients. They would not surrender, to their opponents, one item; nor deign to offer one apology. In Whiting's collection of the books of the society, however, it appears that great freedoms have been used. The fact has been established, by a comparison of the ancient and modern editions, that the most offensive expressions have been expunged: that Fox's Journal, in particular, had undergone a severe castigation. Nor is this to be wondered at. Penn has advocated the measure in a similar case. When Fox and he ventured to alter, to a more orthodox sense, a paper "given forth by inspiration," he defended the deed on this ground, “that the spirit of the prophets is subject to the prophets."‡

Besides these divisions, the Free Quakers, who justly advocate the principle of self-defence, have formed themselves into a society. There are, also, the Jumping Quakers, who, in the days of Penn, seceded, under their leader, Case.§ These copied their gestures from the ancient Salii, the priests of Mars, in preference to the priestess of Delphi. Instead of the devout acts of trembling and quaking, they adopted those of jumping! They are perpetuated among us to this day. They exist near Albany, and in the state of Ohio. "They may be considered," said uncle John, "as a species of extravagance, even in the kingdom of darkness. And yet, (such is human nature) they may maintain their march till they fall before the glory of the latter day! For

* See Keith's " Deism of W. Penn," and Mosh. vol. v. cent. 17. ch. 4. sect. 2. part 2. See note B. appendix 1.

Bugg's Pict. p. 64, 65. "Snake, &c." p. 113.

See vol. ii. p. 217.

§ See "The Quakers, a divided people," publ. in A. D. 1708.

though their doctrinal system is rotten to the core, they do, nathless, retain much of the decencies and loveliness of morality in their private manners."

§ 26. Human nature is the same in all societies. The spirit of persecution has disgraced almost every section of christians. The Puritans were persecuted by the Hierarchy. In New England, the Puritans persecuted the Friends.* And amiable as they are, the Friends have had a visit from this demon. Those who have studied their history, will remember the cases of Pierson, and of King, and of Chadwell, and Ann Mudd. In their sufferings we have a view, in miniature, of the members of the society retaliating on individuals that cruelty which fell on them from a persecuting priesthood. Those persons disturbed the Friends' meetings as Fox and others did those of the church. They were dragged out, and subjected to that specific cruelty, which Fox records in his case. Pierson was insulted; his clothes were torn; "his blood was shed;" he was laid across a horse and carried by Friends to an ale house. They had him seized by a warrant; he was dragged before a justice. Four times they imprisoned him in arbitrary prisons: twice they placed him in the jail of Carlisle; and finally, at the annual meeting, they contrived to have him arrested, under a charge of debt, and thrown into a jail in London. His feeling appeals against the society, are made precisely in the words of Fox against the church, and the cruel magistracy of his day.t

To the same spirit, we must ascribe their harsh measures of discipline. Members have been expelled because they had scruples against rising and uncovering during prayer. Some have felt the thunders of their vatican, because they sold a book hostile to their tenets. If members marry out of the society, they

* I magnify not the spot on the character of those great men who founded New England. I simply state a fact. And that spot is certainly covered by that glory which their sons and their daughters have thrown around them by their perfect liberality, and by their superior labours in the Bible and Missionary causes.

+ Penn ii. 193, 212, 214, and Muckalow's book, p. 22 and 29, and Pierson's "Relation of the implacable cruelty of the Quak. A. D. 1713," and Bugg's Picture of Quak.

Rathb. Nar. p. 72.

SI refer the Quaker to their Regist. of Condem. for 1681, and “Snake, &c." edit. 3. p. 308, 309, or edit. 2. p. 304.

are forthwith expelled. And in our large cities, this infliction on a merchant, who has been brought up in the society, and who has his mercantile concerns chiefly among them, is a signal for his ruin.* In Ireland, and sometimes in England, they inflict a kind of civil penalty on those who marry out of their community. The parents of the offending parties "are enjoined by the annual meeting, not to give them any of their substance or portion," until they return to the unity of the body. And those parents who "shall give portions to them, or entertain them, or be familiar with them," shall "be closely dealt with." And if they persist, they too shall be excluded. And this exclusion, in every case, except that of the rich and independent, is paramount to ruin in temporal concerns.‡

§ 27.-The Society, from its first appearance, has had this peculiar feature, that it has always stood alone. It has been an Ishmael on the limits of the Reformed churches. It has been against every one of her sections, and every one of them has been against it. Toward the close of the 17th century, the tide of public opinion was directed against them with constant and increasing violence. The pulpit and the press were put in requisition. Individuals and whole counties, ministers and laymen, bishops and judges united their efforts to repel their violence against the doctrines and institutions of Christ. Hicks had convicted them of impiety and irreverence toward the Holy Scriptures.§ "The magistracy, the gentlemen and ministry of the county of Lancaster," had petitioned the council to interpose, to set bounds to their errors and disorders.|| Dr. Owen, a voluminous writer against the society, but who seldom named them, had, with his known weight of talents, and with great moderation, followed them over their system, and had given triumphant refutations of their errors in the Trinity, on the person of Christ: on the person and ope

* See the melancholy details in Evans's Narrative. Philad. Athen. Libr. pampl. vol. 53, no. 4.

See extracts of the National Half-years' meeting, A. D. 1680. Rathbone's do. appendix, no. 6, on the connexion between disownment and persecution.

Dialogue between a Christian and Quak. Penn ii. p. 590, and Rathbone's Narrative, appendix no. 5. Phil. Libr. no. 3798, octavo. See the petition in "Snake, &c." p. 21.

rations of the spirit: on the Scriptures: on the Sabbath and the divine ordinances.* Judge Hale had exposed their "superstitious folly, in placing so much of their religion in keeping on the hat; in using thee and thou; in changing names of days and months." He had exposed their "subtle schemes, in drawing off the people from christian institutions and the ministry, that they might infuse into them their corrupt principles." Faldo had, at the bar of the public, convicted them of Socinian errors. Stalham had, with great effect, exhibited their contradictions with themselves and with the Scriptures. The amiable and sensible Scandrett had travelled over their system, and exposed, in the most candid manner, their complicated errors. Twenty-one divines, among whom we find the names of Manton, Gouge and Baxter, had established the fact, that the leaders of the society had formed a medley of Sabellian and Socinian errors in their creed.¶ Three learned rectors,** in a joint production, entitled, “ The Principles of Quakers shown to be blasphemous and seditious,” had roused the indignation of the religious public, and spread alarm through the body of the society. Leslie, the favourite of the public in that dispute, and distinguished for his ingenuity and solidity, his sallies of wit and satire, had exposed on every vulnerable point, the errors, the superstition and contradictions of the society. The venerable bishop of Cork had, with dignity and success, shown that the society was not only enveloped in a cloud of errors, but that not two of their leaders were agreed about their first principle.‡‡ Keith had shown, by abundant evidence, that by means of allegory, they had removed from their system, the

* Each of these is discussed less, or more fully, in different parts of his

works.

Sir Matthew Hale's Works, vol. i. p. 208. edit. 1805.

In his "Quakerism no Christianity." A. D. 1673.

$"Reviler rebuked."

"Antidote against Quak." Small quarto, in the Philad. Libr. no. 1323. See Calamy's Ejected Min. Art. Scandrett.

¶ See Pref. to Faldo, and also Penn, ii. 608.

** Dr. Beckham, Dr. Meriton and Dr. Topcliffe.

"Snake in the Grass" It went through three editions in little more than a year. It was the object of assault by every Quaker author. No Quaker can speak of this book in temperate language. See no. 474,

duod. Philad. Libr.

See his Testimony, &c." and Penn, ii. 885. They cannot agree on the nature of the light in them. See vol. ii. ch. vi. following.