will that they should minister, they believe it will be manifested to them by the divine Spirit, where they are to speak, whom they are to address, and what things they are to express. In the exercise of so high and sacred a function, they dare not depend, either in a greater or a less degree, upon their own strength or wisdom; but they feel constrained to place their sole reliance upon Him who searcheth the reins and the heart;' upon him who hath the key of David,' who 'openeth, and no man shutteth, and shutteth, and no man openeth.'"*

Bishop Burnet, speaking of this inward vocation, says, “No man ought to think of this profession, unless he feels within himself a love to religion, with a zeal for it, and an internal true piety; which is chiefly kept by secret prayer, and by reading of the scriptures. As long as these things are burdensome to the mind, they are infallible indications that he has no inward vocation, or notion of the Holy Ghost to undertake it. The capital error in men's preparing themselves for that function is, that they study books more than themselves, and that they read divinity more in other books than in the scriptures." Again, he says, "Ask yourselves often, would you follow that course of life, if there were no settled establishment belonging to it, and if you were to preach under the cross, and in danger of persecution? For till you arrive at that, you are yet carnal, and come into the priesthood for a piece of bread. Above all things, raise within yourselves a zeal for doing good, and for gaining souls; indeed, I have lamented, during my whole life, that I saw so little true zeal among our clergy."

It is not only upon the principle of non-maintenance that the Quakers object to the payment of tithes, but they deny also the assumed divine right of any christian church to them. They consider that modern tithes originated in the covetousness of the Romish church during the dark ages, and that the notion of a divine right to them was never entertained in this country, before an act to that effect was passed by Henry VIII., which is the only claim the church can produce for this assumed right. This right they deny upon the following grounds :-First, because the only tithe mentioned in scripture formed a part of the Levitical Gurney's "Distinguishing Features," &c., chap. v.

Law, of which law Christ was the end; and who in sending forth his disciples to preach the glad tidings of the gospel, commanded them to do it freely and without pay. Secondly, because the Levites being one of the twelve tribes, and consequently entitled to their share in the division of the land, were allotted by God, in lieu thereof, the tithes of the whole land. A tenth part only of these tithes were allowed to the officiating priests, the remainder was for the maintenance of the tribe itself, out of which alone could be chosen this order of priesthood. And as no parity can be drawn between the order of priests ordained under the Mosaic Law, and that of the present order of preachers, who can be chosen from all ranks and all nations: so they consider that this modern claim to a divine right, originating in an encroachment of papal power, can in no wise be justified, either by scripture or right reason. Their objections upon this point, therefore, amount to a religious principle.

It is curious that this assumption of the church to a divine right to tithe, which at times has caused so much religious animosity, and which originated in an act of parliament, during the changing times of Henry VIII., should have been finally settled by another recent act, that in a few years will abolish tithes altogether; substituting in their stead a rent-charge, and changing the alleged divine right into a legal maintenance for a national church.

The foregoing tenets, Clarkson considers as the four grand tenets and distinguishing features of the Society. Oaths and warfare, they consider opposed to the very spirit of christianity; and however the prejudices of education and habit may incline us to think otherwise, yet, if we were, abstractedly from all established notions upon these points, rationally to consider those passages in the gospel, together with the corroborating testimonies of the apostles, which bear upon them; we can scarcely do otherwise than acknowledge, that the Quakers have arrived at just conclusions thereon. In the exercise of their duties as ministers, they nobly choose to follow the express injunctions of our Lord to his disciples, when he sent them forth to preach without pay; in which practice they feel themselves supported by the example of the apostles, who gloried that they made the gospel of no

charge to those who received it, that they preached its doctrine without gain, and that they maintained themselves by the labour of their own hands. In this respect, holding up to us a pattern of a ministry, altogether purer and more apostolic than is to be found in any other christian church. For as the ministers of other communities do not even profess an equal reliance upon the divine teachings of the Spirit, but trust also to the aids of school wisdom and polite learning, (which, St. Paul tells us, "is foolishness with God,") 1 Cor. iii. 19; so also they even stoop to make a gain or livelihood of their spiritual labours, and cannot, therefore, be regarded in the noble light of the disinterested apostolic preachers of the early church, but merely in the secondary light of paid instructors.

They farther consider the mind of man to be endowed with a spiritual as well as an intellectual faculty, and that religious growth and experience is a spiritual acquirement, in no ways dependent upon mental or intellectual abilities; a fact which, it is deeply to be regretted, has been proved by instances of profound erudition, and brilliant talent having been united with the grossest infidelity.

When the period shall arrive that the "stone that was cut out without hands" shall have become "a great mountain," and shall have "filled the whole earth;" and when all the nations of it shall call upon the holy name of Jesus, and shall become not only christians in profession, but also in the practice of all its pure and peaceable precepts, then such essential tenets as the above will be fully appreciated, and the whole human family will become Quakers upon these characteristic features of the one religion of Christ. Then shall be experienced individual subjugation of the passions, and universal benevolence to man, then shall "they beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning-hooks-Isa. xliv ;" then shall "the wolf dwell with the lamb, and the leopard lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion, and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them."-Isa. xi. 6.

PART III.

PECULIARITIES, OR SECTARIAN DISTINCTIONS.

The Quakers have many peculiarities that distinguish them, both in appearance and manner, from all other people. The most conspicuous of which, are their dress and address; in the former, following a model peculiar to themselves, both as to the cut and colour of their garments, carefully avoiding the use of all superfluities, ornaments, and gay colours. This singularity of appearance, they adopt upon the principle, that it is both unbecoming and inconsistent for a humble and serious people to indulge themselves in any kind of vain and frivolous personal adornments, their spiritual welfare being an object of too important, and too absorbing a nature, to allow their minds to be engrossed by such minor considerations, especially when they have a tendency to excite the earthly feelings of pride and vainglory. In confirmation of these sentiments, we are again referred to our Saviour's incomparable sermon, where we are beautifully cautioned against a too absorbing anxiety about the things of this life: "Therefore, I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for the body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment ?"-" But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you."-Matt. vi. 24, to the end. This striking personal feature, which originated in the plain attire of the sober-minded and religious people, who mostly composed the first converts of their founder, George Fox, and who, by their example, testified against the frivolity and extravagance of the prevailing fashions of that period, has now degenerated into a peculiar fashion of their own, in some instances, assuming a fantastic singularity, offering to the casual beholder, an eccentricity as striking as many of the strange inventions of ever-changing fashion. Yet the Society strongly recommends to all its members a conformity to these

outward marks, conceiving that they act as guards and preservatives against the volatility of youth, who, from not being so conspicuously habited, might fall into some flagrant breach of their principles.

To some extent this consideration may be true, but as the bulk of modern Quakers do not confine themselves to the primitive simplicity and plainness of their early predecessors in many particulars, a query naturally arises, whether, with some individuals, too great a stress has not been laid upon this outward mark, at the expense of one of much greater importance, the careful and early instillation of their moral and religious principles? For the outward mark alone, without an accompanying inward conviction, cannot make the true Quaker.

The second striking peculiarity, their abstaining in speech from all flattering titles and compliments, from personal gestures, and from taking off the hat, as well as their use of the singular pronoun, when addressing one person; all of which arise, from a desire of conforming to the simplicity of the apostolic times. The singular pronoun, they consider to have been in universal use throughout the world, anterior to the decline of the Roman empire, when the base flattery and idolatrous homage paid to the assumed divinity of the emperors, first introduced this custom of addressing an individual in the plural number. It afterwards became the complimentary style of address to all superiors, and at the time of George Fox was so used, and was by no means in the general use, in which we find it at the present day; being now employed on all occasions, and by all ranks, without any reference whatever to compliment common usage has also so far established this form of speech, that some of our modern grammars now teach, "thou or you," as the second person singular, and with all classes, except the Quakers, it has almost entirely superseded the harsh and uneuphonious sound of the old fashioned form, which is now only employed in the emphatic language of poetry, or in addressing the Deity.

This harmless innovation upon the accustomed mode of address, made by George Fox, was regarded at the time as clownish and insulting, and gave great umbrage to the proud and selfimportant. And the little pronoun thou, embittered the minds