THE CONCLUSION.

Μεγαλων απολισθαινειν όμως ευγενες ἁμαρτημα.”---LONGINUS.

THIS history of the opinions of the Friends, and of their organization as a separate sect, and of the moral tendency of their system, Γ now bring to a close. I lay it at the feet of my Divine Master, and implore his benediction on it.

I have not lessened, nor have I aggravated, from design, aught of their peculiar system. I have laboured to come at the truth, so far as I could trace it through so many obscure windings. Much pains have been taken to quote correctly. With the labour and pains of many years our doctrinal and historical indices were filled up from every writer, of any name, in the society. In these their different opinions were collated. These I have had before me with the best editions of their favourite authors which I could obtain.

The society's attention I cannot expect. They are as rigorous as the holy father and cardinals of Rome in framing their index expurgatorius. With them there is no practical liberty of the press. Their internal polity takes it utterly away. Our people read both sides of the question. They absolutely prohibit their youth, and, indeed, members in general, from looking into any book not of their index. From the year 1676, their monthly and quarterly meetings are enjoined to "keep an exact account what priests and others have written books against Friends."* And the person and name, not the book, is usually held up to view. Their people durst not, and, generally speaking, cannot read our books. They would be persecuted even to expulsion—if, asserting their natural rights, they would think for themselves. Their opinions become hereditary. They manage the matter by proxy! And even many of their leading members and preachers

*Lond. Epist. for A. D. 1676.

will hardly venture themselves. If they are hardy enough-it is somewhat after the godly example of the abbot of St. Cyran, who never took up a book of the heretics without going through the process of exorcising the devil out of it.

“Sed fortasse nos non canimus surdis.”

The regard of the christian world is respectfully solicited to this historical review of the Quaker system. Men, brethren and fathers, examine and decide for yourselves. I place it in your hands with diffidence and respect.

If these statements be correct, as it is honestly believed that they are, it will be no difficult matter to form a just idea of the system. Of their amiable virtues we speak not. Those merit every praise. Of their admirable civil polity, embracing their internal and external polity, we say nothing which is not tempered with respect, and even applause. But their religious system, and their christian aspect, we hold up to view, as those of a sect making the most inordinate pretensions and claims.

From this exhibition of facts, it is seen that their system combines, in one heterogeneous mass, almost every species of heresy and error, ancient and modern: that with Saccas they are mystics-and have excluded some of the most sacred institutions of the Lord Jesus Christ: that with Sabellius they are Sabellians, on the most sacred doctrine of Trinity, and the distinct divine persons that with Pelagius they are Pelagians: that with Arminius, they are Arminians on the doctrine of grace: that with Paul of Samoseta, and the Ebionites, and the two Socini, they are Unitarians, and reject from their creed the most sacred Trinity, and the distinct personality of the Son of God, and the atonement; that with Origen and others of modern name they are Universalists. And yet, in the modification of these sentiments, there are so many repulsive materials wrought up in them, that the society can never amalgamate with any one of all these sects. They cannot even approximate to a friendly communion with any sect within or without the limits of the visible church! "Arise, O God! plead thine own cause-lift up thy feet unto the perpetual desolations, even all that the enemy hath

done wickedly in the sanctuary. They have cast fire into thy sanctuary; they have defiled, by casting down, the dwelling place of thy name unto the ground. Turn us again, O God, and cause thy face to shine, and we shall be saved. Thou shalt arise and have mercy on Zion. For the time to favour her, yea, the set time, is come!"Psalm lxxiv. &c.

THE END.

APPENDIX I.

Note A-Sect. 14, Part I.

JOHN BROWN was banished Nov. 6, 1662: and died in Holland, 1679, of a lingering disease. The king of England exerted his influence to get him banished from Holland, but the states protected him. The friends of Barclay and of Quakerism have affected to consider Brown as a rustic and illiterate man. Nothing can be more erroneous. See Mr. Ward's character of him, (and he knew him well.) "He was eminent in grace and learning, and of great natural powers; a man of undaunted courage in opposing corruption and error; and jealous for the Lord of Hosts above all his brethren." Pref. to Brown on the Romans.

Cruikshanks calls him "the learned, zealous and pious Brown." Hist. vol. i. p. 134. The illustrious and learned Leydecker, Professor of Theology at Utrecht, has given a character of Brown in his preface to Brown on Justification. "His praise lives deservedly in the churches, and his light shone in our low countries: having been banished his native land for his zeal, piety, faithfulness and good conscience. He wrote with a great deal of wisdom," &c. &c. &c.

F. Spanheim Filius, whom Professor Leydecker calls "the most famous divine of that age," was a warm friend of Brown, and gave his public approbation of him as a writer. The learned professor applauded Brown's book on the "Morality of the Sabbath." Brown was succeeded in his pastoral charge in Rotterdam, by Fleming, the author of "the Fulfilling of the Scriptures."

Note B.-Sect. 25, Part I.

Keith. After this rupture, the society poured its vials of wrath on poor Keith's"* head. And individuals uttered their personal anathemas. The prophetical curse of the inflammable Whitehead was the most intemperate. See "The Snake," &c. sect. 20, for a copy of it.

After this, Keith was reconciled to the church of England; and became a regular priest. In the years 1702, 1703, 1704, he per

* The term used by the writers of the society after the rupture: while "honest George," when in good standing, was applauded for his "learning and Platonic studies." See Penn's letter to Turner. "Snake," &c. p. 333.