obey the Holy Spirit, speaking by him. Hence, they say, the appellation of Quakers was given them in reproach by one of the magistrates, who, in 1650, committed G. Fox to prison, on account of his bidding him, and those about him, to "tremble at the word of the Lord." But they adopted among themselves, and still retain, the endearing appellation of Friends.

From their first appearance, they suffered much persecution. In New England they were treated with peculiar severity, imprisoned, scourged, (women as well as men); and at Boston four of them were even hanged, among whom was one woman and this was the more extraordinary and inexcusable, as the settlers themselves had but lately fled from persecution in the parent country.

During these sufferings, they applied to King Charles II. for relief; who, in 1661, granted a mandamus, to put a stop to them. Neither were the good offices of this prince in their favour confined to the colonies; for, in 1672, he released, under the great seal, 400 of these suffering people, who were imprisoned in Great Britain.

To what has been alleged against them, on account of James Naylor and his associates, they answer, that their extravagancies and blasphemies were disapproved at the time, and the parties disowned; nor was he restored till he had given signs of a sincere repentance, and publicly condemned his errors.

In 1681, Charles II. granted to W. Penn the province of Pennsylvania. Penn's treaty with the Indians, and the liberty of conscience which he granted to all denominations, even those which had persecuted his own, do honour to his memory, In the reign of James II. the Friends, in common with other English dissenters, were relieved by the suspension of the penal laws. But it was not till the reign of William and Mary that they obtained any thing like a proper legal protection.

An Act was made in the year 1696, which, with a few exceptions, allowed to their affirmation the legal force of an oath, and provided a less oppressive mode for recovering tithes under a certain amount; which provisions under the reign of George I. were made perpetual. For refusing to pay tithes, &c. however, they are still liable to suffer in the exchequer and ecclesiastical court, both in Great Britain and Ireland.

The doctrines of the society of Friends

have been variously represented. The following account, however, was drawn up for our first edition, by one of themselves, (Mr. J. Bevans) and nearly in the words of their own most approved writers; but is here considerably abridged.

1. They believe that God is one: and that this one God is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, as in Matt. xxviii. 19. [Claridge.] To the assertion that they deny the Trinity, William Penn answers, Nothing less: they do believe in the holy Three, or the Trinity of Father, Word, and Spirit, according to the scriptures; but they are very tender of quitting scripture terms and phrases for schoolmen's; such as distinct and separate persons and subsistences, &c. and they judge that a curious enquiry into those high and divine relations, though never so great truths in themselves, tends little to godliness, and less to peace."

2. They believe that Christ is both God and Man in wonderful union; that he suffered for our salvation, was raised again for our justification, and ever liveth to make intercession for us. And in reply to the charge, that the Quakers deny Christ to be God, W. Penn says, "A most untrue and uncharitable censure: for their great and characteristic principle is, that Christ as the divine Word, lighteth the souls of all men who come into the world, with a spiritual and saving light, (according to John i. 9-12,) which none but the Creator of souls can do."

[Here we beg leave to offer a remark or two, as on these points there has been some dispute; and it could hardly be supposed, that so large a body of thinking persons could be perfectly unanimous in their interpretations of the scriptures, to the phraseology of which they rigidly adhere. Indeed a celebrated female speaker, Hannah Barnard, of the state of New York, (N. A.) was silenced and disowned in America, as was also Thomas Foster, of London, for holding sentiments supposed to be Socinian, and which they called "Scriptural Unitarianism." See Tracts relating to a Controversy between Hannah Barnard and the Society of Friends." An Appeal," in three parts, with a Sequel.-An Examination of ditto, by Vindex.-A Defence of the Society (from Socinianism) by John Bevans, Jun.

As respects the doctrine of the Trinity, they not only avoid that term, but are particularly averse to any distinction of persons in the Divine Essence; yet Penn himself, who on this subject is perhaps most exceptionable, speaks of our "Lord Jesus

(to wit, Jesus Christ formed within us, and working in us,) the body of death and sin is crucified, and we are freed from actually transgressing the law of God. (Matt. v. 48. 1 John ii. 14. iii. 3.) Yet this perfection still admits of growth; and there remains always a possibility of sinning, where the mind does not most diligently and watchfully attend to the Lord. Heb. vi. 4—6.

9. Concerning worship. They consider as obstructions to pure worship, all forms which divert the attention of the mind from the secret influences of the Holy Spirit. Yet, although true worship is not confined to time and place, they think it incumbent on Christians to meet often together, in testimony of their dependence on their heavenly Father, and for a renewal of their spiritual strength. When thus met, they believe it to be their duty patiently to wait for the arising of that life which, by subduing those thoughts, produces an inward silence, and therein affords a true sense of their condition; believing even a single sigh, arising from such a sense of our infirmities, and of the need we have of divine help, to be more acceptable to God than any performance, however specious, originating in the will of man.

10. On the ministry. As by the light, or gift of God, all true knowledge in things spiritual is received, so by the same, as it is manifested in the heart, every true minister of the gospel is ordained and prepared for the work. Moreover, they who have this authority, may and ought to preach the gospel, though without human commission or literature. (1 Pet. iv. 10,11.) Barclay.

11. On baptism and the supper. They believe that as there is one Lord and one faith, so there is one baptism; which is not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience before God. And this baptism is a pure and spiritual thing, by which we are buried with him, that being washed and purged from our sins, we may walk in newness of life; of which the baptism of John was a figure, which was commanded for a time, and not to continue for ever. (Matt. iii. 11.) Hence it follows, that the baptism which Christ commanded, (Matt. xxviii. 19.) must relate to his own baptism, and not to that of John. With respect to the other rite, termed the Lord's supper, they believe that the communion of the body of Christ is a spiritual participation of his flesh and blood, by which the inward man is daily nourished in the hearts of those in whom Christ dwells. (John vi. 53, 54.) Barclay.

12. They believe the resurrection, according to the scripture, not only from sin, but also from death and the grave. They believe that as our Lord Jesus was raised from the dead by the power of the Father, and was the first-fruits of the resurrection, so every man in his own order shall arise; they that have done well to the resurrection of eternal life, but they that have done evil to everlasting condemnation. (Penn and Sewell.)

Having treated of the principles of religion as professed by the Friends, we now proceed to notice some tenets, which more`immediately relate to their conduct among men.

1. On oaths, they abide literally by these words of our Saviour: But I say unto you, swear not at all; neither by heaven, &c., but let your communication be yea, yeanay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these, cometh of evil. (Matt. v. 33-37.)

2. To prove that war is not lawful to Christians, they argue thus :-Christ commands that we should love our enemies: the apostle James testifies that wars and strifes come from the lusts which war in the members of carnal men: the apostle Paul admonisheth Christians that they defend not themselves, neither avenge, by rendering evil for evil, because vengeance is the Lord's: the prophets Isaiah and Micah have expressly foretold, that in the mountain of the house of the Lord, Christ shall judge the nations; and then they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, &c., and there shall be none to hurt nor kill in the holy mountain of the Lord. (Barclay.)

3. On deportment.-1. They affirm that it is not lawful for Christians either to give or receive such flattering titles of honour, as your Holiness, your Majesty, your Excellency, &c., because these titles are no part of that obedience which is due to magistrates or superiors; neither doth the giving them add to, or the not giving them diminish from, that subjection we owe them. But they do not object to employ those titles which are descriptive of their station or office; such as king, prince, duke, earl, bishop, &c. Neither do they think it right to use what are commouly called compliments; such as your most obedient servant, &c. Such customs have led Christians to use falsehood, which is accounted civility. They disuse those names of the months and days, which, having been given in honour of the heroes and false gods of the heathen, originated in flattery or superstition. They likewise

condemn the custom of speaking to a single person in the plural number, as having also arisen from motives of adulation. 2. They affirm that it is not lawful for Christians to kneel or prostrate themselves to any man, or to bow the body, or to uncover the head to them, because these are the outward signs of our adoration towards God. 3. They affirm that it is not lawful for Christians to use superfluities in apparel, which are of no use, save for ornament and vanity. 4. That it is not lawful to use games, sports, or plays among Christians, under the notion of recreation, which do not agree with Christian gravity and sobriety. They allege, that every thing ought to be rejected that wastes our precious time, and diverts the heart from that evangelical spirit which is the ornament of a Christian.

4. With regard to religious liberty, they hold, that the rights of conscience are sacred and unalienable, subject only to the control of the Deity, who has not given authority to any man or body of men, to compel another to his religion. (Barclay.) 5. On their church government. To effect the salutary purposes of discipline, they have established monthly, quarterly, and yearly meetings. A monthly meeting is usually composed of several particular congregations, situated within a convenient distance. Its business is to provide for the subsistence of the poor, (for they maintain their own poor), and for the education of their offspring; to examine persons desiring to be admitted into membership; to deal with disorderly members, and if irreclaimable, to disown them. (Matt. xviii. 15—17.)

All marriages are proposed to these meetings for their concurrence, which is granted, if, upon enquiry, the parties appear clear of other engagements; and if they also have the consent of their parents or guardians, without which no marriages are allowed for this society has always scrupled to acknowledge the exclusive authority of the priests to marry. Their marriages are solemnized in a public meeting for worship, and the monthly meeting keeps a record of them; as also of the births and burials of its members. This society does not allow its members to sue each other at law; it therefore enjoins all to end their differences by speedy and impartial arbitration; and if

any refuse to act according to these rules, they are disowned. Several monthly meetings compose a quarterly meeting, to which they send representatives, and to which appeals lie from the monthly meetings. The yearly meeting has a general superintendance of the society in the country in which it is established; and as particular exigencies arise, makes such regulations as appear to be requisite; and appeals from the quarterly meetings are here finally determined. There are meetings of the female Friends, held at the same times and places, (in separate apartments) to regulate matters relative to their own sex. There are likewise meetings for 1 sufferings, relative to the penalties inflicted for tithes or other matters, which they consider of the nature of persecution.[Sewell's History of the people called Quakers, 8vo edit. vol. i. pp. 45-432. vol. ii. p. 552. R. Claridge's Life and Posthumous Works, pp.414-442. Penn's Works, folio edit. vol. i. pp. 859-60. vol.ii. pp. 783-878. Barclay's Works, folio edit. pp. 84-876. A Summary of the History, Doctrine, &c. of the Friends, pp. 4-21. Bevans's Refutation of the more Modern Misrepresentation of Friends, pp. 21-95. Clarkson's Portraiture of Quakerism, 3 vols. 8vo.]

The Friends are not very numerous in Europe. They have been calculated at 50,000 in England and Wales, about 300 in Scotland, and more in Ireland. In some parts of the United States they are nume rous, particularly in Pennsylvania; and we are informed they compose a fourth of the population of Philadelphia. Of late years, many of this society have applied to the higher branches of science, particularly chemistry; and some (as Fordyce, Fother gill, Sims, &c.) have ranked in the highest class of medical professors. Others have applied to literature, and have even lis tened to the inspiration of the Muses, among whom the name of Barnard Barton deserves to be distinguished. It is still more to their honour, that they have been foremost in promoting all objects of benevolence that do not clash with their religious sentiments; particularly in the British and Foreign Bible Society, the Lancastrian schools, the civilization of the American Indians, and, above all, in discountenancing, and attempting to suppress, the Slave Trade.

GAL

GABRES, or GUEBRES. (See Gaurs.) The Turks apply the term to Christians in the sense of Infidels or Heathens.

GABRIEL, Saint, Congregation of, a society of lay gentlemen, founded by Cæsar Bianchetti, at Boulogne, about A. D. 1646, for improvement " in Christian knowledge and virtue."-[Hist. des Ord. Relig. tom. viii. c.22.]

GAIANITÆ, followers of Gaian, bishop of Alexandria, in the 6th century, who is said to have denied that Jesus Christ, after the hypostatical union, was subject to any of the infirmities of human nature. (See Eutychians.)

GALENISTS, the followers of Galen Abraham Haan, a physician at Amsterdam, and an eloquent preacher among the Mennonites, (which see.) He was considered a Latitudinarian, admitting to his communion all who believed the Scriptures and led religious lives. He was opposed by Samuel Apostool. (See Apostoolians.)—[Mosheim's E. H. vol. v. p. 496.] GALILEANS, GAULANITES, or GAULANISTS, a political sect, or rather party, among the Jews, the followers of Judas, (a native of Gaulan, in Galilee,) who, in the tenth year of Jesus Christ excited his countrymen the Galileans, and many other Jews, to take arms, and venture upon extremities, rather than pay tribute to the Romans. The principles he instilled into his party were, not only that they were a free nation, and ought not to be in subjection to any other; but that they were the elect of God, that he alone was their governor, and that therefore they ought not to submit to any ordinance of man. Though Judas was unsuccessful, and his party in their very first attempt entirely routed and dispersed; yet so deeply had he infused his own enthusiasm into their minds, that they never rested, until in their own destruction they involved the city and the temple.

Indeed Michaelis mentions a sect of Galileans, in number 13 or 14,000, the avowed disciples of John the Baptist, who, so lately as A. D. 1779, resided at or near Elmarkah. [Josephus, Book XVIII. ch. 1. Calmet's Diction. by Taylor. Kingdon's Answer to Hall, p. 138.]

GALLICAN (or French) CHURCH. Notwithstanding the established religion

GAL

of France is Roman Catholic, and the King of France is called eldest son of the church, the Gallican clergy have ever been more exempt from the temporal dominion of the Pope than those of any other country, and that in two respects:-1. The Pope had not authority to command any thing in which the civil rights of the kingdom are concerned. 2. Though the Pope's supremacy was owned in spiritual matters, yet his power is limited and regulated by the decrees and canons of antient councils received in the realm.

The bishoprics and prebendaries were all in the gift of the king; much therefore depended on his personal character; and no other Catholic state, except Italy, had so numerous a clergy as France, among whom were eighteen archbishops and 111 bishops.

Fe

In the established church the Jansenists (followers of St. Augustin's doctrine) were very numerous; and among them there is no doubt but that there were men of the brightest talents and purest piety: such were Pascal, Amaud, and Nicole. nelon, Archbishop of Cambray, though very mystical, was a miracle of piety and benevolence; yet he never could persuade himself to leave the pale of the Roman Church. In fact, he was such a friend to peace, that he thought any thing better than strife and schism; and would sacrifice, in some degree, truth itself to preserve harmony among Christians.

After the repeal of the Edict of Nantz, in the seventeenth century, the Protestants suffered much from persecution; but a law, which did much honour to Louis XVI. late King of France, gave to his NonCatholic subjects, as they were called, all the civil advantages of their Catholic brethren.

The French clergy amounted to 30,000, the higher orders of which enjoyed immense revenues; but the curés, or great body of working clergy, seldom possessed more than about 30l. a year. The clergy, as a body, independent of their tithes, possessed a revenue, arising from property in land, amounting to five millions sterling annually; at the same time they were exempt from taxation. Before the levelling system took place, the clergy signified their readiness to contribute to the exigencies