Christ without, of his death, sufferings, resurrection and ascension, yet none of them preach it as a necessary matter of salvation to believe it, that ever we heard of," "and it cannot be supposed, that they hold faith in Christ without them to be necessary to their salvation, seeing many of them have given their judgment, that the light is sufficient to salvation, without something else, which is a plain excluding the man Christ Jesus from having any part in our salvation, and leaving him only the bare name or title of Saviour."

John Gough in his "History of the People called Quakers," gives a pretty full account of the scism occasioned by the defection of Keith, and his followers, -it is well worth a perusal. There the reader will find the same charges made against Friends then, that those called orthodox make against them now. Thus we see that when any external thing, no matter how excellent in itself, is set up above the teaching of the spirit of Christ in the soul, it leads to contention and division. Almost every religious society takes the scriptures for the primary rule of faith and practice, and yet, no two of them understand them alike. "All scripture given by inspiration of God is profitable for doctrine, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works; but when leaned upon as the rule of faith and life, they are exalted above their proper place, being made to occupy the position which rightfully belongs to the Divine light, the only infallible and sufficient teacher in the things of God and salvation. That when thus depended on, the letter kills,' and those who so lean on them are liable to wrest the scriptures to their own destruction."

The same causes that produced the scism in the days of George Keith, have operated to effect the late separation here, which was not only promoted and greatly facilitated, but was finally consummated through the instrumentality of several Friends in the station of ministers, from England, who within a few years, previously, had visited us under the profession

of religious concern. Instead of those plain, unadulterated heart searching truths, so conspicuous in the discourses and writings of our worthy predecessors, and which had been sustained through a succession of faithful standard bearers, to the period referred to, we had now to listen to laboured discourses on doubtful speculative points of doctrine, strongly urged as fundamental articles of faith, and those who presumed to question their validity, were denounced as Deists and Infidels. Before this time some uneasiness had been manifested by a few restless and aspiring individuals among us, who had taken an active part in some of the popular religious as well as political concerns of the day; and in the prosecution of which, they had not only imbibed doctrinal views incompatible with the profession they had previously made, but acted, on some occasions, in direct violation of some of the most important testimonies of the society.

Some of these taking offence at Elias Hicks, because of his having boldly and faithfully exposed their inconsistent proceedings, formed a combination with the English Friends, referred to; and with a zeal worthy of a better cause, redoubled their efforts to prostrate his religious character. The unbending integrity and faithful dedication of this Friend having presented an almost insuperable obstacle to the accomplishment of their designs. To effect this object, talebearing and detraction were resorted to, and the most extravagant and unfounded misrepresentations were widely, though for some time, privately circulated in relation to him and his religious opinions.

About this period, many discovered in the sermons of the English Friends, sentiments at variance with the doctrines of the society, and for some time others who have since joined the Orthodox party, did not hesitate to declare, that they were 'sensible of this fact. Much excitement ensued, and the minds of many becoming obscured through prejudice, they could not be brought to admit that those English Friends held views which they have since avowed

without disguise, and which are now distinguished in England as Evangelical."

This departure from primitive doctrine had been gaining strength in England for some time; but had made but little progress in this country until after the arrival of those English Friends.

It became conspicuously manifest in that country about the year 1824. Near this time was published a pamphlet, entiled, "A Letter to a Friend on the Authority, Purpose and Effects of Christianity, and especially on the Doctrine of Redemption, by Joseph John Gurney." The views inculcated in this tract being such as rendered it acceptable to Calvinistic professors, it was reprinted and extensively circulated by the "American Tract Society." The same Friend about the same time, published a work which he entitled "Observations on the Religious Peculiarities of the Society of Friends." Those who have attentively perused these works, with an eye unclouded by prejudice, must see in them an insidious attack upon the doctrines and important testimonies, which the society has maintained, through persecution and great suffering, and which it has always considered as having originated in Divine wisdom. Notwithstanding this was obvious to many, the Orthodox approved these works, and republished them in Philadelphia.

Some time after, another work from the pen of J. J. Gurney, made its appearance, entitled, "Brief Remarks on the History, Authority and Use of the Sabbath," which contains sentiments directly opposed to those of Robert Barclay, and all our Friends, ancient and modern, who had previously written on the subject.

This work was also favourably received by Orthodox professors, in this country, whose views on this subject have uniformly been opposed to those of Friends, and was republished by them, accompanied with a preface, by Moses Stuart, professor of Theology, at Andover. This latter work did not pass unnoticed; the erronious views inculcated in it, were

ably refuted by a Friend in England, and another in Ireland, each of whom wrote a tract in reply to it.

About the year 1834, J. J. Gurney, wrote another small work, entitled, "Portable Evidences of Christianity," containing sentiments very similar to those inculcated in the "Beacon." This work also obtained the approbation of the Orthodox professors, before alluded to, and was republished by them here. Up to this time we are not aware that much dissatisfaction appeared, either among Friends in England, or among the Orthodox party here, in relation to the works above mentioned. That portion of the Society of Friends in England, now distinguished Evangelical," having gained confidence from the favor with which the foregoing works had been received, at length threw of the mask and came out openly against some of the fundamental doctrines of the society, in the work above referred to, called "A Beacon to the Society of Friends, by Isaac Crewdson," a minister, in which the paramount authority of the Scriptures, over the Divine Light, as the primary rule of faith and practice, is asserted and defended.

as 66

Soon after the appearance of the "Beacon," Dr. Hancock, of Liverpool, published a small treatise, entitled "A Defence of the Doctrines of Immediate revelation and Universal and Saving Light," &c., intended as a defence of these fundamental doctrines of the Society, from the attacks made upon them in that work. Such were the conflicting opinions advanced in these works, and so great was the excitement and alarm occasioned by the boldness with which some of the ancient doctrines of the Society were attacked by the author of the "Beacon," that a serious breach of unity and harmony ensued. The subject was taken up in the last yearly meeting in London, and much animadversion, and a protracted and somewhat stormy discussion was the consequence. It resulted in the appointment of a committee to visit Lancashire quarterly meeting, where the greatest disunity existed, with a view of restoring harmony. By accounts from that meeting, and the committees

proceedings, it appears that their labors have proved unavailing.

Such has been the progress of this departure from original principles, that of latter times, doctrines are openly promulgated and defended by some filling the highest stations in society; entirely repugnant to those always held by Friends. In evidence of this, we refer to the "Beacon," and to " Holy Scripture, the test of Truth," &c., by Richard Ball. The latter openly denounces the writings of Barclay, Penn, and others as unscriptural and unsound. These two last mentioned works, we have lately republished, that it may be seen that the authors have openly denounced the doctrines which Friends have always held, and for which some have laid down their lives. Those unacquainted with the state of the Society in England, will learn with surprise that the "Evangelical Friends" form a large and increasing party, among whom are many of the most wealthy and influential individuals belonging to the society in that country.

Although the English Friends succeeded in effecting a separation in the Society here, we hope there are but few among those called Orthodox, who have fully adopted the "Evangelical" opionions of their trans-atlantic brethren.

The following work from the pen of an English Friend, is of a different character, and it is consoling to find, notwithstanding the defection above mentioned, that there are yet those who are not ashamed to maintain and defend the truth, as it was revealed to and proclaimed by our early Friends, in a dark and degenerate age. The views inculcated in it are generally those of genuine Quakerism. The work is well written, and illustrates and defends the opinions held by Elias Hicks, and all faithful Friends from the beginning; though it has met with the decided opposition of some prominent Friends in England. Josiah Forster in Lancashire Quarterly Meeting, said, that he "could not feel satisfied without expressing his entire disapprobation of a book that had appeared since he was last in Liverpool, entitled,