LETTER V.

In reading your discourses my attention was particularly engaged by the

sermon delivered at Newtown, in Bucks County, and it did seem to me so

much at variance with the principles which induce the Quakers to

assemble for public worship, that were there no other evidence, it would

be sufficient to prove that you are not under the guidance of that

spirit, by which, in former days, their ministers were governed.

That society believe that the great object of such assembling is to

endeavour, by shutting out all external things, to discipline the mind

to that pure and silent worship and waiting upon God, in which they may

experience Christ to be their shepherd and teacher; and although this

solemn silence may sometimes be profitably interrupted for the purposes

of admonition, instruction and encouragement, yet that no minister can,

(when under right direction,) expatiate on topics irrelevant to the

subject.

A little examination must, I think, convince us that your sermon, so far

from being delivered under such impressions, carries on the face of it,

the proof of a mind struggling for distinction: and that in this effort,

much has been introduced foreign to the subject on which you professed

to treat, and however innocent in itself, very unsuitable to the place,

and peculiarly calculated to withdraw the mind from the object for which

the assembly were ostensibly gathered.

You commence your sermon by stating your apprehensions that there are

individuals who are not sufficiently impressed with the necessity of

order and discipline in society, and seem to consider it your duty to

convince them of its importance. To a plain understanding this does not

appear difficult, for the arguments in favour of it are so palpable,

that a very few minutes indeed, would be sufficient to any one not in

the habit of multiplying words, to establish it beyond all controversy.

You, however, seem never disposed to take the common road: the arguments

would be but the repetition of a thrice told tale, and would therefore

command no extraordinary attention: they might beget conviction, but

would not produce _that effect_ upon the audience, which, if not always

the object, is so dear to the orator.

But in deviating from the road, you have lost yourself in the

wilderness; and such has been your entanglement, that after all the time

which you consumed, I am sure there was not an individual present in the

meeting, who could tell what you really meant by discipline, how it is

to be established, or in what manner it is to be enforced. I form this

opinion from having read the sermon: for with all the advantages of

frequent recurrence to particular passages, and of re-perusal, I found

it very difficult to form any idea of your meaning: how then could your

audience, with none of these advantages, in the very few moments in

which they could preserve unbroken the slight concatenation of your

ideas, encumbered as they are with references unconnected with the

subject, receive any information or instruction from them. If I am

correct in my conclusion, and sure I am that no one who heard you can

contradict me, it must follow, that being incomprehensible to those to

whom it was addressed, it could not proceed from the suggestions of true

wisdom.

After a few observations on the subject of discipline, you give to your

audience a kind of lecture on astronomy. Had you confined yourself to

recalling to their recollection the wonderful harmony in the works of

the Almighty, it would not have been incongruous; but to enter into a

long dissertation on the sun, moon, and stars, and on vacuum and

unmeasured space, was neither adapted to the place or company. It was no

doubt quite new and entertaining to such of them as had never read the

elementary treatises in use in some of our schools; and it is certainly

the most sublime of all sciences, and that in which the powers of the

human mind have been displayed in the greatest degree; yet I cannot

think you were judicious in selecting a Quaker meeting as a proper

theatre for the display of your talents, nor can I believe that your

ingenuity can make any application of the facts you have stated to the

subject of your discourse. You tell us that the sun, although it emits

so much light, never lessens; that there is harmonious and social

commune between the heavenly bodies;[19] that the earth, if kept too

long in the cold, would grow heavier, and falling from its proper place,

derange the other bodies; that the moon has a great effect upon our

globe, &c. &c. The moon, we know, is thought by many to have a

considerable influence on the imaginations of men in certain situations,

but I never heard that such influence had any effect in producing good

order and discipline, and no one supposes that the rays of the sun can

throw any light upon the subject. Besides you ought to have recollected

that you were subjecting yourself to the charge of ingratitude; for

surely the men of science must think you ungrateful in availing yourself

so largely of those labours, which you have endeavoured to persuade your

friends are a curse to mankind.[20]

Footnote 19:

This information, I must acknowledge, is an exception to the

generality of my assertion, for I do not believe it is contained in

any of the elementary books I have mentioned; nor do I think it can be

found in the writings of either Newton or Herschell, or that either of

them, although so long engaged in examining the planetary system, were

so fortunate as to observe any of these bodies at the moment when they

were engaged in these friendly conversations. Perhaps the author has

been led into a mistake by some obstruction in his glass, like a

celebrated member of the Royal Society, who announced the discovery of

an elephant in the moon, which, on examination, was found to be only a

mouse in his telescope.

Footnote 20:

Sermons, page 53 and 55.

I am not so ignorant of the situation of the Society of Friends, as to

be uninformed of the uneasiness which is felt by some of its members

under its established rules of order and discipline; and as I know that

your preaching was one of the principal causes of it, I did think it of

some importance to endeavour to ascertain your opinions on the subject.

It was indeed a laborious work to travel through the many pages over

which they are dispersed; to remove the various matters with which they

were encumbered, and collect the scattered fragments. Yet after all my

toil, I found my work not half accomplished. These fragments when

brought together, were of such various sizes and colours, so diversified

in shape, and heterogeneous in their materials, that it surpassed my

skill to arrange them in any way consistent with order and propriety;

and if the knowledge of them can afford any instruction, it must be from

the striking contrast between their wild deformity, and the rational

rules of order and discipline which they are intended to supersede.

You say that all aversion to order and discipline arises from the want

of a right knowledge of ourselves: that when we come to this right

knowledge, we shall be so perfect in these things, that there will be no

contests or divisions among us: that all order and discipline must be

fixed by the divine Lawgiver, and that then it cannot be violated; and

therefore that all attempts to censure or control a member must proceed

from those who counterfeit its meaning, in order to _lord_ it over

others: that each member of society is in himself a little world, which,

if kept in right order and subjection, all would be harmony and

discipline; but, when this is not the case, all attempts to enforce them

tend to increase the confusion: that we all have the law within

ourselves, therefore order and discipline must never be contrived by

mortals: that the Quaker discipline is unsound, because it is in the

letter; but that there are some true Quakers, and that each of these has

all discipline and order within himself.

Now what is all this? Is it not a second growth of that _Fungus_ which

was engendered in the hot bed of fanaticism many years past; and has not

the sober sense of the humble Christian, or the wit and humour of a

Butler, been able to eradicate it from the soil of the Christian church?

Are we again to have among us those men above ordinances, who mistake

confusion for order, and the destruction of our faith for the

consummation of religion?

These questions must present themselves to every mind when examining

your opinions; for, when stripped of all glosses, and exhibited in their

genuine colours, they mean that all written rules of order and

discipline are restraints upon the liberty of the saints: that no rules

should be established by men, for that every man has the rule written in

his own heart, and that there alone he is accountable.

That no man is accountable to another for his religious belief, and that

every man has a right to worship in the way which he may believe most

acceptable to his Creator, are undeniable truths; but as the different

Christian sects have congregated on account of a unity in their

religious tenets, and assemble together for the purpose of uniting in

divine worship, they have a right, and, (if they are firm in their

belief,) it is their duty, to establish such rules and regulations as

will best preserve their religion in, what they believe to be, its

greatest purity; and in an especial manner to prevent the preaching of

doctrines adverse to it. And this is no infringement of the liberty of

conscience; for any man who dissents from their doctrines may separate

himself from them; he may unite himself with any other sect; or if, in

his career, his spiritual knowledge has set him above all ordinances, he

may erect his own standard, and, unrestrained by forms and unfettered by

creeds, he may give the utmost strain to his imagination, and perhaps

become himself the head of a sect. But no casuistry can justify, or

pretence excuse a man, who continues to be ostensibly the member of a

religious community, for the purpose of undermining its principles or

destroying the belief in its tenets. Let him believe them erroneous and

the substitutes he offers unquestionably true; it alters not the case.

The source will be impure, and the waters which flow from it, tainted.

If the mind can be brought to conceive the possibility of the existence

of a society formed according to your rules and orders of discipline, it

must present itself to the imagination in all the sublime confusion of

another chaos--you may offer yourself to explain the word of God, and

you will be reminded that this is all in the letter: you may tell them

that the Scriptures may be read to advantage, when all things in them

have been previously revealed;[21] and they may reply, that reading them

will then be quite unnecessary--you may exhort them to assemble together

for the purpose of divine worship, "for that then we should be

instructed what to do, and how to bring our offerings, to be handed over

to the priest, so that they may be made acquainted with our state, and

may preach the true gospel to us;"[22] and they may tell you "that such

assemblies are not the places to gather spiritual food."[23] If you are

asked why you waste so much time in preaching, you will tell them "the

reason is plain; that although the letter directs us to the law, and

nothing else can teach us, yet we flee from it; and therefore outward

instruments are raised up and clothed with power:"[24] and they may

reply that this is also the letter, and "that the Lord is too kind to

send them away for instruction; and that he is always present, a

schoolmaster to every soul."[25] If you explain to them your own growth

and experience in spiritual knowledge, they will ask you of what use it

can be to them, and tell you, "that each individual requires a law

peculiar to himself; and that the law of the Spirit of Life in one, is

not the law of the Spirit of Life in another"[26]--and if, (adopting

this opinion,) you should declare to them that the law of the Spirit of

Life is different in each individual, some of your audience may assert,

"that the divine law which is written by the finger of God upon the

tablet of our hearts, is the same to every individual"[27]--and if

fatigued with these objections, you should express your surprise at

their number, inconsistency and futility, you will be told that they are

all furnished by yourself.

Footnote 21:

Sermons, page 313.

Footnote 22:

Sermons, page 248.

Footnote 23:

Sermons, page 275.

Footnote 24:

Page 52.

Footnote 25:

Sermons, page 51.

Footnote 26:

Sermons, page 51.

Footnote 27:

Sermons in New York, page 124.

If, then, the great founder of the sect is yet so indistinct in his

vision, what must be the situation of those who are less advanced in the

religious experience of your new school? If he is so frequently involved

in contradictions, what must be the accumulated mass when collected

together?

Should your project be realised, and such a congregation assembled,

those who, like yourself, search the Scriptures for types and figures,

may, with much less violation of probability than occurs in your

discourses, consider the meeting as a consummation of that confusion of

tongues typified in the building of the Tower of Babel.

Observations on the Sermons of Elias Hicks In Several Letters to Him; With Some Introductory Remarks, Addressed to the Junior Members of the Society of Friends. · 第 19 / 33 题