_Memoir of the Late Rev. Joseph Hughes, A.M., one of the
Secretaries of the British and Foreign Bible Society._ By JOHN
LEIFCHILD. pp. 498.--Ward.
We are not aware that we can commence our notice of this instructing
volume better than by citing the words with which it concludes: "The
memory of the just is blessed." But then "memory" must be enriched and
refreshed by the knowledge of facts which illustrate the principles and
character of "the just;" and if, with such assistance, it becomes
strengthened and sanctified to enlarge and perpetuate the exercise of
practical piety, it must be "blessed" indeed.
That the perusal, even of the most eminently pious biography, may have
its disadvantages, we are prepared to admit; yet, judicious reflection,
accompanied with progressive experience, will effect much towards
preserving the considerate and devout reader from concluding that human
excellence in the present state, however elevated, can be entirely
detached from some qualifying alloy, or that the less distinguished may
not be raised to the possession of "the best gifts," by that sovereign
benevolence to which every creature, whether in earth or in heaven, is
indebted, for whatever measure of natural superiority or moral greatness
he may obtain.
It remains, therefore, our unshaken conviction, that, upon the whole,
the amount of benefit arising from a suitable regard to such works as
this now before us, vastly preponderates over the influence of certain
objections which, were they allowed to operate beyond suggesting a
salutary caution to the reader, might deprive us of some of the most
powerful _stimuli_ to noble enterprise, and some of the richest sources
of sacred enjoyment.
Mr. Hughes was born, we learn from his own account contained in this
memoir, in London, Jan. 1, 1769. His father was a native of Wales; his
mother, of Lancaster. A few months after his birth, he was put, for the
benefit of country air, to Mrs. Edwards, a nurse residing at Cuffley, on
Enfield Chase, with whom he remained several years. Afterwards his
parents placed him under the instruction of an ancient matron, of the
name of Hudson. At a very early period he assumed a manner and
appearance far above his years. "Joseph," one said to him, "do you love
play?" to which the grotesque little urchin, as he calls himself,
demurely replied, "_I did, formerly!_"
In his tenth year he was received as a pupil and boarder in the family
of Mr. Smalley, minister of a Presbyterian congregation at Darwen, near
Blackburn, in Lancashire. Here he continued for a few of the most
important years of his life. From Darwen he was removed to a free school
at Rivington in the same county. He was baptized by the late Dr.
Stennett, and a few months afterwards was placed upon Dr. Ward's trust
as a theological student in the Academy at Broadmead, Bristol. Dr. Caleb
Evans was President; Mr. James Newton, A.M., Classical Tutor. Here he
continued the usual term, with a view of completing his course in
Scotland. Mr. Hughes thus speaks for himself:--
"Before quitting Bristol for Scotland, I enjoyed the advantage of
hearing, as the assistant of Dr. Evans, Robert Hall, who also took
part in the tuition of the students. The genius and attainments of
the last individual would be ill pourtrayed by me. They command
admiration wherever he is known; and if his pen had been as busy
as his mind is capacious, ardent, and sublime, they would have
commanded the admiration of distant ages. No one, before I had
listened to him, had translated the classics in my hearing, with
equal grace and spirit; no one had given me such an impression of
intellectual nature: but he seems never to have formed the same
lofty estimate of himself as he must have known that all his
acquaintance held most tenaciously. The paucity of his publications
must be ascribed to this. 'On what subject,' he has substantially
said, 'can you recommend me to write, on which better things have
not already appeared than it is in my power to produce?' Hence we
may account for his diffidence, amounting to anxiety, when he has
espied among his public auditors, a Parr, or a Mackintosh. Having
been asked what he thought of the famed John Henderson, he said,
'I felt myself to be a mere child in his presence.'" p. 37.
In October, 1787, Mr. Hughes set out for Aberdeen, with his
fellow-student, Mr. (afterwards Dr.) John Evans. Here his literary
acquisitions were enriched, and his religious character much improved.
Some attachments and friendships were formed, which, in following years,
were ripened to maturity. Having taken his degree, he spent one session
at Edinburgh, where he was most affectionately received by the venerable
Dr. Erskine.
In 1791, he was solemnly called to the ministry, by the church at Wild
Street, and invited to fill the situation of Classical Tutor at the
Bristol Academy. Dr. Evans dying in August this year, Mr. H. continued
to preach at Broadmead during the remainder of that and nearly the whole
of the following year. About this time he renewed an attachment formed
while a student at Bristol, between himself and Miss Esther Rolph,
youngest daughter of George Rolph, Esq., a respectable solicitor at
Thornbury: who afterwards became his wife, and who lives to lament her
loss.
In December, 1792, Mr. Hughes accepted the office of assistant minister
at Broadmead; Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Ryland, having become the Pastor and
President of the Academy. In this connexion, however, after a time, Mr.
H. encountered difficulties and discouragements which at length
terminated in his removal to Battersea in July, 1796. In the following
year, he was ordained: the service was attended to in the Independent
chapel, at Clapham. Mr. Josiah Thompson, his early patron, delivered the
charge, and Mr. Dore preached to the people. Other parts were taken on
the interesting occasion by Mr. Liddon, of Hemel Hempstead, and Dr.
Rippon, who has survived them all.
The "Religious Tract Society" was instituted in 1799, of which Mr.
Hughes was appointed Secretary, and which office he retained to the
period of his death. But it was as the Secretary of the "British and
Foreign Bible Society" that he was universally known and admired. This
noble institution, which he seems, in conversation with the Rev. T.
Waters, of Worcester, to have admitted originated in a suggestion from
himself, was publicly formed March 7th, 1804, at the London Tavern,
Cheapside; Granville Sharp, Esq., in the chair. To the discharge of the
delightful but onerous duties of this honourable office, he consecrated
his distinguished talents and eminent piety, during nearly the last
thirty years of his life.
Towards the close of his life, in consequence of some trying occurrences
at Battersea, certain efforts were made to remove him into the
metropolis. This movement, however, called forth renewed feelings and
expressions of mutual attachment between himself and the persons who had
so long enjoyed his ministration; and he respectfully declined the
overture which had been made to him from London.
For a considerable time before his death, Mr. Hughes had been afflicted
with a pain in one part of his foot. This did not at first occasion any
alarm; but early in July 1833, having set out on a long journey to
Wales, and other places, on behalf of the Bible Society, the affection
in his foot so increased, and, by the necessary exertion in prosecuting
the object of his journey, became so aggravated, that he was obliged to
retire to the house of a friend in the vale of Abbey Tintern, and give
up what remained of his projected tour. This sickness was to be unto
death; rest and retirement did not mitigate the symptoms of his
complaint. Amidst great suffering he was removed to Bath; and when it
was found that little hope remained of a cure being obtained, he was
conveyed in an invalid carriage from Bath to the house of his son,
where, after continuing a few days, he was taken to his own residence.
Throughout his affliction, though his sufferings appear often to have
been exceedingly acute, he discovered the most exemplary patience and
resignation; the frame of his mind seems to have been uniformly devout
and serene, and his confidence in the person and work of the divine
Redeemer, strong and unwavering. At length, the time of his departure
arrived. On the evening of October the 3rd, 1833, in the sixty-fifth
year of his age, he peacefully left these mortal shores.
The character of his mind, of his studies, of his conversation, of his
oratory on the platform, and of his sermons from the pulpit, Mr.
Leifchild has delineated with the hand of a master, having possessed all
the advantages of personal and confiding friendship. The mental and
moral excellences of Mr. Hughes were unquestionably very exalted; but
his communications often appeared to suffer from what, perhaps, might
not improperly be denominated, a constitutional coldness of manner,
which seemed to impose a sort of reluctant constraint on his own
feelings. We remember a gentleman of the Tract Committee remarking, "I
admire Mr. Hughes--I hear him,--I see him--I want to _feel_ him." It was
evident that, in himself, he felt intensely here; and, doubtless, he now
burns with all the holy ardour of a seraph in the celestial world.
Were it practicable, we should have peculiar satisfaction in gratifying
our readers, and enriching our columns, with lengthened extracts from
this interesting volume; but we must confine ourselves to two, which, we
are sure, both on account of what they contain, and the high respect in
which the writers of them have been long and deservedly held, will be
most acceptable to our readers. The first is from the pen of Mr. Jay.
"Mr. Hughes was often and much at Bath, formerly, supplying several
years at Argyle Chapel, for six weeks together, while I was in
town. I have been intimately acquainted with him for upwards of
forty-three years, and have exchanged more mind with him than with
any man I ever knew, except my friend and tutor, Cornelius Winter.
With regard to religious things, we only differed as to baptism;
and if we did not love each other the more for this difference, I
am sure we did not love each other the less. We disagreed, too, a
little with regard to composition and preaching: he too squeamish,
and I too careless; he labouring for correctness, and I for
impression (in grasping which I sometimes erred); he too satisfied
if he could abide criticism, and I too careless of critical
judgement, if I could secure effect. Yet, though he was often
kindly finding fault with me when we were alone, he was always
seeking opportunities to hear me; and I cannot be ignorant how much
I shared his commendation, as an author and a preacher. I am
thankful for my intimacy with him. My esteem of him always grew
with my intercourse. _I never knew a more consistent, correct, and
unblemished character._ He was not only sincere, but without
offence, and adorned the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.
"His mind was full of information; his conversation, singularly
instructive, and very edifying; and while others _talked_ of
candour and moderation, he _exemplified_ them. In his theological
sentiments he was firm, yet sober and liberal, and not too orthodox
(as I have often known this,) to be evangelical. But why do I write
this? you know it as well as I, and will describe it better."
p. 143.
Thus Mr. Jay, concerning the lamented Mr. Hughes. But now we introduce
Mr. Foster's letter, addressed to him while languishing into death. "The
letter referred to," says Mr. Leifchild, "as forwarded to him by his
friend, Mr. Foster, the editor is happy in being permitted to
subjoin;--a letter which leaves it hard to determine, whether the
feelings of the writer, or of the receiver, were most to be envied."
"_Stapleton, September 18, 1833._
"In conveying a few sentences for the last time to my dear old
friend, I wish to be allowed to say why such a token of sympathy
and affection is so late.
"Returning from a long excursion in North Wales, very near the time
of your removal to London, I was surprised and grieved at the
report of your seyerely afflicted situation at Bath. My impulse to
go thither was repressed by the information that no one was
admitted to see you. After hearing successive accounts, I wrote a
few lines of inquiry to Mr. Evill; and was answered that you had
just been removed to London,--with a promise of sending me the
information they should receive; which has been done. During the
subsequent time, I have withheld from writing to you, partly by
information that your great weakness rendered every unusual
intervention painful to you, and partly by a report confidently
affirming that you had left this world. But at last, and previously
to receiving yesterday a message from you through the hands of Mr.
R. Cottle, I had determined to write to Mr. George, and put it at
his discretion whether to show you the letter.
"The thought of my dear and ever faithful friend as now standing at
the very verge of life, has repeatedly carried me back in memory to
the period of our youth, when, more than forty years since, we were
brought into habitual society, and the cordial esteem and
attachment which have survived, undiminished, through so long a
lapse of time, and so much separation. _Then_ we sometimes
conjectured--but in vain--what might be the course appointed us to
run; and how long; and which might first come to the termination.
_Now_ the far greater part of that appointment has been unfolded
and accomplished. To me a little stage further remains under the
darkness; you, my dear friend, have a clear sight almost to the
concluding point. And while I feel the deepest pensiveness in
beholding where you stand, with but a step between you and death, I
cannot but emphatically congratulate you. I have often felt great
complacency in your behalf, in thinking of the course through which
Providence has led you,--complacency in regard to the great purpose
of life, its improvement, its usefulness, and its discipline and
preparation for a better world. You are, I am sure, grateful to the
Sovereign Disposer in the review of it. You have had the happiness
of faithfully and zealously performing a great and good service,
and can rejoice to think that your work is accomplished, with a
humble confidence that the Master will say, "Well done, good and
faithful servant," while you will gratefully exult in ascribing all
to his own sovereign mercy in Jesus Christ.
"But, oh, my dear friend, whither is it that you are going? Where
is it that you will be a few short weeks or days hence? I have
affecting cause to think and to wonder concerning that unseen
world; to desire, were it permitted to mortals, one glimpse of that
mysterious economy; to ask innumerable questions to which there is
no answer: What is the manner of existence--of employment--of
society--of remembrance--of anticipation--of all the surrounding
revelations to our departed friends. How striking to think that
_she_[A] so long and so recently with me here, so beloved, but now
so _totally_ withdrawn and absent--that she experimentally knows
all that I am in vain inquiring!
[Footnote A: Mrs. Foster.]
"And a little while hence, you, my friend, will be an object of the
same solemn meditations and wondering inquiries. It is most
striking to consider--to realize the idea--that _you_, to whom I am
writing these lines, who continue yet among mortals, who are on
this side of the awful and mysterious veil--that you will be in the
midst of these grand realities, beholding the marvellous
manifestation, amazed and transported at your new and happy
condition of existence, while your friends are feeling the
pensiveness of your absolute and final absence, and thinking how,
but just now as it were, you were with them.
"But we must ourselves follow you to see what it is that the
emancipated spirits, who have obtained their triumph over death and
all evil through the blood of the Lamb, find awaiting them in that
nobler and happier realm of the Great Master's empire; and I hope
that your removal will be, to your other friends and to me; a
strong additional excitement, under the influence of the Divine
Spirit, to apply ourselves with more earnest zeal to the grand
business of our high calling.
"It is a delightful thing to be assured on the authority of
revelation, of the perfect consciousness, the intensely awakened
faculties, and all the capacities and causes of felicity of the
faithful in that mysterious separate state and on the same
evidence, together with every other rational probability, to be
confident of the re-union of those who have loved one another and
their Lord on earth. How gloomy, beyond all expression, were a
contrary anticipation!
"My friend feels, in this concluding day of his sojourn on earth,
the infinite value of that blessed faith which confides alone
in the great Sacrifice for all the sole medium of pardon and
reconcilement, and the ground of immortal hope. This has always
been to you the very vitality of the Christian religion: and it
is so--it is emphatically so--to me also.
"I trust you will be mercifully supported,--the heart serene, and,
if it may be, the bodily pain mitigated, during the remaining
hours, and the still sinking weakness of the mortal frame; and I
would wish for you also, and in compassion to the feelings of your
attendant relatives, that you may be favoured so far as to have a
gentle dismission; but as to this, you will humbly say, 'Thy will
be done.'
"I know that I shall partake of your kindest wishes and remembrance
in your prayers--the few more prayers you have yet to offer before
you go. When I may follow you, and, I earnestly hope, rejoin you in
a far better world, must be left to a decision that cannot at the
most be very remote; for yesterday completed my sixty-third year. I
deplore before God my not having lived more devotedly to the grand
purpose; and do fervently desire the aid of the good Spirit, to
make whatever of my life may remain much more effectually true to
that purpose than all the preceding.
"But you, my friend, have accomplished your business--your Lord's
business--on earth. Go, then, willing and delighted, at his call.
"Here I conclude, with an affecting and solemn consciousness that I
am speaking to you for the last time in this world. Adieu, then, my
ever dear and faithful friend. Adieu--for a while! May I meet you,
ere long, where we shall never more say, farewell!
"J. FOSTER."
_A Beacon to the Society of Friends._ By ISAAC CREWDSON.--Hamilton,
Adams, and Co. pp. 155. 12mo.
_A Defence of the Doctrines of Immediate Revelation, and Universal
and Saving Light: in Reply to some Remarks contained in a work,
entitled "A Beacon to the Society of Friends."_ By THOMAS HANCOCK,
M. D. pp. 92. 12mo.
The Beacon ought to be read with serious attention, and with an honest
desire to know "what is truth," by every member of the society, to whom
it is addressed. Members of that society cannot need to be informed
by us of the absurd and impious vagaries, advocated with an air of
solemnity, as shocking as it is ridiculous, by certain members of their
body in America, the leader of whom was Elias Hicks, a man of
considerable acuteness and energy, but who evinced a degree of mental
perversity truly appalling. Members of other societies cannot be
expected to feel any great interest in the sentiments,--if sentiments
they can be called,--avowed with so much complacency by that fanatic, or
even in the rapid progress which they made in America. It were wholly
unnecessary, therefore, even if our limits allowed it, to furnish our
readers with any account of the ultra-mystic theology of Hicks. It will
suffice to say, that there is scarcely a doctrine of revelation which it
does not discard or explain away. The peculiar tenets of this sect were
publicly denounced by the English Quakers at their yearly meeting, held
in London, May, 1832; but we hesitate not to affirm--what we can easily
prove--that the tracts of Elias Hicks are clearly deduced from the
fundamental principles of Quakerism; that many of his statements bear a
very close resemblance to those of the early Friends; and that, however
they may be opposed to those writings which possess divine authority,
they are fully borne out by others, which are of _almost_ equal
authority in the estimation of some members of the Society of Friends,
and which, although that sect acknowledges no creed, are generally
regarded amongst them as standards of religious doctrine.
Let us illustrate this: Elias Hicks speaks with great apparent
devoutness, as well as energy, of a way of salvation, which Christians
in general would imagine peculiarly his own, of which the most assiduous
and prayerful student of the Scriptures would have no conception, and
which, as far as we can learn, never entered the minds of Paul, and
Peter, and John. He says, "It is only by gathering to this light (the
light within) that we can gain a place in his favour; and by
endeavouring that all our actions should proceed from the movings of
this life in the immortal soul; and as this comes to be our case, _we
gain reconciliation_ with the Father." This short sentence will appear
to our readers to contain a sufficient quantity of mysticism for any
purpose, and what is worse, a capital error on a point of vital
importance. The Scriptures represent, _not the light within_, but
CHRIST, "who was delivered for our offences, and rose again for our
justification;" as "our peace, who hath made both (Jews and Gentiles)
one," and hath "reconciled both unto God in one body by the cross." When
the apostles were asked, by an awakened sinner, "What shall I do to be
saved?" they, without any hesitation, replied, "Believe on the Lord
Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." They always directed men to
Jesus Christ for salvation, for pardon, and for purity, for light and
for life; they believed that Christians are complete in him; but that,
separated from him, they can do nothing. They affirmed that "there is
salvation in none other; neither is there any other name under heaven
given among men, whereby we must be saved." But, if Elias Hicks were
asked by a poor sinner, conscious of his pollution and guilt, but
ignorant of the hope set before us in the gospel, "What shall I do to be
saved?" he would reply, "It is only by gathering to the light--this
saving light that is within us all, that we gain a place in his favour."
He never thought of directing sinners to Jesus Christ for salvation; his
directions uniformly pointed another way: "Oh, then, let us be
individually endeavouring to gather to the light, and wait on the Lord,
that we may see his counsel." But this _anti-christian_ statement, this
opposition to the word of the truth of the gospel, is in perfect
accordance with the avowed and acknowledged principles of Quakerism.
One of the fundamental principles of the system is, "that there is an
evangelical and saving light and grace in all," and that "this light
enlighteneth the hearts of all in a day, in order to salvation, if not
resisted; nor is it less universal than the seed of sin, being the
purchase of his death, who _tasted death for every man; for as in Adam
all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive_." This is the
language of Robert Barclay, the able apologist of Quakerism; and,
perhaps, some of the Friends may tell us, how many degrees _below_ the
authority of Paul and Jesus they hold the Apologist. It must be evident
to every one, at all conversant with the past history and the present
state of the society, that the Friends have ever been, and are still, in
many instances (by far too many), accustomed to direct men, not to Jesus
Christ, who is able to save unto the uttermost all that come to God by
him: but to the principle of light and life within, which "enlighteneth
the hearts of all in a day, in order to salvation, if not resisted."
Closely connected with the doctrine of inward light, is that of
immediate revelation. But the veneration of men for the authority of
Scripture decreases in exact proportion to their zeal for immediate
revelation. Elias Hicks received revelations quite as important in their
nature, as abundant in their measure, and as immediate in their mode of
communication, as any with which the apostle Paul was favoured. He is
therefore entitled to disregard the authority of Scripture! He has in
himself a higher authority! and he is commissioned to direct men to a
better, in every respect a better, guide, than that sure word of
prophecy to which the first Christians were exhorted to take heed, as to
a light shining in a dark place! This is his language: "It is through
this comforter that _all our_ knowledge of God must come; and all that
ever was among rational beings under heaven, came through this medium,
and none other. But, by our believing that we can help ourselves to
heaven by the aid of the Scriptures, _a mere written book_, at the same
time that we understand it so diversely, sets us to warring and
quarrelling. Has not this been long enough the case, for every rational
being to be instructed and to see, that _instead of its being a
sufficient rule of faith, and practice, it is the reverse, for while it
is depended on as such, it hinders from coming to the truth_. The
Scriptures never told us that they were a sufficient rule, but they
recommend us to that from which they themselves bad their origin--the
Spirit of truth." If this be not infidelity, we really know not what is.
Hicks does not even speak of the sacred Scriptures with that decent
respect which one would consider due to the writings of a _brother_
prophet: "The Scriptures a mere written word, which, instead of being a
sufficient rule of faith and practice, is the reverse, and hinders from
coming to the truth!" Such language must draw a sigh from every
Christian breast. But is such language utterly strange in the annals of
Quakerism? Is it unusual in that society to speak of the Scriptures in
terms of disparagement, compared with the teaching of the Spirit, and
immediate revelation? Barclay affirms, that "the _Scriptures_, '_being
outwardly written_,' are the law which brings _condemnation_, and
_kills_; but that the _gospel_ is the _inward_ spiritual law which
_gives life_." He affirms, that "inward, immediate, objective revelation
is the only sure, certain, and immovable foundation of all Christian
faith;" and that "the principal rule of Christians under the gospel is
not an outward letter, but an inward spiritual law; therefore the letter
of Scripture is not, nor can be, the chief or principal rule of
Christians:" and our good friend, Dr. Hancock, represents those in the
society, who "are turning the eye of the mind outward instead of
inward;" that is to say, who are looking to the Scriptures, instead of
to the light within; as "after beginning in the Spirit going back to the
letter," and thus "leaving the fountain of life itself, and 'hewing out
to themselves _broken cisterns_, that can hold no water?'" Are these the
words which are able to save our souls, to make us wise unto salvation
through faith in Christ Jesus? or are these the terms which a Christian
feels himself authorized to apply to those words?
Much might be said, and most justly, of the evil tendencies, and the
pernicious fruits, of this capital error, respecting immediate
revelation, and the consequent disparagement of the living oracles of
God; but we can now simply advert to that grand axiom, which is in the
mouth of all orthodox Friends, and which, they fancy, renders their
notion of the Scriptures as stable as the pillars of the creation, and
as clear as the light of heaven. The axiom, in simple terms, is this:
"The author is greater than his work; the Spirit which gave the
Scriptures is greater than the Scriptures which he gave; therefore the
Spirit, and not the Scriptures, is the first and chief foundation of
truth, ground of faith, and rule of conduct." This would seem all very
plain; but it is very fallacious. The author is greater than his work:
very true; but when you (if we may for a moment address ourselves to
Friends), when you plead for "immediate revelation," as the surest
foundation of all Christian faith, and "the principal rule" of Christian
conduct, you are not placing the author above his work, but _one work_
of the author above _another_ of the works of the same author; you are
not placing the Spirit above the Scriptures, but you are placing the
private and personal revelations of the Spirit to you, above those
revelations of the same Spirit which he gave to apostles and prophets,
for the instruction and salvation of the human race. It is generally
admitted by you, that the "Scriptures were given by inspiration of God;"
that they are a revelation from God to man; that they are words which
"holy men of God spake and penned as they were moved by the Holy
Spirit." Though we were to admit, therefore, that you have in
reality--we believe no such thing--revelations from the Spirit of truth,
it would be absurd to say, that because the author is greater than his
work, these private revelations are a firmer foundation of faith, and a
more certain rule of conduct, than the revelations contained in the
inspired volume: it is not the Spirit which you have, but, at best, a
revelation from the Spirit; and this revelation you place above the
Scriptures, which you acknowledge to be divine--which you admit to be a
revelation from God to man.
It may be vain in us, but we think this remark worthy the attention of
Friends: if we are mistaken in our view of this subject, we should be
happy to be put right; but if we are correct, the main pillar of
Quakerism is overthrown, and the edifice must, as in that case it would
deserve to, fall.
Of Dr. Hancock's work, it may, perhaps, be enough to say, that it
affords a poor defence of notions which many of our readers will believe
do not merit a better. Like some other "defenders of the faith," the
Doctor makes up for a lack of argument, not indeed by an exhibition of
the sword, or the stake, but by positive assertions, by dogmatism, and
by a condemnatory spirit. The unfortunate author of "The Beacon"
appears, in Dr. H.'s opinion, to have committed an almost unpardonable
offence against the society, and, in this opinion, we are sorry to find
the Doctor is by no means singular. It is melancholy to witness the
bitter spirit of intolerance and persecution, which the well-intended
effort of Mr. Crewdson has raised in the Society of Friends--the
peaceable, the nonresisting Friends. It is questionable, even now,
whether the publication of his little volume may not lead--in violation
of one of the fundamental principles of the Society, as stated and
advocated by William Penn, in his address to Protestants, and in
contempt of the spirit of religion, and, happily, of the age in which
we live,--to the exclusion of Mr. Crewdson from the Society of Friends.
Alas for poor human nature! whatever else may change, this is always
the same--the same, whether under a bishop's mitre, or a Quaker's
broad-brim. The "Defence" may certainly appear a powerful thing to those
who entirely agree with the author: those who differ from him will
probably be of another mind. A few short extracts will suffice to show
the _clearness_ and _consistency_ of the author's statements. In page
17, he says, "I consider every opinion which has not their (the
Scriptures') support must fall to the ground;" but in page 8 he says,
"If nothing of divine influence, in the days of Fox and Penn--nothing, I
say, but the light and knowledge of Scripture, had operated on the minds
of men, then, I believe, _our religious Society would never have had
existence_, for they were taught immediately _by_ Christ, and they
directed all _to_ Christ." Every opinion not supported by Scripture must
fall to the ground: then Quakerism must necessarily sink; for, according
to the Doctor's own showing, that system owes its very existence, not to
the Scriptures, but to something else--to immediate revelation. In page
22, he says, "_Neither the opinion of Robert Barclay, nor that of any
other man, would weigh with me_, if I did not consider that it was
founded on a correct and enlarged view of Scripture doctrine:" very
good; but then, in the very next sentence, he adds, "I quote the Apology
of Robert Barclay, concluding, that one who is now _a minister_ (Mr.
Crewdson), _in outward fellowship in the same society with myself, can
hardly be supposed_ TO HAVE THROWN OFF THE AUTHORITY OF A WORK _so
justly esteemed as it is amongst us_; for this would imply, that his
_departure from the ground of our testimonies_ was greater than I am yet
willing to believe it to be." The opinion of Barclay has no weight: yet
no man in the Society of Friends can be supposed to have thrown off the
authority of Barclay's Apology! We cordially congratulate the Society of
Friends on the appearance of the "Beacon;" and sincerely pray, that a
spirit of inquiry may be universally excited, and that the divine
authority of the Scriptures, as the sole and sufficient rule of faith
and practice, may eventually, and even speedily, be established in the
mind of every individual amongst them. Of Dr. Hancock we know nothing;
and of that gentleman, personally, we cannot, and will not, say anything
bordering on disrespect; but we heartily wish the Mystics and Quietists
all the joy, to which they are _fairly entitled_ from his Defence.