man,

superstitious ceremonies-all human consecrating of things, and buildings, and places which exclude all formal lip and knee homage-or all drawing near with the lips to God, when the heart is far from him"which essays not to enter into the pool before the Angel has descended to trouble the waters, but which rests with humble confidence upon "him who is mighty to save," and will in his own time make bare his holy arm for the deliverance of his contrite and afflicted ones, who know that "the preparation of the heart in and the answer of the tongue is from the Lord;" if, I say, a nearer accordance to the simplicity of Christian worship, and Christian discipline, cannot be seen in these peculiarities" which recognise no ministry, "but of the ability which God giveth"-no government but that which rests upon "HIS shoulders" to whom it belongs, and of whom the prophet Isaiah foretold, in that beautiful passage, wherein he declares, that "He shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace, and the government shall rest upon his shoulders, and of the increase of his kingdom there shall be no end:"-if, I repeat, a stricter affinity be not seen between these "peculiarities," and the modes of worship and discipline of the early Christians, so far as they are set forth in the writings of the Apostles, than can be discovered between the latter and those "peculiarities," which must have Cathedrals and Churches and Chapels, -Archbishops and Bishops, and Deans,-Popes and Cardinals, and Monks and Friars,--Presbyters, Doctors, right reverend, very reverend, and not very-reverend sirs crosses, images, altars, fonts, holy water (so

called), wafers, mitres, crosiers, gowns, surplices, and silk aprons-reading or giving out their own or other men's opinions, upon some text of Scripture twice or thrice a week, and reading over, time after time the same form of prayer, without reference to the immediate wants, states, or conditions of the hearers-tithes, oblations, offerings, dues-letting of seats-support by voluntary contributions, and a long train of other practices, contradictory doctrines, and strange ceremonies, too numerous to mention :-if, I say, it is not seen that the Friends' "peculiarities," which the "Scottish Congregational Magazine" writer, designates Sectarian, do in these particulars of worship and discipline, more closely resemble that of the Primitive Christians, so far as they are set forth in the Scriptures, I can only say in almost their own words, that it is marvellous "that any intellect should be the subject of such hebetude of vision as not to discern the fallacy." And with respect to the peculiarities" of dress and language, if plainness and simplicity in the one, use and cleanlinessin the other, do not accord with the doctrine, and probable practice of our Saviour-the Apostles and primitive believers generally, according to Scripture testimony, than the bowing and cringing-the hypocritical deference to mere rank-the indiscriminate application of worthy and honourable terms and titles, to individuals, from the mere circumstance of station alone, without reference to the moral fitness of the expressions, or worth of the party addressed-if, to call our fellow-creatures most religious, gracious, noble, illustrious, honourable and right honourable-reverend, right reverend, and most reverend, whether they possess

"

these qualities, or on the contrary, are irreverend, most irreverend dishonourable, most dishonourable, ungracious and irreligious-if such "peculiarities" as these, are more conformable to Apostolic precept and practice than the "peculiarities" of Friends, which disown that spirit which prompts us to "hold men's persons in admiration, because of advantage;” then I must confess that I have read the Bible to but little profit, and that those dear and persecuted Friends of former days, who "in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils amongst false brethren," were enabled through

the everlasting arm" of divine power and love, to uphold in faithfulness and patience the testimonies they were given to bear; then, I say, were they "of all men most miserable." Be not deceived, my Christian brethren, these things are not of Christ-these "peculiarities," are of the spirit that warreth against the Truth, and to which the call of the prophet extends with searching power, "come out from amongst them, and be ye separate." Whence is it, my fellow Christian professors of all denominations, but from the pride of man, and not the humility of the Cross, that THESE peculiarities"these ceremonies and demands-these titles, and honours, and DISTINCTIONS arise? The writer of the "Review of the Beacon," praises that work, chiefly because of "the principle adopted in it of making the Word of God," (which holy title he misapplies to the Bible,) "the ultimate appeal for the truth of every doctrine, and the propriety of every practice." Mind, not of some doctrines and practices, but of "EVERY doctrine," and "every practice." Now, in what part of the Bible does he find Christ, or his Apostles, dividing

Christians into two distinct bodies, of CLERGY-men, and LAY-men? Where is the command, that men are to ordain each other to preach the Gospel, which Paul declares to be, not this holy man's writings, or that holy man's writings, or all the writings, and sayings, and prophecies of all the holy men that were ever "moved" thereunto, but, "the power of God unto salvation.”Where, I say, is the command for men to ordain one another to preach the Gospel!-to establish universities and schools of divinity, and to forbid all preaching "in the name of Jesus," but such as receive a licence from their fellow dependants and expectants on divine love and mercy? Where do we find that such authority should be given to " the wise, and mighty, and learned of this world," to appoint and qualify all those in their earthly wisdom and favour they may think meet, "to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ ?" Where do we find the command that such a mode of proclaiming the "glad tidings" of heaven shall be adopted in the Church of Christ, and that the members shall contribute of their earthly substance to support it in worldly pomp and grandeur? Where do we find the command for even voluntary" contributions? Where do we find authority for placing the Gospel for support upon public charity? Did Christ, or his Apostles, order one more than the other? Did they press the civil power into their service, and coerce men to give the tenth of the land's produce to a body incorporated with the state, and invested with almost all kinds of temporal privileges and honours, in order that men might "not be conformed to this world, but transformed by the renewing of their minds?" Where do we find authority for

D

men to appoint ministers of the Gospel of Christ, and to give a certain sum per annum for a seat in a building, or so much as their means can afford, in order that they may participate in the benefits of this man-made ministry? Where is the chapter and verse from the Reviewer's standard of "ultimate appeal for the truth of EVERY doctrine, and the propriety of EVERY practice," for this practice and the doctrine upon which it may be founded? Is this description of payment-of making as much of the Bible as fair competition will allow, sanctioned by Christ, or any of his Apostles, according to Scripture testimony? Is this putting up of a human ministry to the highest bidder, recommended in the sacred volume, in preference to a compulsory payment? Or, have either of these "peculiarities" scriptural authority to enforce them? May we not, without fearing the charge of unbecoming levity being urged against us, exclaim, "I never heard of such a thing in the Bible ?” Monstrous infatuation indeed,-gross hypocrisy,—enormous wickedness,—or extraordinary blindness, that, with the Bible-the very Bible itself in their own vernacular tongue-before their eyes, that any intellect should be the subject of such hebetude of vision as not to discern the fallacy." But I cannot quit this part of the subject yet. A serious charge has been made against what are termed the " Sectarian peculiarities" of the Friends, and these peculiarities are, more or less, throughout the "Extracts from Periodical Works," held up for reprobation, as dangerous and anti-scriptural: yes, that "the tenets of Elias Hicks," (says the Baptist Magazine writer,) "are clearly deducible from the fundamental principles of Quakerism." Now, for