again, after the apostacy, in their primitive and ancient purity, as they were delivered by the apostles of Christ in the Holy Scriptures; I say, that the same Spirit does now lead us into the like holy order and government to be exercised amongst us as it was among them."

From this view of the nature of meetings for discipline, it was a natural consequence that, in the management of the business which came before them, the members were governed by the impressions on their minds, which they believed to come from the Head of the Church, and not by efforts of their own reasoning powers. An illustration of this may be found in the Journal of Richard Davies, who mentions that at a Quarterly Meeting where he had exhorted Friends to the observance of the order, then recently introduced, of holding men's and women's meetings for the care of church matters, some one, who was opposed to these meetings, opposed what he had said. When he had done, our friend, Thomas Ellwood, proposed to the meeting that all should sit down and wait to feel the power of God among us, and let that decide whether I did speak in the name and power of God among them this day; to which the meeting agreed, and all were silent. After which, several Friends, as they were moved by the Lord, gave tenderly their testimony that what was delivered that day was in the name and power of God. There stood up a young man that I knew not, whose heart was affected, and much broken in spirit, and said on this wise: "There is a man come this day amongst us, I know not from whence he came nor where he goes; but this I am satisfied, the Lord sent him here, and his power and presence is with him and his testimony for the God of Truth."

In the early days of our Society the young and inexperienced were not expected to attend meetings for business—but only those who were so far advanced in spiritual growth as to be able to discern what was in accordance with the Divine will.

A "Testimony, or Epistle," sent out by the brethren in London in 1666, says: "We advise that not any be admitted to order public business of the church but such as are felt in a measure of the universal Spirit of Truth." It appears to have been the practice for young Friends not to attend such meetings until invited by the older members. Joseph Pike mentions his own experience: "When about twenty years of age, I was invited by Friends to be a member of the men's meeting in Cork, at which time I was under a religious exercise of mind. My conversation was sober, and my exterior plain, according to Truth-all which drew the love of Friends towards me. I thought myself very unworthy, being low and weak in mind, thinking I could do them no service; but hoping to receive some benefit myself, I did with fear and caution accept their offer, and sat among them some years before I presumed to speak much to what came before them. Yet I joined in heart and soul with those who were exercised for the Truth; and as I grew more and more concerned for its prosperity, when occasion offered, I spake more to subjects in meetings." After some further remarks on the subject, Joseph Pike expresses his judgment, "That the affairs of the Society cannot be conducted in the unity of the Spirit without due care be taken in the admittance of qualified members." In accordance with this view, in 1740, a query was adopted, to be answered by inferior meetings: "Is care taken that no unfit persons sit in meetings for discipline?"

William Edmundson, in an epistle "Concerning Men's and Women's Meetings," says: "It is of absolute necessity for all the members to know in what authority they sit in those meetings for the service thereof must be performed in the wisdom and counsel of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the authority of his blessed Spirit and power." "In all such meetings about the Lord's business, the Lord must be chairman, ruler and

judge for it is in the gift of the Lord's good Spirit that the ability stands to perform that service."

It would be easy to multiply similar testimonies. Since the principles of our Society require the decisions of its meetings to be based upon the judgment of the Spirit this judgment, whether it speaks through few or many, must be acquiesced in by the others. Hence, as Robert Barclay states, Friends do not decide by pluralities or majorities. The question as to deciding by votes, was prominently brought forward in the course of the trial of a cause in the New Jersey Court of Chancery, involving the rights of Friends and of the Hicksites to a school fund about the year 1830. The first witness examined on behalf of Friends was Samuel Bettle, Sr., who made the following statement:

Our mode of deciding questions is peculiar. It is intimately connected with our religious principles and doctrines; when an individual or a religious assembly is gathered into a reverent, inward, waiting state of mind, that we are sensible at times of the presence of the invisible and omnipresent One qualifying the heart for secret communion and approach unto God. Hence, the Society believe, and it is one of their peculiar and distinguishing doctrines that there may be secret approach to and worship of God, without any ceremonial outward act or service; and in our meetings for business, we also hold that it is needful to experience the same power to qualify us for right discernment and to restrain our own spirit and will; and we do believe that when our meetings have been thus in degree influenced, there have been wisdom and judgment better than our own; consistent with the prophetic declaration respecting the blessed Head of the Church, that He should be a Spirit of judgment to those who sit in judgment." With these views, and a corresponding practice, our Society has been favored to come to its decisions and conclusions at its various meetings, with a remarkable degree of harmony and unity. These conclusions, thus prevailing in a meeting, or, in other words, this sense of the meeting, is often

attained to with very little expression; and the member acting in the capacity of clerk records this sense, feeling or conclusion of the meeting. And it has never been come to by a vote, or the opinion of the majority: no question is ever taken by a reference to numbers, or votes, or a majority, or anything like that. It is obtained upon religious principles, which we understand very well, but which it is difficult to explain. We have got along in this way for near two centuries very well.

In reply to a query, whether, by the ancient practice of the Society, the young and inexperienced are permitted to take part in the transaction of the business of the meetings, Samuel Bettle stated that in ancient times the young did not attend those meetings, unless specially invited to do so; but that the present practice is to admit all who choose to come. This change of usage has been made with the hope that the attendance of these meetings and witnessing the religious exhot the services of them rested, might have a used Merce over the younger members, and tend to prepare them for taking a part in the business of the Church. This could scarce fail to be the effect if, as Joseph Pike said was the case with him, they "mned heart and soul with those who were exercised for the Truth

ciety of Friends were very je And not only by word of mouth. and earnestly for the faith" they had they have left is very voluminous. produces, perhaps none have been

more valued and been more effective than "The Apology for the True Christian Divinity, as the same is held forth and preached by the people, in scorn, called Quakers. Being a full explanation and vindication of their principles and doctrines, by many arguments deduced from Scripture and right reason, and the testimonies of famous authors, both ancient and modWith a full answer to the strongest objections usually made against them." By Robert Barclay.

ern.

Almost from its first publication, this book has been received by Friends as an authoritative statement of the doctrines most surely believed among them, and has been reprinted and distributed from time to time, so that if any of their number should now reject its authority, it would be no breach of charity to say that they themselves had ceased to hold the doctrines of Friends.

66

A writer in the Westminster Review" speaks of it as a master-piece, both in style and manner, among the richest gems of our language." One of the most learned bishops, when asked by a foreigner to recommend to him a systematic work in the English language on Protestant Theology, told him that he knew of none, unless it were Barclay's "Apology for Quakerism." And truly, to any one wandering in the dreary waste of polemics of this age or that, it would be a pleasant place to alight upon. A complete proficient in the learning of the school-men, he wields their weapons with wondrous skill, to destroy the empire which they had so long held over men's souls, and he defends the Truth with a chivalrous devotion, and courtesy to his opponents, reminding us of the Norman knights from whom he was descended; and, mingling with his eloquence and skilful logic, we ever hear a strain of such pure and heartfelt piety as touches our hearts fully as much as it pleases our fancy and our reason."

The Journal of Joseph Wood mentions the convincement of