HAVING in my former communication endeavoured to illustrate some of the views of the Society of Friends, and to state some facts which I deem important to a right understanding of their character as a religious body, I shall proceed to notice some of the other remarks of "PAUL," contained in his first Essay. The subject of his second address, I must leave for future consideration. From some cause I apprehend their character and views are misunderstood, what that cause is, I must leave, although I cannot believe it proceeds from "habitual reserve." It is true, they are not fond of controversy, but I have never observed that they were averse to explanation.

The period in which religious controversy was a favourite theme, with the generality of christian professors, I believe has long passed by. It has been succeeded by a day, either of indifference to the subjects of it, or of calm investigation into the all-important concerns of salvation. With men of sound reflection, the quiet end patient search after truth must be decidedly preferable to the hurried pursuit of it through the stormy and turbid region of controversy; these do not willingly quit the serenity of the former, for the unsettled and tempestuous scenes of the latter: nor would I desire they should. If the sacred

scriptures are the only adequate rule of faith and practice, they must be best understood in a state of retirement and private prayer. If the Holy Spirit, under whose influence they were written, is the primary source of instruction, its language will be most intelligible when the mind is undisturbed by the clamour of debate. With these views I shall endeavour to keep the ground of calm discussion, and to give a reason of the hope, and faith, and practice, of the people with whom I stand connected, in a manner consistent with the dignity and solemnity of a religious subject. Having premised these observations, I shall proreed to " PAUL's" next remarks, "That Friends are unwilling to join with others in their Bible and Missionary Societies."

In order to understand the real state of the case, it may be necessary to mention a few facts. In the first place, a considerable number of their members, both in England and America, have joined the Bible Associations, and rank amongst their active and liberal contributors; of this, were it necessary, I could adduce ample proofs. In the next place, our Yearly Meeting have a book department, and officers appointed to distribute Bibles and other religious publications, as suitable occasions are presented: this is not a new establishment, it is of very long standing. It makes no noise in the world, was never published

in the newspapers. It is like a gentle stream, fed from an unfailing spring, spreading verdure and fertility through all its meanders-silent in its course, and scarcely known but where its benefits are felt.

It can scarcely have escaped general observation, that the Society of Friends have a very quiet way of doing their business, it is in fact the true ground of "PAUL'S" complaint against them in the present instance. In their works of charity, they seem studiously to avoid every thing that might attract public attention. Many of their members are fed, and clothed, and educated, from the funds of the society, whilst their fellow members generally do not know them to be subjects of public bounty: thus the end of charity is answered in a two fold way; poverty is relieved, without being exposed.

I have sometimes when viewing them as with the eye of an indifferent observer, been struck with an idea that they laid particular stress upon that injunction of our Lord, "When thou doest thine alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth, that thine alms may be in secret, and thy Father who seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly." Matt. vi. 3. Be that as it may, the noiseless tenor of their progress, has often been the subject of remark; but I can hardly suppose that indifferent judges will consider them much behind their fellow christians in love and good works."

66

When I have considered the course pursued by members of other religious persuasions in their Bible Societies, Missionary Associations, Charity Schools, Tract Societies and other benevolent institutions, the innumerable pamphlets and newspapers they publish, teeming with accounts of their good deeds, with lists of their contributor's names, with the amount of their donations, as well as with the surprising effects of their labours. it has seemed to me that they must have forgotten the command of our Lord, where he says, "When thou doest thine alms do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in their synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men:" Matt. vi. 2. If they do not forget it, they must suppose the end justifies the means, and warrants them to pursue a different course from that pointed out by the highest authority. The man that went up into the temple to pray, boasted of his good works before those who were assembled with him under the same roof, and stood reproved; the walls of a single house, form two narrow a boundary for modern christians to tell of theirs in, and by a thousand heralds they proclaim them to the wide world. The inconsistency of this practice, I think, must arrest the attention of every reflecting mind, and is, I have no doubt, one cause why some do not join them in their labours.

On the subject of Missions, the Society of Friends have never been indifferent; for though they have not joined in the attempt, to convert the natives of Birmah or Hindostan, though they have sent no Missionary to Java, China, or Japan, yet they have not been idle at home. They are not opposed to missions. Under eircumstances which are deemed warrantable or auspicious, they are friendly to them. And I think that "PAUL'S" benevolent mind ought not to be pained because they do not join with others in the work. So that they do their share of the business, the Christian Philanthropist will be satisfied. Friends have on this continent, at the present moment, at least four settlements among the Indian natives, which have been maintained at a vast expense. "PAUL," I suppose, did not know of this: indeed how could he know it? They have had no Missionary Herald to tell the world what they have been doing in the case: they have not been asking charitable contributions through the towns and villages of the United States, for the support of their institutions, or I suppose their labours in this concern would have been known and duly appreciated. The Society has annually, I may say, hundreds of Missionaries as the term is now used, who travel abroad in the service of the gospel, by which means the remotest settlements are visited and their brethren and others are ministered to as occasion requires. These, having received mercy at their Lord's hand, go forth under the sacred obligation of gratitude to Him; they minister freely, in the ability received, both in spiritual and temporal things; they invite people, not to come to them, but to come unto Christ, that divine fountain of living water, which God hath opened in the soul, and to drink of that heavenly stream" without money and without price."

Having shown that the Society of friends have not been unmindful of the objects of Bible and Missionary Societies, I intend in my next essay to give some of the reasons why they have not extended their Missionary labours beyond the Cape of Good Hope.

AMICUS.

Saturday, June 9, 1821,

LETTER V.

ON BIBLE AND MISSIONARY SOCIETIES.

It would be truly gratifying to my feelings, from time to time, like" AMICUS," to make prefaces and apologies. But I have neither time nor room. If my expressions are sometimes harsh, o were those of my apostolic namesake, and I know that my

spirit is full of love. The Searcher of hearts is my witness how pure are my motives in these letters, and how sincere is my desire for your salvation.

And does "AMICUS" really suppose, he has proved that your body, as a body, are the friends of Bible and Missionary Societies! Or does he from his heart, believe that such is the fact? A few (a very few) of your society, in England and America, have stood up as the vindicators and promoters of this cause. I admit, and rejoice to admit the interesting fact. But in this they were never imitated by the mass of their brethren. So singular was the sight of a professed Friend, taking an active public part in these societies, that the names of the individuals have been frequently and honorably mentioned in their published Reports. A Reynolds, a Pole, an Allen, and others, have done themselves much honor, and the cause much service; but what have you done as a Society? I am bold to say, that while a few individuals have pursued a different course, as a body you have condemned and opposed these institutions, and do, to this hour, disapprove of them as dangerous schemes.

In proof, I ask what have you ever done for the Bible Society in this State? While hundreds of families down the Peninsula are destitute of the Scriptures, and while all other denominations, except the Roman Catholic, have joined in circulating the word of life, only three or four individuals of your numerous and wealthy community have ever contributed to its funds, and not one (I believe) has ever honored its meetings with his presence. Individuals, when asked the reasons of their refusal, have intimated their reluctance to associate with those from whom, in other things, they so widely differed," their fear that the Bible would "encourage wars," &c. How often do your public speakers denounce these institutions? How long is it since Elias Hicks, a very popular "public Friend," of whom, one of your members says, that "he could write as good scripture as the Apostle Paul"-how long is it since he, before a large assembly in your Borough, made an open attack on all Bible, Missionary, Tract and other Associations, to the great grief of other denominations, (whom you had been careful to invite,) but manifest gratification of your own?

Shall I add, there is at this time, in Philadelphia, a publication, which, according to the statement of the editor, has a subscription amounting to more than eight hundred, whose avowed and steadily pursued object, is to oppose all those benevolent institutions which characterize the present age; a publication written principally by Friends (as is evident from their doctrines, their "plain language," and other circumstances,} which is circulated in Wilmington to considerable extent, and is

patronized almost entirely by Friends and-infidels! This publication, which, as assiduously as a bee, sucks poison from the lips of slander; and with letters from the Indian Red Jacket, from General Wilkinson, and other pagans and infidels, prepares a monthly treat for the enemies of Missions, a leading Friend in your town, said, "if he had fifty children, it should be the first book he would put into their hands!" In the last number of the above work, the first page, William Allen, of England, is condemned for taking part in anniversary meetings, and the hope is expressed, that the censure "will have its use in checking a disposition now too prevalent, to take a part and be distinguished in some of the specious institutions, which at this time so much abound." And in page 138, Elias Hicks says, "It is my unshaken belief, that Bible and Missionary Societies, are more pernicious to the real spread of the true gospel of Christ, and more oppressive than all the gambling and horse racing in the country." And yet the Friends are in favor of Bible societies! With just as much propriety may we say, the Roman Catholics are patrons of the same, because Leander Van Ess, and a few others, in defiance of the Pope's bulls, in opposition to nine tenths of their body, and in direct contradiction to their creed, join with Protestants in this glorious work or that the Jews were friendly to christianity, because the twelve Apostles belonged to their nation! No, the Friends, as a body, are the enemies and opposers of one of the noblest and grandest institutions ever organized.

Your distribution of Bibles and other publications among your members, like your missions among yourselves, is very well; but in this, what do you more than other denominations do for themselves? The Society which does not provide for itself, like the man that does not provide for his own house, is "worse than an infidel." The Methodists have a large "Book Department," and annually circulate through their churches, especially in the Western country, great numbers of books and bibles; but do they call this a Bible Society! by no means; they never consider this as superseding the necessity of benevolent exertions to benefit strangers and the heathen. The Bible Societies of which I spoke, and which I charge you as opposing, are establishments for the general and universal good, without reference to sect or party. As the object is to circulate the Bible without note or comment, in it all denominations ought to join, and in it all other denominations have joined. And I still think it an act of "unsocial separation" in you, not to assist in this mighty work, and very unkind and unchristian to oppose others because they do not work in your way!

As to missions-You employ "hundreds of missionaries to