a station twelve miles from Melbourne. Our object was the opening of a chapel, and the formation of a church. In the evening we met from twelve to sixteen Indians, with whom we held a conversation on Christian experience, and could comfortably have united the whole of them (except one) in Christian fellowship. We never witnessed a more entire change of heart, or more correct views of Divine truth, than most of them manifested, considering that they have only been two years under Christian instruction; yet only six of them came forwards, the others wishing to wait a little till they became wiser and stronger, for they said, "If we should profess the love of Christ and afterwards forsake him, it will do great injury to religion, and greatly increase our guilt.” The questions which we put to them were answered in the most correct and explicit manner. Many interesting questions were put by them to us. After they had left us we had a long and friendly conversation with Peter the missionary. We found him a warm-hearted and wise man, who has devoted all his energies to the good of his tribe, of whom about fifty attend his preaching, and about twenty are hopeful subjects of Divine grace. He spends his time in preaching, in visiting the people at their houses, in writing, and printing religious tracts, and circulating them diligently amongst the whole of the village; they are written and printed in their own language. All our communica tions to the people were through him as interpreter. The next day many of us breakfasted with Peter; after family worship we had a second interview with some of the Indians, to ascertain who of them intended to make a public profession of love to Christ; having advised them on the previous evening to spend most of the night in prayer and self-examination, while we engaged not to forget them. About half-past ten o'clock Peter took a large sea-shell, (which, being bored at one end, answered well for a horn,) and by blowing it called the people together for worship. The first part devolved upon me, the second part, that is (the dedicatory prayer) was offered by brother Parker, which was simple, earnest, and appropriate, in which the people seemed to unite with intense feeling. After an hour's intermission the service was resumed, brother Parker formed the church. I ordained one of their number chosen by themselves to the office of deacon; after which we jointly administered the Lord's Supper. It was a pleasing sight for an Indian, American, and British minister thus to be united in the wilds of Canada, while Indians, Americans, and Britons surrounded the table of our common Lord. The solemnities of the day being closed, the people lingered as if unwilling to go. In the evening we had another interesting conversation with Peter, when he related to us the particulars of his history. (To be concluded in our next.) TO CORRESPONDENTS. We decline to publish any essay, unless we have the name of the author.—If the author of "Christian Fellowship" will forward us the remainder of the paper, with his name, we will give it our best attention. All communications to be addressed, post-paid, to Messrs. WARD & Co., Paternoster-row, and, if possible, by the 10th of the month. W. Tyler, Printer, Bolt-court, Fleet-street. THE INQUIRER. FOR JULY, 1838. What saith the Scripture?-ROм. iv. 3. MISINTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE. We are indebted to a correspondent for the paper which follows, on the misinterpretation of some passages of Scripture, written some months ago by Mr. Joseph John Gurney. We consider it, in several respects, an important document, and too valuable to be lost sight of in the present state of the Society, and therefore give it entire, as it reached us; while it will soon be discovered that we are entirely at variance with the views entertained by the writer on the subjects of the Christian rites of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. These are the often repeated objections of the Friends; but having been so satisfactorily met and refuted by Mr. Isaac Crewdson and Mrs. Maria Hack, in their recent very interesting treatises, it will be unnecessary for us to say more, than that we think the writer has somewhat fallen into the error he deprecates. Were there not a "favourite view" to uphold, a "particular doctrinal bias," which prevents the full reception of Scripture with a "holy impartiality," he would hardly, we think, have given the turn he has to the Scripture passages brought forward on these subjects. We leave them, however, to the judgment and discrimination of our readers, purposing to offer a few remarks, in passing, on other parts of the paper; after particularly directing their attention to the concluding paragraph, in which the writer seems, by a most extraordinary effort, to attempt to throw the founders of Quakerism overboard, finding them a little in error; and now, after the lapse of 150 years, to give us his definition of Quakerism, viz., "the religion of the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, without diminution, without addition, and without compromise." After the little that has transpired in the pages of this periodical, and after the clear rejection, even in this paper, of the distinct commands of our Lord, it will be difficult, we think, for the simple, unsophisticated reader of the New Testament to come to the same conclusion. COMMENTS ON CERTAIN TEXTS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE WHICH ARE FREQUENTLY MISINTERPRETED BY FRIENDS. BY J. J. GURNEY. WHEN we assert that nothing short of the illuminating influence of the Holy Spirit can give us a sufficient or saving knowledge of the truths set forth in Scripture, we, of course, do not mean to insinuate that, in our researches into the storehouse of Divine knowledge, the use of our natural faculties is to be superseded. It is unquestionably our duty to exercise diligence and care, in order to obtain a right understanding of the sacred volume; for this, like every other book, must be interpreted in accordance with the known principles of language, and not without a reference to innumerable facts and circumstances which throw light on its meaning. Equally evident is it, that in the reading and interpretation of Scripture we should exercise a watchfulness over our own dispositions, and maintain a wholesome self-restraint. Nothing is more easy than to read Scripture with a particular doctrinal bias,-to give full place in our minds to passages which fall in with that bias,-to pass over other parts of the book with less notice; and even to wrest to the support of our own particular views, texts or expressions of which the true meaning, on a close inspection, is found to be in an opposite direction. And all this may be done without any intention of deviating from the truth, and for the express purpose of maintaining some important and vital principle of religion. But the Scriptures ought ever to be read with a holy impartiality: we must gratefully accept the development of truth in all its features; and even if there should arise between some of its parts an appearance of disagreement, we must still receive and imbibe the whole, as it is presented to us by the pen of inspiration. We may humbly hope that difficulties, which we are now incapable of reconciling, will all be cleared away, when the comparatively obscure glass through which we now see these things is exchanged, in a better world, for perfect light. I believe the general principles now adverted to are as honestly received and acted on by members of the Society of Friends as by those of any other Christian body; but it is probable there are few religious societies the members of which are not liable to fall, through want of caution, into certain conventional misinterpretations of Scripture, which impede the free progress of truth within their borders. I must freely acknowledge that a few examples of this kind have arisen among us, not, indeed, (as far as I know,) in our public documents, but in the usage of individuals; and I am convinced that the sooner such errors are rectified, the better for the growth and prosperity of our little section of the Christian Church. Small as they may be regarded in their origin, consisting, perhaps, in an inaccurate view of a single word or sentence, these mistakes are often found to spread their influence to a great extent; and they are stepping-stones, by which unwary persons may be, in no small degree, assisted in an actual descent into heresy. The first passage which I wish to notice is 2 Pet. i. 19-21, “We have also a more sure [or very sure] word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in your hearts." The idea was at one time rather prevalent among the members of our Society, that when the apostle used the term, "a more sure word of prophecy," he was alluding, not to any word written, but to that Divine illuminating influence by which the prophets were inspired, and which guides the Christian believer " into all truth." Such a view of the passage is, indeed, but seldom insisted upon at the present day; but as it is sometimes advanced, I think it right to acknowledge my own sentiment, that it is at variance with that simplicity which we ought always to maintain in the perusal and interpretation of the sacred writings. That the "very sure word of prophecy" was that which had been uttered and was written, is evident from the immediate context, in which the apostle distinguishes this word from the day-star in the heart, and at the same time identifies it (as I conceive) with prophecy of the Scripture. It ought, however, to be observed, that we need not confine these expressions to that part of Scripture which contains predictions of future events, for the term "prophecy " is applicable to every kind of inspired speech or writing; and the Jews were accustomed to call the whole of the Old Testament "the prophecy." The holy Scriptures are a light to which, at all times, and under all circumstances, we do well " to take heed;" but they shine only in a dark place, until the minds of those who read them are illuminated by the Holy Spirit" until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in our hearts."* My next example forms a part of that noble declaration of the apostle Paul: "I am a debtor both to the Greeks and to the barbarians, both to the wise and to the unwise; so, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the Gospel to you that are at Rome also, for I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek; for therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith," (that is, I presume, from the faith of the preacher to the faith of the hearer,)" as it is written, The just shall live by faith," Rom. i. 14-17. The word "Gospel " signifies glad tidings; and every one knows that the glad tidings which the apostle was appointed to preach were those of life and salvation, through the incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection of Christ. Such the apostle himself, in this very chapter, declares to be his commission. "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, (which he had promised before by his prophets in the holy Scriptures,) concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead," ver. 1-4. That, in preaching this blessed Gospel, he insisted on the atoning sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ, as well as on his other gracious offices, is evident from his declaration to the Corinthians-" We preach Christ crucified;" and again, "For I determined not to know any thing among you save Jesus Christ and him crucified." Now the Gospel * Our author here, in a manner most peculiarly his own, endeavours to excuse the grievous error in rendering this passage. He observes, that at one time it was "rather prevalent among the members of our Society." Candour, and justice to these "members,' should have led him to state whence history informs us it originated,-in no less a character than George Fox himself, the founder of the Society, from whom it must have been received as the truth by his contemporaries and biographers, with many more since that day; and even to the present hour it is most stoutly maintained by some Friends, as noticed in a former number. Can we suppose that George Fox fell into the error, as J. J. Gurney suggests, through want of caution? or was it not rather the result of his ignorance of language, united to an enthusiastic belief of his being under "that Divine illuminating influence by which the prophets were inspired? And then arises a serious question,What idea can we have of such "an influence," which led to such a result? We use the words "grievous error," from a belief that it tended, with other conventional views, to lower the estimate of the Sacred Scriptures in the Society of Friends for a long period, believing the "inward monitor" to be the sure guide to peace and heaven; so that the doctrines of the Cross, and the atoning sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ, were subjects, at one time, scarcely heard among them. |