We may mention another point of comparison. There were some of the teachings of the early Friends, which, while really constituting part of the Quaker Reformation, were more of the nature of testimonies, specially belonging to that particular age. Such were doubtless based upon true principles into which these faithful disciples were led by the Spirit of Christ. But we have to remember that the application of principles may and does vary under the same Divine guidance. It had been so with the Primitive Christians. They had their strong testimony to bear about meats offered to Idols; against the use of blood; and so on. But these expressions of a true principle have long passed away, with the need of them. Though the injunction on these subjects was given to Gentile Christians, in the most solemn and unqualified terms (Acts xv. 28), no believer, Gentile or otherwise, feels any longer bound by it.

So with the early Friends. Admitting that there may have been in their protests against certain evils and extravagances of the time some degree of crudeness and exaggeration-for instance, in the use of what they called plain and truthful language; on the subject of dress, and personal demeanour-and in respect to some recreations; still they testified in their seventeenth-century style to some important truths that may now be upheld in other ways. In these things we have our own responsibility, which is not met by mere imitation.

We sometimes hear Quakerism described as if it were identical with what is known as "Evangelicalism," plus a few specialities about the Ordinances, War, and Oaths. This is a great mistake. We may appeal both to the early Friends, and to their contemporaries the "Evangelicals" of the seventeenth century; and we shall find the answer from each clear and unmistakable. Leaders of the "Evangelical" sects in those days— such as Baxter and Bunyan-never would admit that the fathers of Quakerism were in harmony with themselves as regards even primary Christian doctrine. They stigmatized them as one-sided,—as tending to Socinianism,—as undervaluing the Bible, and so on,-charges which one still hears at times applied by "Evangelicals" to old-fashioned Quakerism: though more unfounded statements as regards each particular, both then and now, could hardly be made. So far from being one-sided, they proclaimed afresh the central truth of Christianity. Their testimony to Christ, as Almighty and Divine, was a practical testimony;-and as such it was more definite and unequivocal than that of any other religious community. And their reverence and love for the Bible were so marked, that its plain teachings were accepted by them at great cost and suffering, on points respecting which other churches seem still "halting as between two opinions."

The Friends themselves-on this question of agreement in what were regarded as Fundamentals-were equally uncompromising. While they gladly avowed that they did not differ materially from many other religious communities, in what William Penn called "the common doctrines of

Christianity," they did not hesitate to assert that they differed almost radically in the definition-the understanding-and even in the place of some of these teachings.

The "Evangelical" sects-as we have already pointed out-declared, and still declare, their central truth to be the Death of Christ. The early Friends, going wider and deeper, proclaimed the great central and foundation truth to be Christ Himself;-the Living Saviour-the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever. They ignored no revealed truth. The human life of Christ-His death-His resurrection-His ascension-all for our sakes -they thankfully accepted and believed. But Christ the Living-the Indivisible,-He who had been God manifest in the flesh, and now is God manifest in the spirit,—was their foundation Rock. And on that Rock they built, and found safety and rest.

One characteristic achievement of the Quaker movement which is of primary importance was the rousing impulse it gave to individual Conscience. Christ-as these Reformers preached Him-was not only present in the Church as its Head, but He was present in the heart of each disciple. Therefore the Conscience—that wonderful organ or indicator, by which the Divine Presence is noted and its purpose revealed-was not to be a mere collective Church Instrument, interpreted and controlled by the priest or pastor, or even by the congregation; but a personal indicator, under Christ's direction, planted in the secret of each heart. Under this Divine Guidance, people were to think for themselves-seek for themselves and act for themselves. And yet not as mere detached and isolated units. The one Supreme Guide who dwelt in each soul, and understood and loved each soul, became-as He was trusted-the true bond of union to His people. This practical faith in Christ's direct revelation of Himself to each believer-as it is held in humility and charity is still found-even amidst great diversities of operations-to give true unity of purpose and an aggregate of wisdom; and so enables the Brotherhood to work harmoniously together for mutual help, and for the promotion of the truth. Here we have the true constitution of that union of many diverse spiritual natures, under the Headship and control of one Lord, which we recognise as a Divine institution, and which we call the Church.

A Church that felt itself so constituted would naturally be continually saying to its members-in other words the members would be continually saying to one another-" Christ is your Master; take heed to Him; take heed to His invisible and unsearchable influence, the convictions of the Spirit, the guidance and teaching of the Spirit,—the restraints of the Spirit." And the early Quaker Church did constantly reiterate this teaching. George Fox's epistles, and the addresses of his compatriots, are full of such injunctions. The supremacy of Conscience, controlled and enlightened by the Spirit of Christ, was in fact their prominent theme.

Personal Conscience was the rudder which, in the Divine hand, steered

their bark through the stormy sea which these brave men had to traverse. In obedience to it they went forth as Preachers; they held meetings; they organized communities for promoting God's truth; they went to prison; they laid down their lives; proving faithful to this Light of Christ in the Lamp of Conscience, even unto Death.

But further than that, they did their duty, and were seen to do their duty, in the petty details of every-day life. Perhaps this is as great a test of a tender and active conscience as can be found. George Fox tells us,"When people came to have experience of Friends' honesty and faithfulness, that they kept to a word in their dealings, and would not cheat them; but that if they sent a child to their shops for anything, they were as well used as if they had come themselves,-the lives of Friends did preach, and reached the witness of God in the people. Then the inquiry was, 'Where is there a draper, or shopkeeper, or tailor, or shoemaker, or any other tradesman, that is a Quaker?'”

Another quiet, but invaluable characteristic, springing from the same root, and which has already borne good fruit,-but which needs to be much more cultivated in the world of politics and daily life, is the absence, or at least the diminished power, of the spirit of self-seeking and of mere personal ambition. Oliver Cromwell testified to it as something unusual, when he said of the Friends, "Here is a people whom I cannot win with gifts, honours, office, or place." John Bright once referred to the same characteristics when he said, "I am a member of a small but somewhat remarkable sect,-a religious body which had a remarkable origin, and in its early days at least a somewhat remarkable history. It is, of all the religious sects, the one that has most taught the equality and equal rights of man. And I venture to say it is remarkable for another thing, that, probably more than any other body, within its borders and in its service, personal ambition is practically unknown." John Bright adds, “I think much of my opinions, and much of my course, have been determined or at least greatly influenced by the training I received in that body."

This active personal Conscience, which leads to a true self-reliance based on the assurance of Christ's presence and help, was the root of that sturdy independence of character which was once (and which is still, to some extent, let us hope) a distinguishing feature of Quaker people. It has been through this true staying power so much needed in the battle of life, that the individual conscience has come to tell upon the whole community. Probably when George Fox spoke of one true Quaker shaking the country for ten miles round, he had in view not merely or mainly preaching, or other public efforts; but rather this integrity and uprightness -this unswerving fidelity to the truth however manifest in the soul,—this conspicuous loyalty to Christ, which brought about the whole movement. We read that some Scotch earl, who had been dealing with certain of these uncompromising Friends, said,-The Quakers' loyalty is a qualified

loyalty it smells of Rebellion."

To which one of them calmly replied "We understand not loyalty that is not qualified: qualified that is, with the fear of God, rather than of man."

And so this individuality—this unqualified loyalty to Christ,-told upon the churches and the nation in many important ways. For the churches the Quaker movement did much, by its broad teaching, to dissipate or at least to moderate the narrow Calvinism that prevailed in most of the Protestant communities. For the nation it won for us all Liberty of Conscience. "The struggle to secure this was carried on through forty years of bitter suffering, marked with many cruel martyrdoms, and the early Friends ultimately triumphed by the might of passive resistance wearying out persecution; and so they purchased for England the price less jewel of religious liberty."

To the brave and good soldiers who fought in this long and arduous struggle, we may apply the words of an eminent writer, and say: "They were true patriots. They developed another kind of deliverance for their country, founded on the authority of Truth. They stood up against Tyrant and Priest. They witnessed against false social maxims, against superstitions, against all that was enslaving the soul. They proclaimed a living God; and they sought in all things to be faithful to their King."

585

METHODISM.

BY MRS. SHELDON AMOS.

WHEN I was invited to lecture here, I had never delivered a lecture anywhere, and looking at the list of subjects undertaken by distinguished persons for this Course, I was fainthearted, and though I did not like exactly to refuse a kind offer, I saw no excuse for my speaking on any great World-Religion. Of ancient Egypt alone I knew enough to know that I knew very little. So I looked further, and seeing one lecture on "The Mass," I perceived that a portion of Christianity might be admissible, and then it was clear that I had hereditary right to speak on Methodism; for after the name of John Wesley himself there occurs no name of a Methodist organizer and statesman so prominent as that of my grandfather, Dr. Bunting. And yet, though brought up in the innermost centre of English Methodism, it were with diffidence I should approach the effort to speak of the great American, Australian, and other branches of the Methodist Connexion, had I not, in the course of a life spent among singularly varied sets of human beings, found constantly a quite curious amount of ignorance about the meaning, history, condition, and aims of Methodism. If I can induce some of you to inform yourselves about what I take to be at once the most conservative, the most radical, the most practical, and the most intensely spiritual of Churches, the one which has most frequently been rent by the fierce determination of the violent who take the Kingdom of Heaven by storm, to press on always to the next step in spiritualized and spiritualizing popular religion and Church government, I shall not regret having come to try to speak to you to-day.

I say that Methodism is conservative. John Wesley inherited both the Puritan and the Anglican traditions; and so the spirit of the Reformation, and so his ideal, may be traced through many reformations back to primitive ideals. And John Wesley's four volumes of Sermons and his Notes on the New Testament are still the comprehensive, tolerant, broad, while minute and exact, body of theological teaching on which Methodist ministers are trained, and to which they declare their agreement before they are ordained to the ministry. Such a mass of theological teaching cannot be rigid as a short creed. For while these views exclude volumes wider and more elastic, there has been no proposal to dethrone them as Methodist standards. And in these are included sermons and notes which have caused High Churchmen and Low, Sacramentarians and Salvationists, alike to claim John Wesley as of their own particular way of thinking. will not say that they are as wide as Christianity itself, but they are perhaps more Catholic than the tests of any other Church.

I