140 ARE THE SCRIPTURES HELD IN ESTIMATION? elder,* at Manchester, whose character might well have secured him (if that of any man living could be thought to secure him) from the suspicion of a desire for any thing but the spiritual welfare of those whom, in the most disinterested manner, he was endeavouring to put into the way of instruction. But no the Scriptures must not be studied, in the full and proper sense of the word, lest the principles of Friends might be laid waste in the minds of the young and inexperienced. The extracts from the writings of the early Friends which have been given, will serve to clear up this mystery, because it will be readily seen that the main purpose of the Scriptures was, with them, to confirm "inward and immediate revelation," and this is still to be esteemed the paramount rule of faith. * William Boulton, whose friendship, with that of the author of the "Beacon," is to me inestimable. CHAPTER IV. IS THE SACRIFICE OF CHRIST HELD IN PROPER BUT we must now pass on from the consideration of the fatal absurdities which the foregoing extracts from the early writers among Friends exhibit, and which we see are held, in the present day, in full estimation by their successors. That a more clear idea of their system may be formed, let us go on to examine what were the views held out by the early Friends respecting the great sacrifice of Christ. For, although there are some things contained in their writings which would give the idea of scriptural opinions having been held by them on this infinitely important subject, there are others of an opposite nature, which do not appear to me to admit of being explained away. And let it be fully taken into account that, although, in so limited a work as the present, it is impracticable to give more than a few extracts, the writings of Friends, unhappily, so much abound with the like views, that the selection on this subject, as well as on those which have before claimed our notice, has been extremely difficult, from the almost incredible bulk that might, with nearly equal propriety, have been transcribed. We may first notice what is said by Robert Barclay, in his Apology, Prop. 13th, § 2nd, page 446, where we find him saying, "The body, then, of Christ, which believers partake of, is spiritual, and not carnal; and his blood, which they drink of, is pure and heavenly, and not human or elementary." And he goes on to say, "If it be asked, then, what that body, what that flesh and blood is? I answer, it is that heavenly seed-that Divine, spiritual, celestial substance, of which we spake before in the fifth and sixth propositions. This is that spiritual body of Christ, whereby and through which he communicateth life to men, and salvation to as many as believe in him and receive him; and whereby, also, man comes to have fellowship and communion with God." Then, after quoting a number of passages of Scripture, as it appears to me, most fearfully to pervert them, some of which I shall after wards notice, he says, "From this large description of the origin, nature, and effects of this body, flesh, and blood of Christ, it is apparent that it is spiritual, and to be understood of a spiritual body, and not of that body or temple of Jesus Christ which was born of the Virgin Mary, and in which he walked, lived, and suffered in the land of Judea; because it is said that it came down from heaven, yea, that it is he that came down from heaven. Now all Christians, at present, generally acknowledge that the outward body of Christ came not down from heaven, neither was it that part of Christ which came down from heaven. And, to put the matter out of doubt, when the carnal Jews would have been so understanding it, he tells them plainly, verse 63, 'It is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing.' This is also founded upon most sound and solid reason, because it is the soul, not the body, that is to be nourished by this flesh and blood. Now, outward flesh cannot nourish nor feed the soul; there is no proportion nor analogy betwixt them; neither is the communion of the saints with God by a conjunction and mutual participation of flesh, but of the Spirit: he that is joined to the Lord is one spirit, not one flesh. For the flesh (I mean outward flesh, even such as was that wherein Christ lived and walked when upon earth, and not flesh when transformed by a metaphor to be understood spiritually) can only partake of flesh, as spirit of spirit: as the body cannot feed upon spirit, neither can the spirit feed upon flesh. And that the flesh here spoken of is spiritually to be understood, appears further, inasmuch as that which feedeth upon it shall never die, but the bodies of all men once die, yea, it was necessary that the body of Christ himself should die. That this body and spiritual flesh and blood of Christ is to be understood of that Divine and heavenly seed before spoken of by us, appears both by the nature and fruits of it." From Barclay's explanation of "the seed" may be clearly understood what is meant by it in George Fox's Journal, where it is very frequently spoken of, and is not, perhaps, defined in such a manner as to give a cursory reader much, if any, notion of what he really means by it. For instance, at page 266, we find as follows:-"I was moved by the power and Spirit of the Lord to open unto them the promise of God, that it was made to the seed, not to seeds as many, but to one, which seed was |