suaded one-half of the American Quaker community to adopt his unitarian, or rather his deistic views, and to sever their connection with the original body.

But it was not against unitarian Quakerism that I had contended in the passages which have been cut out as being inapplicable to the principles now held by the Friends. I had put into the mouth of "Josiah" too much, it seems, of what is called "quietism;" a phase of belief which results from peculiar interpretations of such texts as "Keep silence before me, O islands;" "Be still and know that I am God;" 66 We are the clay, and thou our potter;" or, "In quietness and confidence shall be your strength;" &c. These, and similar texts, when I was in the habit of attending Friend's meetings some thirty years ago, were favourite or at least frequent subjects of the sermons delivered: not that a Quaker sermon is necessarily, or indeed often, a discourse on a single text, for frequently it consists of loose observations strung together by texts, as the mind of the speaker rambles on from text to text and subject to subject. The abnegation of the creature, the necessity of introversion of spirit, the continual waiting in expectation of "a dayspring from on high," were habitually enforced from the preachers' gallery. In consequence of such a style of preaching, the Friends, at least in Ireland, had largely embraced quietism; and accordingly the writings of Madame Guion, Fenelon, and other quietists were frequently to be found in Friends' families, and recommended by Friends for the perusal of young persons. Hence the Quakerism that I myself had imbibed was quietistic; and hence, when, after many years of estrangement, I began to write of Quakerism, I naturally reverted

(like a newly awakened Rip van Winkle) to what had been in vogue when I was a boy. But, meantime, the Quakers had changed with the times; not only in the less rigid enforcement of the time-hallowed forms of dress and address, but in many other respects. A style of evangelical (I do not mean calvinistic) preaching, of which the late J. J. Gurney's preaching was the type, had gradually arisen. The old style, after many struggles with "Gurneyism," had gradually declined; and, as I am informed, has now lost much of its prestige, though it is by no means extinct, and often makes a vigorous protest against modern innovations.

Several Essays have recently been written on the gradual decline of Quakerism, and various causes have been assigned for what is a generally admitted fact. Many elements of decay may be at work, but the chief cause of weakness seems to me to be a gradually failing faith in the truth of the doctrines held by Fox and Barclay. The proportion of Friends who distinctly hold the distinctive dogmas of Quakerism to those who hold them loosely or in a new sense, is yearly diminishing. In another generation or two, unless renovated, the dogmatic teaching of Fox and Barclay will die out.

Of this decay in doctrine the leading Quaker dogma of "Immediate Inspiration," or as they term it, "the immediate influence of the Holy Spirit," is a striking example. It is no longer held in the strong and full manner in which it was regarded even within my own memory, much less in the paramount form in which George Fox and his associates taught it. As now held, it is so little different from the parallel doctrine of the Church-the sensible influence of the Holy Spirit on the faithful heart

-that it is hardly worth upholding as a ground of separation from the Church's communion.

a

Of late it has become a frequent custom with many of the younger members of the Society of Friends to go on Sunday mornings to the Quaker meeting, and in the evening either to church or to some dissenting chapel, where they may hear a sermon. Such conduct, twenty years ago, would have subjected the offenders to admonition, as it would have been looked on as acknowledging hireling ministry," and therefore as infringing a vital principle of Quakerism. But a still wider departure from former practice is now beginning to be tolerated; for marriage to a member of another communion, even though solemnized by the blessing of a priest," no longer necessarily involves the loss of membership. And, having so far sanctioned the authority of " a man-made priesthood," it only further remains that Friends should abandon what they have called their "ancient testimony against the payment of tithes," and this in fact is taking place, at least in Ireland, where the conversion of the tithe into a rentcharge has demonstrated to many the unsound basis on which their scruple rested.

66

Such, I apprehend, will be the fate of all the other "ancient testimonies" of Quakerism. A more enlightened and better educated generation is beginning to discover that, though the doctrines of Fox and Barclay have in them "much that is true, and much that is new," yet that "what is true is not new," and what is new is only true in a very restricted sense. The natural result of such a discovery ought to be just what is actually in progress, namely, a gradual loosening of the bonds which hitherto have bound together the members of the sect; and I

trust it will result in a gradual gathering into the Church's communion.

It is my earnest wish that this work may prove useful. I can truly say that it has been written neither for fame, nor for profit, nor yet for amusement, but to advance what I believe to be the cause of truth. Hence, I have freely sacrificed to J. P.'s criticism every passage which in his judgment was deemed offensive or unjust; although I still think that some of the passages cut out were directed not at chimeras of my own brain, but at opinions which once largely obtained, and which do yet, in several localities, prevail among "Friends." But I am quite willing that these misty opinions should be allowed to dissolve naturally, as morning fogs disappear before the rising sun.

Trin. Coll. Dublin.

Feb. 5th, 1862.

W. H. H.