on that subject; upon which quotation Rand makes the following admissions, page 28, "I need not repeat Friend Cobb's quotation from Barclay (obs. p. 14, 17. Apol. 96,99.) I acknowledge it is full to the point which I have said they allow, viz. that man is totally depraved as he stands in the fall. I allow too there is much more to the same point in Barclay and several other writers. This I knew before I preached my sermons; but this we have seen is not believing depravity, if, at the same time, they believe that mankind have the seed of God, or love of God, restored to them. That they do so believe, I will now prove." Barclay had in a his preceding proposition maintained that mankind had measure of saving divine light given to them, by which, if believed in and submitted unto, they might know a deliverance from this state of death and darkness, and be led into the light of the Lord: that there is a day of visitation afforded to every man, in which, if he resists not, but humbles himself and repents, he may be saved. But Rand says, page 27th, "they mean (alluding to the Quakers) "as nearly as I can ascertain, that mankind became corrupt by the fall of Adam, but are now, even all of them restored, so that all men have a holy principle of love of God in them." A want of candour in any man, with whom we have dealings in the common affairs of life, makes it unpleasant and unsafe to have those concerns to adjust; and stamps his character with an unfavourable impression wherever he is known. But in a professed minister of religion, and in things relating to the knowledge of God and the best interests of our souls, it is disagreeable and unseemly beyond expression. How could this man, after having read the statements only, made by Edward Cobb, and

the extracts which he published, if he had exercised common candour, have attempted to have imposed upon his readers, such an incoherent mass as he has done, as constituting the belief of the society of Friends? In doing which, he has added insult to injury, by telling what they mean, not what they say. But it is still more extraordinary, after his further admissions, that he has read a number of their standard authors, who have professedly treated upon those subjects. How could he so pervert the plain and positive meaning of Barclay, as when Barclay says, "Whatever good any man doeth, it proceedeth not from his nature as he is man or the son of Adam; but from the seed of God in him as a new visitation of life, in order to bring him out of his natural condition, so that though it be in him it is not of him." Rand says, "This clearly implies that man doeth some good thing, and that the seed of God is in him as a new visitation of life to produce it." Certainly no such implication follows from Barclay's words. Does it follow, that, because whatever good any man doeth proceedeth not from his own nature, therefore man doeth some good thing? Or that all men do some good thing, as he would have his readers believe from what he remarks following, when he says, that "the proposition from which this extract is taken, is entitled, p. 94, "Concerning the condition of man. in the fall," and begins thus, "All Adam's posterity, both Jews and Gentiles," &c. Does it follow from thence, that all that is spoken of any man, in the course of the proposition, is to be construed to have this extensive signifi. cation? I confess it is a new idea to me, that a general signification given to a word in a title to book or proposition, is to be attached to that

word, throughout the book or proposition. Rand has attempted to force this idea upon his readers, and no doubt the better to answer his purpose, has substituted in his extract the words, "Whatever good a man doeth," &c. instead of the words, "whatev er good any man doeth," &c. as it stands in Barclay. I would gladly attribute this substitution to accident; but when I see the use, to which he has turned it, in order to make the words appear to have a general signification, I cannot avoid attributing it to a design to misrep

resent.

I have said that the Quakers believe in the universality of the love of God to man, so far that he freely offers to them the means of salvation. But is the provi ding of them with the means by which they might be restored, on the condition of faith and obedience, an absolute restoration of them?-The Lord by his spirit strove with the old world, but did this actually restore them? Did he not, because of their disobedience to the strivings of his spirit with them, swallow them up in the deluge? He gave of his good spirit to instruct the Israelites, Neh. ix. 10. yet because they rebelled against him and vexed his Holy Spirit, therefore he was turn. ed to be their enemy, and fought against them, Isaiah lxiii. 10. It was not inconsistent with the wisdom and goodness of God to give them of his Spirit, although through their disobedience it did not restore them, nor preserve them in his fear. Our blessed Lord declares, that the office of the Comforter, or spirit of truth, is to convince the world of sin, (and undoubtedly it does its office); but it does not follow from thence, that all who are thus convinced, are restored and saved, or have a portion of "God's holy moral image" in them. God

so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believed on him should not perish but have everlasting life. But it does not follow, that in consequence of this great love of God to every man, the world have all believed, and been restored to the favour of God. The apostle asserts, that the grace of God, which brings salvation, has appeared to all men; but it does not from thence follow, that all are restored and saved, or have a portion of God's moral image.Neither does the failure in effecting restoration and salvation in either of the instances recited, nor yet in any others to which the scriptures bear testimony, in any measure invalidate the certainty of those offers having been made; nor yet of their having been intended to have effected the restoration and salvation of all those to whom they were or are graciously offered. His allegations upon the subject, and his attempts to impose meanings upon the Quakers which have no connection with their principles or belief, may be justly construed to implicate the Divine Being and his servant the apostle in the instances before recited, and indeed in any other instances of an import tending to show the universality of the love of God to man.

The Quakers neither say nor believe any thing upon this subject contrary to the testimonies of the Holy Scriptures. But Rand says, "the question is, what is man?" I answer, he is just what it pleases the divine will to make of him through faith and obedience to the teachings of his Holy Spirit; or what his disobedience to its sacred influence and teachings leaves him to be. If the former, he becomes restored to the divine favour, and is under the divine government of grace; but if the latter, he continues a poor, fallen, depraved creature,

notwithstanding the grace of God which brings salvation has appeared unto him, and would, had he believed in it and obeyed it, have regenerated him, and taught him to have denied all ungodliness and the world's lusts, and to have lived soberly, righteously and godly in this present world.

It will be seen by looking over Rand's book, from page 27 to 36, that, through the whole of them, he is only beating the air, raising phantoms through the workings of his own imaginations and invention, and fighting them with as much apparent zeal, as if he really believed that those absurdities actually followed from the principles of the Quakers. He must know, they do not, and it is to be feared he is only endeavour. ing to impose upon his readers.

If he was a candid man, he would have met the subject upon its proper ground, and, instead of making meanings for the Quakers, he would have stated their tenets as they hold and explain them, and if he were opposed to them, would have shewn in what their sentiments were unscriptural. This would have brought the present subject to this point. The Quakers believe that man in his natural and fallen state is alienated from his maker: but that God, who delighteth not in the death of him that dieth, but that all should return, repent and live, hath afforded sufficient grace unto all, which if believed in and obeyed would lead to repent. ance, and by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the holy ghost, effect their salvation. But if they reject this freely offered grace, they will abide in their sins, and condemnation will ensue, agreeable to the declaration of our blessed Lord, that this is the condemnation, that light has come into the world, but men