thee, nor suffer thee to be at ease in thy sins; but doth and will deal plainly and faithfully with thee, as those that are followers thereof have also done.

God Almighty, who hath so signally hitherto visited thee with his love, so touch and reach thy heart, ere the day of thy visitation be expired, that thou mayst effectually turn to him, so as to improve thy place and station for his name. So wisheth, so prayeth,

Thy faithful friend and subject,
ROBERT BARCLAY..

This book, shortly after its publication, was translated into High and Low Dutch, French, and Spanish.

I shall decline giving an extract from the body of the "Apology," as I have a very appropriate one from the last treatise written by Barclay, and which has been justly considered as the corner stone of his system of divinity, It was entitled "The Possibility and Necessity of inward and immediate Revelation of the Spirit of God towards the Foundation and Ground of True Faith, proved in a Letter written in Latin to a Person of Quality in Holland, and now also put into English, by

R. B." This letter, originally dated 1676, is inserted at large in Sewell's History of the Quakers, with several other pieces on the same subject. In his preface to this piece, he states the question of the rule of faith as established by the Catholics on one hand, and the Protestants on the other:

It is, (says he) a question now frequently tossed, "What is the ground and foundation of faith?" And when the matter is sifted to the bottom, it resolves in tradition or revelation: for those who lay claim to the Scripture, and would not make it the foundation of their faith, do resolve it but in a tradition, when the motives of credibility are enquired into; since, the subjective revelation which they yield comes but in the last place, and is by themselves termed medium incognitum assentiendi; and such a revelation those of Rome will not refuse, to influence them to assent to the determination of the church. So those protestants, who say the subjective operation of the spirit influences them, though they know not how, to believe the Scripture presented and conveyed to them by tradition, as the dictates of God's spirit, and so understand them as their preachers in terpret them, differ not much, or at least, have not reason to differ from the church of Rome, who say the spirit influences them to believe the Scriptures

as proposed by the church, and according as her doctors and councils interpret them; and neither has any better foundation than tradition: and to speak the truth plainly, the faith of both resolves in the veneration they have for their doctors; but whereas the one affirms, they do it by an entire submission, they think it decent to say, they judge them infallible; and certainly it is most reasonable, that such as affirm the first believe in the last. The other, because they pretend they believe the church, but continually have denied to her infallibility, though generally they be as credulous as the other; and I find the doctors of their church as angry to be contradicted as the other. That is an ingredient goes to the composition of all clergymen, since it became trade, and went to make a part of the outward policy of the world, from which has flowed that monster, Persecution. In short, the matter is easily driven into this narrow compass. We believe either because of

an outward or inward testimony; that is, because it is outwardly delivered, or inwardly revealed to us. For my part, I think the papists do wisely in pleading for infallibility; for certainly the true church never was, nor can be without it; and the protestants do honestly in not claiming it, because they are sensible they want it. I should therefore desire the one to prove that they are infallible; and advise the other to believe, they may, and seek after it. But I am sure, neither

the one is, nor the other cannot, without immediate divine revelation.

There is great force and acuteness in this statement, whatever we may think of the solidity of the author's principles.

BROWN (TOM)

THOMAS BROWN, of facetious memory, was the son of a considerable farmer in Shropshire, and educated at Newport school in that county, whence he was removed to Christ-church, Oxford. But the irregularities of his college life, soon obliged him to quit the university; and he set out, on a vague scheme of making his fortune, to London. But disappointed in his hopes, starvation stared him in the face, though he found interest enough to establish himself in a school at Kingston-upon-Thames. This occupation, however, ill-accorded with the vivacity of his temperament, and his previous habits, and he soon deserted the school for the metropolis. Here his former companions were more disposed to be pleased with his humour, than to relieve his wants, and he