"I am far (says Locke,) from denying that God can, or doth sometimes, enlighten men's minds in the apprehending of certain truths, or excite them to good actions, by the immediate influence and assistance of the Holy Spirit, without any extraordinary signs accompanying it. But in such cases we have reason and Scripture, unerring rules, to know whether it be from God or no. Where the truth embraced is consonant to the revelation in the written word of God, or the action conformable to the dictates of right reason, or Holy Writ, we may be assured that we run no risk in entertaining it as such; because, though it be not an immediate revelation from God, extraordinarily operating on our minds, yet we are sure it is warranted by that revelation which he has given us of truth. But it is not the strength of our private persuasion within ourselves, that can warrant it to be a light or motion from Heaven; nothing can do that but the written word of God without us, or that standard of reason which is common to us with all men. Where reason or Scripture is express for any opinion or action, we may receive it as of divine authority; but it is not the strength of our own persuasions which can by itself give it that stamp. The bent of our own minds may favour it as much as we please; that may show it a fondling of our own, but will by no means prove it to be an offspring of Heaven, and of divine original." Here is a great coincidence between the opinions of the christian philosopher and the quaker apologist; and although they refer to right reason as well as the Scriptures, as our guide, they meant not to use them in contradistinction to each other. When we refer to either of two rules to solve a proposition, it is because both will produce the same result; and they introduced the word reason, as applicable only to those opinions and actions, respecting which, the Scriptures are silent. If, says the philosopher, the doctrine is consonant to reason or Scripture, it may be received without risk, although it may not proceed from an immediate revelation of God. Divine revelation, says the apologist, can never contradict the outward testimony of the Scriptures or right reason; and whatever any do, pretending to the spirit, which is contrary to the Scriptures, must be accounted and reckoned a delusion of the devil. By this test no genuine quaker can object to being tried,[4] "for he preaches no new gospel, but that which is confirmed by all the miracles of Christ and his apostles; and he offers nothing but that which he is able and ready to confirm by the authority of the Scriptures, which all protestants acknowledge to be true." It is indeed the only criterion by which we can judge of the faith of man, and by that criterion, how few of your sermons would escape condemnation. Footnote 4: Barclay. LETTER II.