Christian breast. But is such language utterly strange in the annals of Quakerism? Is it unusual in that society to speak of the Scriptures in terms of disparagement, compared with the teaching of the Spirit, and immediate revelation? Barclay affirms, that "the _Scriptures_, '_being outwardly written_,' are the law which brings _condemnation_, and _kills_; but that the _gospel_ is the _inward_ spiritual law which _gives life_." He affirms, that "inward, immediate, objective revelation is the only sure, certain, and immovable foundation of all Christian faith;" and that "the principal rule of Christians under the gospel is not an outward letter, but an inward spiritual law; therefore the letter of Scripture is not, nor can be, the chief or principal rule of Christians:" and our good friend, Dr. Hancock, represents those in the society, who "are turning the eye of the mind outward instead of inward;" that is to say, who are looking to the Scriptures, instead of to the light within; as "after beginning in the Spirit going back to the letter," and thus "leaving the fountain of life itself, and 'hewing out to themselves _broken cisterns_, that can hold no water?'" Are these the words which are able to save our souls, to make us wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus? or are these the terms which a Christian feels himself authorized to apply to those words? Much might be said, and most justly, of the evil tendencies, and the pernicious fruits, of this capital error, respecting immediate revelation, and the consequent disparagement of the living oracles of God; but we can now simply advert to that grand axiom, which is in the mouth of all orthodox Friends, and which, they fancy, renders their notion of the Scriptures as stable as the pillars of the creation, and as clear as the light of heaven. The axiom, in simple terms, is this: "The author is greater than his work; the Spirit which gave the Scriptures is greater than the Scriptures which he gave; therefore the Spirit, and not the Scriptures, is the first and chief foundation of truth, ground of faith, and rule of conduct." This would seem all very plain; but it is very fallacious. The author is greater than his work: very true; but when you (if we may for a moment address ourselves to Friends), when you plead for "immediate revelation," as the surest foundation of all Christian faith, and "the principal rule" of Christian conduct, you are not placing the author above his work, but _one work_ of the author above _another_ of the works of the same author; you are not placing the Spirit above the Scriptures, but you are placing the private and personal revelations of the Spirit to you, above those revelations of the same Spirit which he gave to apostles and prophets, for the instruction and salvation of the human race. It is generally admitted by you, that the "Scriptures were given by inspiration of God;" that they are a revelation from God to man; that they are words which