I am aware that to enter into this subject, though but briefly, is an odious task.  But I shall abstain from all comparisons, by which I might offend any.  If I were to be asked which, among the many systems of the Christian religion, I should prefer, I should say, that I see in all of them much to admire, but that no one of them, perhaps, does wholly, or in every part of it, please me; that is, there is no one, in which I do not see some little difficulty, which I cannot solve, though this is no impediment to my faith.  But, if I were pressed more particularly upon this point, I should give the following answer.  I should say, that I should prefer that, which, first of all, would solve the greatest number of difficulties, as far as scriptural texts were concerned, in conformity with the Divine attributes, which, secondly, would afford the most encouraging and consolatory creed, if it were equally well founded with any other; and which, thirdly, either by its own operation, or by the administration of it, would produce the post perfect Christian character.  Let us then judge of the religion of the Quakers by this standard.

That there are difficulties with respect to texts of scripture, must be admitted; for if all men were to understand them alike, there would be but one profession of the Christian religion.  One man endeavours to make his system comport wholly with human reason, and the consequence is, that texts constantly stare him in the face, which militate against it.  Another discards reason, with a determination to abide literally by that, which is revealed, and the consequence is, that, in his literal interpretation of some passages, he leaves others wholly irreconcileable with his scheme.  Now the religion, of the Quakers has been explained, and this extensively.  In its doctrinal parts it is simple.  It is spiritual.  It unites often philosophy with revelation.  It explains a great number of the difficult texts with clearness and consistency.  That it explains all of them I will not aver.  But these which it does explain, it explains in the strictest harmony with the love, goodness, justice, mercy, and wisdom of God.

As to the creed of the Quakers, we have seen its effects.  We have seen it to be both encouraging and consolatory.  We have seen it produce happiness in life, and courage in death.  The doctrine of the possibility of human perfection, where it is believed, must be a perpetual stimulus to virtue, it must encourage hope and banish fear.  But it may be said, that stimulative and consolatory as it may be, it wants one of the marks which I have insisted upon, namely, a sound foundation.  But surely they, who deny it, will have as many scriptural texts against them as they who acknowledge it, and will they not be rendering their own spiritual situation perilous?  But what do the Quakers mean by perfection?  Not the perfection of God, to which there are no limits, as has been before explained, but that which arises