subject of it, in general, is a detail of the dispute which the apostle Peter had with Simon Magus, in an interview referred to in the eighth chapter of Acts: and the object of the book is to refute the system which that im postor set up in opposition to the gospel. The recognitions and homilies are written with great elegance, and with a purity of sentiment (a few passages excepted) which might justly claim apostolic authority. In these performances, we learn the important fact, that the first founders of gnosticism were disciples of John the Baptist. And the natural conclusion is, that St. John wrote his gospel to refute the errors of the gnostics, and of the disciples of John the Baptist."

To this extract, permit me to subjoin a few remarks. We are not to imagine, that John the Baptist himself formed a sect in opposition to Christ; or that all his disciples were gnostics; or that he taught opinions and doctrines such as were afterwards held by the gnostic heretics. But it is important to the biblieal student to learn, that some of John Baptist's disciples did not believe in Jesus of Nazareth, as the Messiah; that from worldly views, they rejected Christ, and kept separate from his

tles and disciples, and introduced a motley absurd system of theology. Simon Magus was one of these pretended disciples of John, and affected to possess extraordinary power from heaven. His doctrine of supernatural be ings was very absurd, and his morals very corrupt. He was supported in his claims by many Jews as well as heathens. So that the gnostic theory was a heterogeneous compound of Judaism and heathenism. If the first part of St. John's gospel is read with attention in reference to these suggestions, it will appear just and pertinent, where now, perhaps, it is obscure to some. We observe also, that possibly Lardner is not fully supported by ancient authorities, in rejecting the Clementine recognitions and homilies as spuri

ous.

He was a great critic in biblical literature; and has taught us in many instances to distinguish between genuine and reputed apostolic writings. By some learned men, however, he is thought to have condemned without sufficient reason and authority. And I suggest, wheth

er

THE Seneca Indians, observing what good the quakers had done at Oneida, invited them to their country. This invitation

Three young

was accepted. friends with two of the committee went to the Indian towns, on the Alleghany river, and were

well received. The committee explained to the Indians the object of their visit; and before they left them, held a conference

with the Indians and endeavoured to persuade them to adopt the habits of the white people. The young men continued with this tribe, to instruct them, and to set an example of husbandry: Four of the committee visited the settlement the next year. They delivered a speech to the Indians on that occasion, in which they expressed their satisfaction on account of the improvements which had been made. Cornplanter, the chief, in behalf of the nation, replied, that "When the young friends first settled among them, many of his chiefs were averse to it; they had this summer several councils among themselves, respecting the young men, and all the chiefs seeing their good conduct and readiness to assist Indians, were now well satisfied.”

From this place the friends went to the settlement on the Catarogus river. Wherever they went, they endeavoured to reform the habits of the Indians in respect to the use of ardent spirits, to instruct them in husbandry, in blacksmith business, and the use of mills. To in structions in these important branches of business, they added those of reading and writing, &c. The following extracts of speeches, letters, &c. from the report of the committee, will give some idea of the benefits the Indians received from the benevolent efforts of the quakers,

From Indians at Catarogus to the Quakers -1799.

"The instructions that you gave, pleases us very much in general; you may rely upon it that we are going to follow your directions; we have fully determined to leave off drinking whiskey, and if there comes traders on, we have determined to order them off the ground."

"Friends, Quakers, we hope you will keep your minds strong as you was at first, and we return you great many thanks for the kindness you have done already."

Remark of the committee, 1801.

"The Indians were become very sober, generally refraining from the use of strong drink, both at home, and when abroad among the white people. One of them observed to our committee, "no more bark cabin. but good houses; no more get drunk here now this two years."

Speech of a chief warrior to the Quakers.

"We shall often think of you whilst on your journey, and desire you to inform your chiefs at home, that we are thankful for the saw-mill irons, axes, hoes, ox-chains, &c. which they have given us.

"Brothers, we hope we shall give more attention to farming than we have hitherto done; we thank you for your advice about the saw-mill, and for your friend's consenting to remain with us awhile, to teach some of our people to work the mill."

that civilization was only a preparatory step. It is a question of importance, whether much success can be expected in attempts to christianize the Indians, or any savage tribes, unless they are preceded, or at least accompanied, with friendly efforts for civilization and the introduction of useful arts. Dr. Campbell, in a sermon preached before the society in Scotland for propagating christian knowledge, undertakes to show, that "the success of the first publishers of the gospel, is a proof of its truth." Among other considerations in support of this idea, he exhibits a contrast between the means used by the apostles, and those which have become necessary since miracles have ceased in the church.

He

remarks on the efforts and successs of Roman Catholic Missionaries. As one of the most successful efforts he mentions the mission to Paraguay in South America. In stating the methods of proceeding he says "It was more by insinuation and indirectly, than by open and professed teaching, that the knowledge of christianity was introduced by them. Their direct and only object long appeared to be, to teach those savages agriculture, the most necessary manufactures, the art of building, and the other arts most conducive to civilization; and when in this way they had sufficiently

recommended themselves to their confidence, to take occasion of inculcating, especially on the children intrusted to their care, their religious principles. The method of the apostles was much shorter; they did not find the least necessity for such artificial management."

The Doctor does not mention this contrast by way of reproach to the missionaries, but as evidence that the success of the apostles is to be ascribed to such supernatural divine agency, as amounts to proof of the truth of the gospel. Accordingly, in the improvement of his discourse he observes-"Let it not be imagined, that what was said in regard to the use made of arts and sciences by the popish missionaries, was with a view to condemn or discredit such expedients. It was only with an intention to show that there were many causes to which the success of those missionaries, comparatively little, might be attributed without recurring to miracles; whereas there was nothing that could account for the astonishing success of the apostles in whom all those advantages were wanting, but miracles alone. It was not to depreciate the wisdom of man, but to show that "the foolishness of God is wiser." So far from condemning the Roman Catholics in this, I approve, I applaud their zeal, their solicitude, their perseverance."