[1] The word "friend" (O.E. _freond_, Ger. _Freund_, Dutch _Vriend_)
is derived from an old Teutonic verb meaning to love. While used
generally as the opposite to enemy, it is specially the term which
connotes any degree, but particularly a high degree, of personal
goodwill, affection or regard, from which the element of sexual love
is absent.
[2] These may be briefly summed up thus:--(1) power to hold land and
vesting of property in trustees by mere appointment; (2) remedy
against misapplication of funds; (3) priority in bankruptcy or on
death of officer; (4) transfer of stock by direction of chief
registrar; (5) exemption from stamp duties; (6) membership of minors;
(7) certificates of birth and death at reduced cost; (8) investment
with National Debt Commissioners; (9) reduction of fines on admission
to copyholds; (10) discharge of mortgages by mere receipt; (11)
obligation on officers to render accounts; (12) settlement of
disputes; (13) insurance of funeral expenses for wives and children
without insurable interest; (14) nomination at death; (15) payment
without administration; (16) services of public auditors and valuers;
(17) registry of documents, of which copies may be put in evidence.
FRIENDS, SOCIETY OF, the name adopted by a body of Christians, who, in
law and general usage, are commonly called Quakers. Though small in
number, the Society occupies a position of singular interest. To the
student of ecclesiastical history it is remarkable as exhibiting a form
of Christianity widely divergent from the prevalent types, being a
religious fellowship which has no formulated creed demanding definite
subscription, and no liturgy, priesthood or outward sacrament, and which
gives to women an equal place with men in church organization. The
student of English constitutional history will observe the success with
which Friends have, by the mere force of passive resistance, obtained,
from the legislature and the courts, indulgence for all their scruples
and a legal recognition of their customs. In American history they
occupy an important place because of the very prominent part which they
played in the colonization of New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
The history of Quakerism in England may be divided into three
periods:--(1) from the first preaching of George Fox in 1647 to the
Toleration Act 1689; (2) from 1689 to the evangelical movement in 1835;
(3) from 1835 to the present time.
George Fox.
1. _Period 1647-1689._--George Fox (1624-1691), the son of a weaver of
Drayton-in-the-Clay (now called Fenny Drayton) in Leicestershire, was
the founder of the Society. He began his public ministry in 1647, but
there is no evidence to show that he set out to form a separate
religious body. Impressed by the formalism and deadness of contemporary
Christianity (of which there is much evidence in the confessions of the
Puritan writers themselves) he emphasized the importance of repentance
and personal striving after the truth. When, however, his preaching
attracted followers, a community began to be formed, and traces of
organization and discipline may be noted in very early times. In 1652 a
number of people in Westmorland and north Lancashire who had separated
from the common national worship,[1] came under the influence of Fox,
and it was this community (if it can be so called) at Preston Patrick
which formed the nucleus of the Quaker church. For two years the
movement spread rapidly throughout the north of England, and in 1654
more than sixty ministers went to Norwich, London, Bristol, the
Midlands, Wales and other parts. Fox and his fellow-preachers spoke
whenever opportunity offered,--sometimes in churches (declining, for the
most part, to occupy the pulpit), sometimes in barns, sometimes at
market crosses. The insistence on an inward spiritual experience was the
great contribution made by Friends to the religious life of the time,
and to thousands it came as a new revelation. There is evidence to show
that the arrangement for this "publishing of Truth" rested mainly with
Fox, and that the expenses of it and of the foreign missions were borne
out of a common fund. Margaret Fell (1614-1702), wife of Thomas Fell
(1598-1658), vice-chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and afterwards
of George Fox, opened her house, Swarthmore Hall near Ulverston, to
these preachers and probably contributed largely to this fund.
Their insistence on the personal aspect of religious experience made it
impossible for Friends to countenance the setting apart of any man or
building for the purpose of divine worship to the exclusion of all
others. The operation of the Spirit was in no way limited to time, or
individual or place. The great stress which they laid upon this aspect
of Christian truth caused them to be charged with unbelief in the
current orthodox views as to the inspiration of the Scriptures, and the
person and work of Christ, a charge which they always denied. Contrary
to the Puritan teaching of the time, they insisted on the possibility,
in this life, of complete victory over sin. Robert Barclay, writing some
twenty years later, admits of degrees of perfection, and the possibility
of a fall from it (_Apology_, Prop. viii.). Such teaching necessarily
brought Fox and his friends into conflict with all the religious bodies
of England, and they were continually engaged in strife with the
Presbyterians, Independents, Baptists, Episcopalians and the wilder
sectaries, such as the Ranters and the Muggletonians. The strife was
often conducted on both sides with a zeal and bitterness of language
which were characteristic of the period. Although there was little or no
stress laid on either the joys or the terrors of a future life, the
movement was not infrequently accompanied by most of those physical
symptoms which usually go with vehement appeals to the conscience and
emotions of a rude multitude. It was owing to these physical
manifestations that the name "Quaker" was either first given or was
regarded as appropriate when given for another reason (see Fox's
_Journal_ concerning Justice Bennet at Derby in 1650 and Barclay's
_Apology_, Prop. II, S 8). The early Friends definitely asserted that
those who did not know quaking and trembling were strangers to the
experience of Moses, David and other saints.
Some of the earliest adherents indulged in extravagances of no measured
kind. Some of them imitated the Hebrew prophets in the performance of
symbolic acts of denunciation, foretelling or warning, going barefoot,
or in sackcloth or undress, and, in a few cases, for brief periods,
altogether naked; even women in some cases distinguished themselves by
extravagance of conduct. The case of James Nayler (1617?-1660), who, in
spite of Fox's grave warning, allowed Messianic homage to be paid to
him, is the best known of these instances; they are to be explained
partly by mental disturbance, resulting from the undue prominence of a
single idea, and partly by the general religious excitement of the time
and the rudeness of manners prevailing in the classes of society from
which many of these individuals came. It must be remembered that at this
time, and for long after, there was no definite or formal membership or
system of admission to the society, and it was open to any one by
attending the meetings to gain the reputation of being a Quaker.
The activity of the early Friends was not confined to England or even to
the British Isles. Fox and others travelled in America and the West
India Islands; another reached Jerusalem and preached against the
superstition of the monks; Mary Fisher (fl. 1652-1697), "a religious
maiden," visited Smyrna, the Morea and the court of Mahommed IV. at
Adrianople; Alexander Parker (1628-1689) went to Africa; others made
their way to Rome; two women were imprisoned by the Inquisition at
Malta; two men passed into Austria and Hungary; and William Penn, George
Fox and several others preached in Holland and Germany.
It was only gradually that the Quaker community clothed itself with an
organization. The beginning of this appears to be due to William
Dewsbury (1621-1688) and George Fox; it was not until 1666 that a
complete system of church organization was established. The
introduction of an ordered system and discipline was, naturally, viewed
with some suspicion by people taught to believe that the inward light of
each individual man was the only true guide for his conduct. The project
met with determined opposition for about twenty years (1675-1695) from
persons of considerable repute in the body. John Wilkinson and John
Story of Westmorland, together with William Rogers of Bristol, raised a
party against Fox concerning the management of the affairs of the
society, regarding with suspicion any fixed arrangement for meetings for
conducting church business, and in fact hardly finding a place for such
meetings at all. They stood for the principle of Independency against
the Presbyterian form of church government which Fox had recently
established in the "Monthly Meetings" (see below). They opposed all
arrangement for the orderly distribution of travelling ministers to
different localities, and even for the payment of their expenses (see
above); they also strongly objected to any disciplinary power being
entrusted to the women's separate meetings for business, which had
become of considerable importance after the Plague (1665) and the Fire
of London (1666) in consequence of the need for poor relief. They also
claimed the right to meet secretly for worship in time of persecution
(see below). They drew a considerable following away with them and set
up a rival organization, but before long a number returned to their
original leader. William Rogers set forth his views in _The Christian
Quaker_, 1680; the story of the dissension is told, to some extent, in
_The Inner Life of the Religious Societies of the Commonwealth_, by R.
Barclay (not the "Apologist"); the best account is given in a pamphlet
entitled _Micah's Mother_ by John S. Rowntree.
Robert Barclay (q.v.), a descendant of an ancient Scottish family, who
had received a liberal education, principally in Paris, at the Scots
College, of which his uncle was rector, joined the Quakers about 1666,
and William Penn (q.v.) came to them about two years later. The Quakers
had always been active controversialists, and a great body of tracts and
papers was issued by them; but hitherto these had been of small account
from a literary point of view. Now, however, a more logical and
scholarly aspect was given to their literature by the writings of
Barclay, especially his _Apology for the True Christian Divinity_
published in Latin (1676) and in English (1678), and by the works of
Penn, amongst which _No Cross No Crown_ and the _Maxims_ or _Fruits of
Solitude_ are the best known.
Persecution.
During the whole time between their rise and the passing of the
Toleration Act 1689, the Quakers were the object of almost continuous
persecution which they endured with extraordinary constancy and
patience; they insisted on the duty of meeting openly in time of
persecution, declining to hold secret assemblies for worship as other
Nonconformists were doing. The number who died in prison approached 400,
and at least 100 more perished from violence and ill-usage. A petition
to the first parliament of Charles II. stated that 3179 had been
imprisoned; the number rose to 4500 in 1662, the Fifth Monarchy
outbreak, in which Friends were in no way concerned, being largely
responsible for this increase. There is no evidence to show that they
were in any way connected with any of the plots of the Commonwealth or
Restoration periods. A petition to James II. in 1685 stated that 1460
were then in prison. Under the Quaker Act of 1662 and the Conventicle
Act of 1664 a number were transported out of England, and under the
last-named act and that of 1670 (the second Conventicle Act) hundreds of
households were despoiled of all their goods. The penal laws under which
Friends suffered may be divided chronologically into those of the
Commonwealth and the Restoration periods. Under the former there were a
few charges of plotting against the government. Several imprisonments,
including that of George Fox at Derby in 1650-1651, were brought about
under the Blasphemy Act of 1650, which inflicted penalties on any one
who asserted himself to be very God or equal with God, a charge to which
the Friends were peculiarly liable owing to their doctrine of
perfection. After a royalist insurrection in 1655, a proclamation was
issued announcing that persons suspected of Roman Catholicism would be
required to take an oath abjuring the papal authority and
transubstantiation. The Quakers, accused as they were of being Jesuits,
and refusing to take the oath, suffered under this proclamation and
under the more stringent act of 1656. A considerable number were flogged
under the Vagrancy Acts (39 Eliz. c. 4; 7 Jac. I. c. 4), which were
strained to cover the case of itinerant Quaker preachers. They also came
under the provisions of the acts of 1644, 1650 and 1656 directed against
travelling on the Lord's day. The interruption of preachers when
celebrating divine service rendered the offender liable to three months'
imprisonment under a statute of the first year of Mary, but Friends
generally waited to speak till the service was over.[2] The Lord's Day
Act 1656 also enacted penalties against any one disturbing the service,
but apart from statute many Friends were imprisoned for open contempt of
ministers and magistrates. At the Restoration 700 Friends, imprisoned
for contempt and some minor offences, were set at liberty. After the
Restoration there began a persecution of Friends and other
Nonconformists _as such_, notwithstanding the king's Declaration of
Breda which had proclaimed liberty for tender consciences as long as no
disturbance of the peace was caused. Among the most common causes of
imprisonment was the practice adopted by judges and magistrates of
tendering to Friends (particularly when no other charge could be proved
against them) the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance (5 Eliz. c. 1 & 7
Jac. I. c. 6). The refusal in any circumstance to take an oath led to
much suffering. The Act 3 Jac. I. c. 4, passed in consequence of the
Gunpowder Plot, against Roman Catholics for not attending church, was
put in force against Friends, and under it enormous fines were levied.
The Quaker Act 1662 and the Conventicle Acts of 1664 and 1670, designed
to enforce attendance at church, and inflicting severe penalties on
those attending other religious gatherings, were responsible for the
most severe persecution of all. The act of 1670 gave to informers a
pecuniary interest (they were to have one-third of the fine imposed) in
hunting down Nonconformists who broke the law, and this and other
statutes were unduly strained to secure convictions. A somewhat similar
act of 35 Eliz. c. 1., enacting even more severe penalties, had never
been repealed, and was sometimes put in force against Friends. The
Militia Act 1663 (14 Car. II. c. 3), enacting fines against those who
refused to find a man for the militia, was occasionally put in force.
The refusal to pay tithes and other ecclesiastical demands led to
continuous and heavy distraints, under the various laws made in that
behalf. This state of things continued to some extent into the 19th
century. For further information see "The Penal Laws affecting Early
Friends in England" (from which the foregoing summary is taken) by Wm.
Chas. Braithwaite in _The First Publishers of Truth_. On the 15th of
March 1672 Charles II. issued his declaration suspending the penal laws
in ecclesiastical matters, and shortly afterwards, by pardon under the
great seal, he released nearly 500 Quakers from prison, remitted their
fines and released such of their estates as were forfeited by
_praemunire_. It is of interest to note that, although John Bunyan was
bitterly opposed to Quakers, his friends, on hearing of the petition
contemplated by them, requested them to insert his name on the list, and
in this way he gained his freedom. The dissatisfaction which this
exercise of the royal prerogative aroused induced the king, in the
following year, to withdraw his proclamation, and, notwithstanding
appeals to him, the persecution continued intermittently throughout his
reign. On the accession of James II. the Quakers addressed him (see
above) with some hope on account of his known friendship for William
Penn, and the king not long afterwards directed a stay of proceedings in
all matters pending in the exchequer against Quakers on the ground of
non-attendance at the national worship. In 1687 came his declaration for
liberty of conscience, and, after the Revolution of 1688, the Toleration
Act 1689 put an end to the persecution of Quakers (along with other
Dissenters) for non-attendance at church. For many years after this
they were liable to imprisonment for non-payment of tithes, and,
together with other Dissenters, they remained under various civil
disabilities, the gradual removal of which is part of the general
history of England. In the years succeeding the Toleration Act at least
twelve of their number were prosecuted (often more than once in the
spiritual and other courts) for keeping school without a bishop's
licence. It is coming to be recognized that the growth of religious
toleration owed much to the early Quakers who, with the exception of a
few Baptists at the first, stood almost alone among Dissenters in
holding their public meetings openly and regularly.
The Toleration Act was not the only law of William and Mary which
benefited Quakers. The legislature has continually had regard to their
refusal to take oaths, and not only the said act but also another of the
same reign, and numerous others, subsequently passed, have respected the
peculiar scruples of Friends (see Davis's _Digest of Legislative
Enactments relating to Friends_, Bristol, 1820).
Period of Decline.
2. _Period 1689-1835._--From the beginning of the 18th century the zeal
of the Quaker body abated. Although many "General" and other meetings
were held in different parts of the country for the purpose of setting
forth Quakerism, the notion that the whole Christian church would be
absorbed in it, and that the Quakers were, in fact, the church, gave
place to the conception that they were "a peculiar people" to whom, more
than to others, had been given an understanding of the will of God. The
Quakerism of this period was largely of a traditional kind; it dwelt
with increasing emphasis on the peculiarities of its dress and language;
it rested much upon discipline, which developed and hardened into
rigorous forms; and the correction or exclusion of its members occupied
more attention than did the winning of converts.
Excluded from political and municipal life by the laws which required
either the taking of an oath or joining in the Lord's Supper according
to the rites of the Established Church, excluding themselves not only
from the frivolous pursuits of pleasure, but from music and art in
general, attaining no high average level of literary culture (though
producing some men of eminence in science and medicine), the Quakers
occupied themselves mainly with trade, the business of their Society,
and the calls of philanthropy. From early times George Fox and many
others had taken a keen interest in education, and in 1779 there was
founded at Ackworth, near Pontefract, a school for boys and girls; this
was followed by the reconstitution, in 1808, of a school at Sidcot in
the Mendips, and in 1811, of one in Islington Road, London; it was
afterwards removed to Croydon, and, later, to Saffron Walden. Others
have since been established at York and in other parts of England and
Ireland. None of them are now reserved exclusively for the children of
Friends.
During this period Quakerism was sketched from the outside by two very
different men. Voltaire (_Dictionnaire Philosophique_, "Quaker,"
"Toleration") described the body, which attracted his curiosity, his
sympathy and his sneers, with all his brilliance. Thomas Clarkson
(_Portraiture of Quakerism_) has given an elaborate and sympathetic
account of the Quakers as he knew them when he travelled amongst them
from house to house on his crusade against the slave trade.
3. _From 1835._--During the 18th century the doctrine of the Inward
Light acquired such exclusive prominence as to bring about a tendency to
disparage, or, at least, to neglect, the written word (the Scriptures)
as being "outward" and non-essential. In the early part of the 19th
century an American Friend, Elias Hicks, pressed this doctrine to its
furthest limits, and, in doing so, he laid stress on "Christ within" in
such a way as practically to take little account of the person and work
of the "outward," i.e. the historic Christ. The result was a separation
of the Society in America into two divisions which persist to the
present day (see below, "Quakerism in America"). This led to a counter
movement in England, known as the Beacon Controversy, from the name of a
warning publication issued by Isaac Crewdson of Manchester in 1835,
advocating views of a pronounced "evangelical" type. Much controversy
ensued, and a certain number of Friends (Beaconites as they are
sometimes called) departed from the parent stock. They left behind them,
however, many influential members, who may be described as a middle
party, and who strove to give a more "evangelical" tone to Quaker
doctrine. Joseph John Gurney of Norwich, a brother of Elizabeth Fry, by
means of his high social position and his various writings (some
published before 1835), was the most prominent actor in this movement.
Those who quitted the Society maintained, for some little time, a
separate organization of their own, but sooner or later most of them
joined the Evangelical Church or the Plymouth Brethren.
Other causes have been at work modifying the Quaker society. The repeal
of the Test Act, the admission of Quakers to Parliament in consequence
of their being allowed to affirm instead of taking the oath (1832, when
Joseph Pease was elected for South Durham), the establishment of the
University of London, and, more recently, the opening of the
universities of Oxford and Cambridge to Nonconformists, have all had
their effect upon the body. It has abandoned its peculiarities of dress
and language, as well as its hostility to music and art, and it has
cultivated a wider taste in literature. In fact, the number of men,
either Quakers or of Quaker origin and proclivities, who occupy
positions of influence in English life is large in proportion to the
small body with which they are connected. During the 19th century the
interests of Friends became widened and they are no longer a close
community.
_Doctrine._--It is not easy to state with certainty the doctrines of a
body which (in England at least) has never demanded subscription to any
creed, and whose views have undoubtedly undergone more or less definite
changes. There is not now the sharp distinction which formerly existed
between Friends and other non-sacerdotal evangelical bodies; these have,
in theory at least, largely accepted the spiritual message of Quakerism.
By their special insistence on the fact of immediate communion between
God and man, Friends have been led into those views and practices which
still mark them off from their fellow-Christians.
Public worship.
Nearly all their distinctive views (e.g. their refusal to take oaths,
their testimony against war, their disuse of a professional ministry,
and their recognition of women's ministry) were being put forward in
England, by various individuals or sects, in the strife which raged
during the intense religious excitement of the middle of the 17th
century. Nevertheless, before the rise of the Quakers, these views were
nowhere found in conjunction as held by any one set of people; still
less were they regarded as the outcome of any one central belief or
principle. It is rather in their emphasis on this thought of Divine
communion, in their insistence on its reasonable consequences (as it
seems to them), that Friends constitute a separate community. The
appointment of one man to preach, to the exclusion of others, whether he
feels a divine call so to do or not, is regarded as a limitation of the
work of the Spirit and an undue concentration of that responsibility
which ought to be shared by a wider circle. For the same reason they
refuse to occupy the time of worship with an arranged programme of vocal
service; they meet in silence, desiring that the service of the meeting
shall depend on spiritual guidance. Thus it is left to any man or woman
to offer vocal prayer, to read the Scriptures, or to utter such
exhortation or teaching as may seem to be called for. Of late years, in
certain of their meetings on Sunday evening, it has become customary for
part of the time to be occupied with set addresses for the purpose of
instructing the members of the congregation, or of conveying the Quaker
message to others who may be present, all their meetings for worship
being freely open to the public. In a few meetings hymns are
occasionally sung, very rarely as part of any arrangement, but almost
always upon the request of some individual for a particular hymn
appropriate to the need of the congregation. The periods of silence are
regarded as times of worship equally with those occupied with vocal
service, inasmuch as Friends hold that robustness of spiritual life is
best promoted by earnest striving on the part of each one to know the
will of God for himself, and to be drawn into Christian fellowship with
the other worshippers. The points on which special stress is laid
are:--(1) the share of responsibility resting on each individual,
whether called to vocal service or not, for the right spiritual
atmosphere of the Meeting, and for the welfare of the congregation; (2)
the privilege which may be enjoyed by each worshipper of waiting upon
the Lord without relying on spoken words, however helpful, or on other
outward matters; (3) freedom for each individual (whether a Friend or
not) to speak, for the help of others, such message as he or she may
feel called to utter; (4) a fresh sense of a divine call to deliver the
message on that particular occasion, whether previous thought has been
given to it or not. The idea which ought to underlie a Friends' meeting
is thus set forth by Robert Barclay: "When I came into the silent
assemblies of God's people, I felt a secret power among them, which
touched my heart, and as I gave way unto it, I found the evil weakening
in me and the good raised up" (_Apology_, xi. 7). In many places Friends
have felt the need of bringing spiritual help to those who are unable to
profit by the somewhat severe discipline of their ordinary manner of
worship. To meet this need they hold (chiefly on Sunday evenings)
meetings which are not professedly "Friends' meetings for worship," but
which are services conducted on lines similar to those of other
religious bodies, with, in some cases, a portion of time set apart for
silent worship, and freedom for any one of the congregation to utter
words of exhortation or prayer.
From the beginning Friends have not practised the outward ordinances of
Baptism and the Lord's Supper, even in a non-sacerdotal spirit. They
attach, however, supreme value to the realities of which the observances
are reminders or types--on the Baptism which is more than putting away
the filth of the flesh, and on the vital union with Christ which is
behind any outward ceremony. Their testimony is not _primarily_ against
these outward observances; their disuse of them is due to a sense of the
danger of substituting the shadow for the reality. They believe that an
experience of more than 250 years gives ample warrant for the belief
that Christ did not command them as a perpetual outward ordinance; on
the contrary, they hold that it was alien to His method to lay down
minute, outward rules for all time, but that He enunciated principles
which His Church should, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, apply to
the varying needs of the day. Their contention that every event of life
may be turned into a sacrament, a means of grace, is summed up in the
words of Stephen Grellet: "I very much doubt whether, since the Lord by
His grace brought me into the faith of His dear Son, I have ever broken
bread or drunk wine, even in the ordinary course of life, without the
remembrance of, and some devout feeling regarding, the broken body and
the blood-shedding of my dear Lord and Saviour."
Ministers.
When the ministry of any man or woman has been found to be helpful to
the congregation, the Monthly Meeting (see below) may, after solemn
consideration, record the fact that it believes the individual to have a
divine call to the ministry, and that it encourages him or her to be
faithful to the gift. Such ministers are said to be "acknowledged" or
"recorded"; they are emphatically _not_ appointed to preach, and the
fact of their acknowledgment is not regarded as conferring any special
status upon them. The various Monthly Meetings appoint Elders, or some
body of Friends, to give advice of encouragement or restraint as may be
needed, and, generally, to take the ministry under their care.
Women.
With regard to the ministry of women, Friends hold that there is no
evidence that the gifts of prophecy and teaching are confined to one
sex. On the contrary, they see that a manifest blessing has rested on
women's preaching, and they regard its almost universal prohibition as a
relic of the seclusion of women which was customary in the countries
where Christianity took its rise. The particular prohibition of Paul (1
Cor. xiv. 34, 35) they regard as due to the special circumstances of
time and place.
War.
Friends have always held that war is contrary to the precepts and spirit
of the Gospel, believing that it springs from the lower impulses of
human nature, and not from the seed of divine life with its infinite
capacity of response to the Spirit of God. Their testimony is not based
_primarily_ on any objection to the use of force in itself, or even on
the fact that war involves suffering and loss of life; their root
objection is based on the fact that war is both the outcome and the
cause of ambition, pride, greed, hatred and everything that is opposed
to the mind of Christ; and that no end to be attained can justify the
use of such means. While not unaware that with this, as with all moral
questions, there may be a certain borderland of practical difficulty,
Friends endeavour to bring all things to the test of the Realities
which, though not seen, are eternal, and to hold up the ideal, set forth
by George Fox, of living in the virtue of that life and power which
takes away the _occasion of war._
Oaths.
Friends have always held that the attempt to enforce truth-speaking by
means of an oath, in courts of law and elsewhere, tends to create a
double standard of truth. They find Scripture warrant for this belief in
Matt. v. 33-37 and James v. 12. Their testimony in this respect is the
better understood when we bear in mind the large amount of perjury in
the law courts, and profane swearing in general which prevailed at the
time when the Society took its rise. "People swear to the end that they
may speak truth; Christ would have men speak truth to the end they might
not swear" (W. Penn, _A Treatise of Oaths_).
Theology.
With regard to the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, the belief of
the Society of Friends does not essentially differ from that of other
Christian bodies. At the same time their avoidance of exact definition
embodied in a rigid creed, together with their disuse of the outward
ordinances of Baptism and the Supper, has laid them open to considerable
misunderstanding. As will have been seen, they hold an exalted view of
the divinity and work of Christ as the Word become flesh and the Saviour
of the world; but they have always shrunk from rigid Trinitarian
_definitions_. They believe that the same Spirit who gave forth the
Scriptures still guides men to a right understanding of them. "You
profess the Holy Scriptures: but what do you witness and experience?
What interest have you in them? Can you set to your seal that they are
true by the work of the same spirit in you that gave them forth in the
holy ancients?" (William Penn, _A Summons or Call to Christendom_). At
certain periods this doctrine, pushed to an extreme, has led to a
practical undervaluing of the Scriptures, but of late times it has
enabled Friends to face fearlessly the conclusions of modern criticism,
and has contributed to a largely increased interest in Bible study.
During the past few years a new movement has been started in the shape
of lecture schools, lasting for longer or shorter periods, for the
purpose of studying Biblical, ecclesiastical and social subjects. In
1903 there was established at Woodbrooke, an estate at Selly Oak on the
outskirts of Birmingham, a permanent settlement for men and women, for
the study of these questions on modern lines. The outward beginning of
this movement was the Manchester Conference of 1895, a turning-point in
Quaker history. Speaking generally, it may be noted that the Society
includes various shades of opinion, from that known as "evangelical,"
with a certain hesitation in receiving modern thought, to the more
"advanced" position which finds greater freedom to consider and adopt
new suggestions of scientific, religious or other thinkers. The
differences, however, are seldom pressed, and rarely become acute. Apart
from points of doctrine which can be more or less definitely stated (not
always with unanimity) Quakerism is an _atmosphere_, a manner of life, a
method of approaching questions, a habit and attitude of mind.
_Quakerism in Scotland._--Quakerism was preached in Scotland very soon
after its rise in England; but in the north and south of Scotland there
existed, independently of and before this preaching, groups of persons
who were dissatisfied with the national form of worship and who met
together in silence for devotion. They naturally fell into this Society.
In Aberdeen the Quakers took considerable hold, and were there joined by
some persons of influence and position, especially Alexander Jaffray,
sometime provost of Aberdeen, and Colonel David Barclay of Ury and his
son Robert, the author of the _Apology_. Much light has been thrown on
the history of the Quakers in Aberdeenshire by the discovery in 1826 at
Ury of a MS. _Diary_ of Jaffray, since published with elucidations (2nd
ed., London, 1836).
_Ireland._--The father of Quakerism in Ireland was William Edmondson;
his preaching began in 1653-1654. The _History of the Quakers in
Ireland_ (from 1653 to 1752), by Wight and Rutty, may be consulted.
Dublin Yearly Meeting, constituted in 1670, is independent of London
Yearly Meeting (see below).
_America._--In July 1656 two women Quakers, Mary Fisher and Ann Austin,
arrived at Boston. Under the general law against heresy their books were
burnt by the hangman, they were searched for signs of witchcraft, they
were imprisoned for five weeks and then sent away. During the same year
eight others were sent back to England.
In 1656, 1657 and 1658 laws were passed to prevent the introduction of
Quakers into Massachusetts, and it was enacted that on the first
conviction one ear should be cut off, on the second the remaining ear,
and that on the third conviction the tongue should be bored with a hot
iron. Fines were laid upon all who entertained these people or were
present at their meetings. Thereupon the Quakers, who were perhaps not
without the obstinacy of which Marcus Aurelius complained in the early
Christians, rushed to Massachusetts as if invited, and the result was
that the general court of the colony banished them on pain of death, and
four of them, three men and one woman, were hanged for refusing to
depart from the jurisdiction or for obstinately returning within it.
That the Quakers were, at times, irritating cannot be denied: some of
them appear to have publicly mocked the institutions and the rulers of
the colony and to have interrupted public worship; and a few of their
men and women acted with the fanaticism and disorder which frequently
characterized the religious controversies of the time. The particulars
of the proceedings of Governor Endecott and the magistrates of New
England as given in Besse's _Sufferings of the Quakers_ (see below) are
startling to read. On the Restoration of Charles II. a memorial was
presented to him by the Quakers in England stating the persecutions
which their fellow-members had undergone in New England. Even the
careless Charles was moved to issue an order to the colony which
effectually stopped the hanging of the Quakers for their religion,
though it by no means put an end to the persecution of the body in New
England.
It is not wonderful that the Quakers, persecuted and oppressed at home
and in New England, should turn their eyes to the unoccupied parts of
America, and cherish the hope of founding, amidst their woods, some
refuge from oppression, and some likeness of a city of God upon earth.
As early as 1660 George Fox was considering the question of buying land
from the Indians. In 1671-1673 he had visited the American plantations
from Carolina to Rhode Island and had preached alike to Indians and to
settlers; in 1674 a portion of New Jersey (q.v.) was sold by Lord
Berkeley to John Fenwicke in trust for Edward Byllynge. Both these men
were Quakers, and in 1675 Fenwicke with a large company of his
co-religionists crossed the Atlantic, sailed up Delaware Bay, and landed
at a fertile spot which he called Salem. Byllynge, having become
embarrassed in his circumstances, placed his interest in the land in the
hands of Penn and others as trustees for his creditors; they invited
buyers, and companies of Quakers in Yorkshire and London were amongst
the largest purchasers. In 1677-1678 five vessels with eight hundred
emigrants, chiefly Quakers, arrived in the colony (then separated from
the rest of New Jersey, under the name of West New Jersey), and the town
of Burlington was established. In 1677 the fundamental laws of West New
Jersey were published, and recognized in a most absolute form the
principles of democratic equality and perfect freedom of conscience.
Notwithstanding certain troubles from claims of the governor of New York
and of the duke of York, the colony prospered, and in 1681 the first
legislative assembly of the colony, consisting mainly of Quakers, was
held. They agreed to raise an annual sum of L200 for the expenses of
their commonwealth; they assigned their governor a salary of L20; they
prohibited the sale of ardent spirits to the Indians and imprisonment
for debt. (See NEW JERSEY.)
William Penn.
But beyond question the most interesting event in connexion with
Quakerism in America is the foundation by William Penn (q.v.) of the
colony of Pennsylvania, where he hoped to carry into effect the
principles of his sect--to found and govern a colony without armies or
military power, to reduce the Indians by justice and kindness to
civilization and Christianity, to administer justice without oaths, and
to extend an equal toleration to all persons who professed a belief in
God. The history of this is part of the history of America and of
Pennsylvania (q.v.) in particular. The chief point of interest in the
history of Friends in America during the 18th century is their effort to
clear themselves of complicity in slavery and the slave trade. As early
as 1671 George Fox when in Barbados counselled kind treatment of slaves
and ultimate liberation of them. William Penn provided for the freedom
of slaves after fourteen years' service. In 1688 the German Friends of
Germantown, Philadelphia, raised the first official protest uttered by
any religious body against slavery. In 1711 a law was passed in
Pennsylvania prohibiting the importation of slaves, but it was rejected
by the Council in England. The prominent anti-slavery workers were Ralph
Sandiford, Benjamin Lay, Anthony Benezet and John Woolman.[3] By the end
of the 18th century slavery was practically extinct among Friends, and
the Society as a whole laboured for its abolition, which came about in
1865, the poet Whittier being one of the chief writers and workers in
the cause. From early times up to the present day Friends have laboured
for the welfare of the North American Indians. The history of the 19th
century is largely one of division. Elias Hicks (q.v.), of Long Island,
N.Y., propounded doctrines inconsistent with the orthodox views
concerning Christ and the Scriptures, and a separation resulted in
1827-1828 (see above). His followers are known as "Hicksites," a name
not officially used by themselves, and only assented to for purposes of
description under some protest. They have their own organization, being
divided into seven yearly meetings numbering about 20,000 members, but
these meetings form no part of the official organization which links
London Yearly Meeting with other bodies of Friends on the American
continent. This separation led to strong insistence on "evangelical"
views (in the usual sense of the term) concerning Christ, the Atonement,
imputed righteousness, the Scriptures, &c. This showed itself in the
Beaconite controversy in England (see above), and in a further division
in America. John Wilbur, a minister of New England, headed a party of
protest against the new evangelicalism, laying extreme stress on the
"Inward Light"; the result was a further separation of "Wilburites" or
"the smaller body," who, like the "Hicksites," have a separate
independent organization of their own. In 1907 they were divided into
seven yearly meetings (together with some smaller independent bodies,
the result of extreme emphasis laid on individualism), with a membership
of about 5000. Broadly speaking, the "smaller body" is characterized by
a rigid adherence to old forms of dress and speech, to a disapproval of
music and art, and to an insistence on the "Inward Light" which, at
times, leaves but little room for the Scriptures or the historic Christ,
although with no definite or intended repudiation of them. In 1908 the
number of "orthodox" yearly meetings in America, including one in
Canada, was fifteen, with a total membership of about 100,000. They
have, for the most part, adopted, to a greater or less degree, the
"pastoral system," i.e. the appointment of one man or woman in each
congregation to "conduct" the meeting for worship and to carry on
pastoral work. In most cases the pastor receives a salary. A few of them
demand from their ministers definite subscription to a specific body of
doctrine, mostly of the ordinary "evangelical" type. In the matters of
organization, disuse of the outward ordinances (this point is subject
to some slight exception, principally in Ohio), and women's ministry,
they do not differ from English Friends. The yearly meetings of
Baltimore and Philadelphia have not adopted the pastoral system; the
latter contains a very strong conservative element, and, contrary to the
practice of London and the other "orthodox" yearly meetings, it
officially regards the meetings of "the smaller body" (see above) as
meetings of the Society of Friends. In 1902 the "orthodox" yearly
meetings in the United States established a "Five Years' Meeting," a
representative body meeting once every five years to consider matters
affecting the welfare of all, and to further such philanthropic and
religious work as may be undertaken in common, e.g. matters concerning
foreign missions, temperance and peace, and the welfare of negroes and
Indians. Two yearly meetings remain outside the organization, that of
Ohio on ultra-evangelical grounds, while that of Philadelphia has not
taken the matter into consideration. Canada joined at the first, and
having withdrawn, again joined in 1907.
See James Bowden, _History of the Society of Friends in America_
(1850-1854); Allan C. and Richard H. Thomas, _The History of Friends
in America_ (4th edition, 1905); Isaac Sharpless, _History of Quaker
Government in Pennsylvania_ (1898, 1899); R. P. Hallowell, _The Quaker
Invasion of Massachusetts_ (1887), and _The Pioneer Quakers_ (1887).
_Organization and Discipline._--The duty of watching over one another
for good was insisted on by the early Friends, and has been embodied in
a system of discipline. Its objects embrace (a) admonition to those who
fail in the payment of their just debts, or otherwise walk contrary to
the standard of Quaker ethics, and the exclusion of obstinate or gross
offenders from the body, and, as incident to this, the hearing of
appeals from individuals or meetings considering themselves aggrieved;
(b) the care and maintenance of the poor and provision for the Christian
education of their children, for which purpose the Society has
established boarding schools in different parts of the country; (c) the
amicable settlement of "all differences about outward things," either by
the parties in controversy or by the submission of the dispute to
arbitration, and the restraint of all proceedings at law between members
except by leave; (d) the "recording" of ministers (see above); (e) the
cognizance of all steps preceding marriage according to Quaker forms;
(f) the registration of births, deaths and marriages and the admission
of members; (g) the issuing of certificates or letters of approval
granted to ministers travelling away from their homes, or to members
removing from one meeting to another; and (h) the management of the
property belonging to the Society. The meetings for business further
concern themselves with arrangements for spreading the Quaker doctrine,
and for carrying out various religious, philanthropic and social
activities not necessarily confined to the Society of Friends.