Three Sermons Reviewed.
We have reached the point where it would seem in order to consider the
matter contained in some of the sermons preached by Elias Hicks, in
order to determine, if we can, what there was about the matter or the
manner of his ministry, which contributed to the controversy, personal
and theological, which for several years disturbed the Society of
Friends.
The trouble was initiated, and for some time agitated, by comparatively
few people. Two or three Friends began talking about what Elias said,
from memory. Later they took long-hand notes of his sermons, in either
case using isolated and disconnected sentences and expressions. Taken
from their association with the balance of the sermon, and passed from
mouth to mouth by critics, they assumed an exaggerated importance, and
stood out boldly as centers of controversy.
All of the evidence goes to show that little attempt was made to give
printed publicity to these discourses, until the preacher had been made
famous by the warmth and extent of the controversy over the character
of his preaching.
A volume of twelve sermons preached by Elias Hicks at various points in
Pennsylvania in 1824 was published the following year in Philadelphia
by Joseph and Edward Parker. These discourses were taken in short-hand
by Marcus T. C. Gould. Two years later, in 1827, Gould began the
publication of "The Quaker," which contained sermons by Elias, and a
few other ministers in the Society. In his advertisement of the first
volume of this publication, after stating the fact of the controversy
which was rapidly dividing the Society of Friends in two contending
parties, Gould says:
"At this important crisis, the reporter and proprietor of the
following work was employed by the joint consent of both parties, to
record in meeting the speeches of the individual whose doctrines were
by some pronounced sound, and by others unsound. Since that period he
has continued to record the language of the same speaker, and others
who stand high as ministers in the Society, and the members have
continued to read his reports, as the only way of arriving at the
truth, in relation to discourses which were variously represented."
It is not our purpose in this chapter to give sermons or parts of
sermons in detail. On the other hand, to simply review a few of these
discourses as samples, because at the time of their delivery they
called out opposition from Orthodox Friends. It may be fairly inferred
that they contained in whole or in part the points of doctrinal
offending in the estimation of the critics of Elias Hicks.
The first of the series of sermons especially under review, was
delivered in the Pine Street meeting house, Philadelphia, Twelfth month
10, 1826. At the conclusion of this sermon Jonathan Evans arose, and
spoke substantially as follows:
"I believe it to be right for me to say, that our Society has always
believed in the atonement, mediation, and intercession of our Lord
and Saviour Jesus Christ--that by him all things were created, in
heaven and in earth, both visible and invisible, whether they be
thrones, principalities, or powers.
"We believe that all things were created by him, and for him; and
that he was before all things, and that by him all things consist.
And any doctrine which goes to invalidate these fundamental doctrines
of the Christian religion we cannot admit, nor do we hold ourselves
accountable for.
"Great efforts are making to make the people believe that Jesus
Christ was no more than a man, but we do not believe any such thing,
nor can we receive any such doctrine, or any thing which goes to
inculcate such an idea.
"We believe him to be King of kings, and Lord of lords, before whose
judgment seat every soul shall be arraigned and judged by him. We
do not conceive him to be a mere man; and we therefore desire, that
people may not suppose that we hold any such doctrines, or that we
have any unity with them."
Isaac Lloyd said: "I unite with Jonathan Evans--we never have
believed that our blessed Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, came to the
Jews only; for he was given for God's salvation, to the ends of the
earth."[136]
[136] "The Quaker," Vol. I, p. 72.
To these doctrinal statements Elias Hicks added: "I have spoken; and I
leave it for the people to judge--I do not assume the judgment seat."
It may be informing in this connection to examine this sermon
somewhat in detail, to see if we can find the definite doctrine which
aroused the public opposition. The text was, "Let love be without
dissimulation." Having declared that there could be no agreement
between hatred and love; and that love could not promote discord, he
indulged in what may be called a spiritual figure of speech, declaring
that a Christian must be in the same life, and live with the same blood
that Christ did, making the following explanation: "As the support of
the animal life is the blood; so it is with the soul: the breath of
life which God breathed into it is the blood of the soul; the life of
the soul; and in this sense we are to understand it, and in no other
sense."
He referred to the reprover of our sins, said that it is God who
reproves us. "Now, here is the great business of our lives," he
remarked, "not only to know this reprover, but to know that it is a
gift from God, a manifestation of His own pure life, that was in his
son Jesus Christ." Continuing he said:
"As the apostle testifies: 'In him was life, and the life was the
light of men; and that was the true light, which lighteth every man
that cometh into the world.' Now can we hesitate a single moment, in
regard to the truth of this declaration? No sensible, reflecting mind
can possibly do it."[137]
[137] "The Quaker," Vol. I, p. 51.
Touching the outward and written as compared with the inner law of
life, he affirmed:
"Here is a law more comprehensive than the law of Moses, and it is
clear to every individual of us, as the law was to the Israelites.
For I dare not suppose that the Almighty would by any means make
it a doubtful or mysterious one. It would not become God at all to
suppose this the case--it would be casting a deep reflection upon
his goodness and wisdom. Therefore I conceive that the law written
in the heart, if we attend to it and do not turn from it to build up
traditions, or depend on anything that arises from self, or that is
in our own power, but come to be regulated by this law, we shall see
that it is the easiest thing to be understood that can be, and that
all our benefits depend on our complying with this law.
"Here now we see what tradition is. It is a departure from this law;
and it has the same effect now that tradition had upon the followers
of the outward law; as a belief in tradition was produced they were
bound by it, and trusted in it. And so people, nowadays, seem to be
compelled to believe in tradition, and thus they turn away from the
gospel dispensation, or otherwise the light and life of God's Spirit
in the soul, which is the law of the new covenant; for the law is
light and the commandment a lamp to show us the way to life."[138]
[138] "The Quaker," Vol. I, p. 51.
Using the term, "washed clean in the blood of the lamb," he proceeded
to explain himself as follows:
"And what is the blood of the lamb? It was his life, my friends; for
as outward, material blood was made use of to express the animal
life, inspired men used it as a simile. Outward blood is the life of
the animal, but it has nothing to do with the soul; for the soul has
no animal blood, no material blood. The life of God in the soul is
the blood of the soul, and the life of God is the blood of God; and
so it was the life and blood of Jesus Christ his son. For he was born
of the spirit of his heavenly Father, _and swallowed up fully and
completely in his divine nature, so that he was completely divine_.
It was this that operated, in that twofold state, and governed the
whole animal man which was the son of Abraham and David--a tabernacle
for his blessed soul. Here now we see that flesh and blood are not
capable of being in reality divine; for are they not altogether
under the direction and guidance of the soul? Thus the animal body
of Jesus did nothing but what the divine power in the soul told it
to do. Here he was swallowed up in the divinity of his Father while
here on earth, and it was this that was the active thing, the active
principle, that governed the animate earth. For it corresponds, and
cannot do otherwise, with Almighty goodness, that the soul should
have power to command the animal body to do good or evil; because
he has placed us in this probationary state, and in his wisdom has
set evil and good before us--light and darkness. He has made us free
agents, and given us opportunity to make our own election.
"Here now we shall see what is meant by election, the election of
God. We see that those who choose the Lord for their portion and
the God of Jacob for the lot of their inheritance, these are the
elect. And nothing ever did or can elect a soul to God, but in this
choice."[139]
[139] "The Quaker," Vol. I, p. 62.
It is not easy to see how any one can impartially consider the
foregoing, especially the words printed in _italics_, and continue to
claim that Elias Hicks denied the divinity of Christ. Near the end of
this sermon we find the following paragraph:
"I say, dearly beloved, my soul craves it for us, that we may sink
down and examine ourselves; according to the declaration of the
apostle: 'Examine yourselves whether ye be in the faith; prove your
own selves; know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in
you except ye be reprobates?' Now we cannot suppose that the apostle
meant that outward man that walked about the streets of Jerusalem;
because he is not in any of us. But what is this Jesus Christ? He
came to be a Saviour to that nation, and was limited to that nation.
He came to gather up, and look up the lost sheep of the house of
Israel. But as he was a Saviour in the outward sense, so he was an
outward shadow of good things to come; and so the work of the man,
Jesus Christ, was a figure. He healed the sick of their outward
calamities--he cleansed the leprosy--all of which was external and
affected only their bodies--as sickness does not affect the souls of
the children of men, though they may labour under all these things.
But as he was considered a Saviour, he meant by what he said, a
Saviour is within you, the anointing of the spirit of God is within
you; for this made the ways of Jesus so wonderful in his day that
the Psalmist in his prophecy concerning him exclaims: 'Thou hast
loved righteousness and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God
hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.' He
had loved righteousness, you perceive, and therefore was prepared
to receive the fullness of the spirit, the fullness of that divine
anointing; for there was no germ of evil in him or about him; both
his soul and body were pure. He was anointed above all his fellows,
to be the head of the church, the top stone, the chief corner stone,
elect and precious. And what was it that was a Saviour? Not that
which was outward; it was not flesh and blood; for 'flesh and blood
cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven'; it must go to the earth from
whence it was taken. It was that life, that same life that I have
already mentioned, that was in him, and which is the light and life
of men, and which lighteth every man, and consequently every woman,
that cometh into the world. And we have this light and life in us;
which is what the apostle meant by Jesus Christ; and if we have not
this ruling in us we are dead, because we are not under the law
of the spirit of life. For the 'law is light and the reproofs of
instruction the way to life.'"[140]
[140] "The Quaker," Vol. I, p. 68.
Unless the so-called heterodox doctrine can be found in the foregoing
extracts, it does not exist in the sermon under discussion.
Two other sermons were evidently both considered offensive and
objectionable by the orthodox. One was preached at the Twelfth Street
meeting, Twelfth month 10, 1826, and the other the 12th of the same
month at Key's Alley, both in Philadelphia. At the Twelfth Street
meeting, amid much confusion, Thomas Wistar attempted to controvert
what Elias Hicks had said in certain particulars. While this Friend was
talking, Elias tried to persuade the audience to be quiet.
At Key's Alley, when Elias had finished, Philadelphia Pemberton, in
the midst of a disturbance that nearly drowned his voice, gave an
exhortation in support of the outward and vicarious atonement. When
Friend Pemberton ceased, Elias Hicks expressed his ideas regarding
gospel order and variety in the ministry, for which Friends had always
stood, in which he said:
"My dear friends, God is a God of order--and it will do me great
pleasure to see this meeting sit quiet till it closes. We have, and
claim gospel privileges, and that every one may be persuaded in his
own mind; and as we have gifts differing, so ought every one to have
an opportunity to speak, one by one, but not two at once, that all
may be comforted. If any thing be revealed (and we are not to speak
except this is the case), if any thing be revealed to one, let others
hold their peace--this is according to order. And I desire it, once
for all, my dear friends, if you love me, that you will keep strictly
to this order: it will be a great comfort to my spirit."[141]
[141] "The Quaker," Vol. I, p. 125.
Speaking of the fear of God, he said that he did not mean "a fear that
arises from the dread of torment, or of chastisement, or anything of
this kind; for that may be no more than the fear of devils, for they,
we read, believe and tremble." His theory was that fear must be based
on knowledge, and the fear to displease God is not because of what he
may do to us, but what, for want of this knowledge, we lose.
Again, he practically repeated what was evidently considered a truism:
"My friends, we are not to look for a law in our neighbor's heart, nor
in our neighbor's book; but we are to look for that law which is to be
our rule and guide, in our consciences, in our souls; for the law is
whole and perfect." Continuing he remarked:
"Now, how concordant this is with the testimony of Jesus, when he
queried with his disciples in this wise: 'Whom do men say that I the
son of man am?' They enumerated several characters, according to the
views of the people in that day. But until we come to this inward,
divine law, we shall know nothing rightly of that manifestation;
for none of us have seen him, nor any of his works which he acted
outwardly. But here we find some are guessing, one way, and some
another way, till they become cruel respecting different opinions
about him, insomuch that they will kill and destroy each other for
their opinions. This is the effect of men's turning away from the
true light, the witness for God in their own souls; it throws them
into anarchy and confusion."[142]
[142] "The Quaker," Vol. I, p. 94.
In the opinion of Elias Hicks, it was not the man Peter that was to
constitute the rock upon which the church was to be built, but rather
the inner revelation, which enabled the disciple to know that the
Master was the Christ. "When a true Christian comes to this rock, he
comes to know it, as before pointed out; and here every one must see,
when they build on this divine rock, this revealed will of our Heavenly
Father, there is no fear."
Touching the vital matters of salvation, we make the following extracts
from this sermon:
"Nothing but that which is begotten in every soul can manifest God
to the soul. You must know this for yourselves, as nothing which
you read in the Scriptures can give you a sense of his saving and
almighty power. Now, the only begotten is what the power of God
begets in the soul, by the soul uniting with the visitations of
divine love. It becomes like a union--the soul submits and yields
itself up to God and the revelation of his power, and thus it becomes
wedded to him as its heavenly husband. Here, now, is a birth of the
Son of God; and this must be begotten in every soul, as God can be
manifested by nothing else.
"Now, what was this Holy Ghost and spirit of truth, and where are we
to find it? He did not leave his disciples in the dark--'He dwelleth
with you, and shall be in you.' Mind it, my friends. What a blessed
sovereign God this is to be to the children of men--a God who has
placed a portion of himself in every rational soul--a measure of his
grace sufficient for every purpose, for the redemption of the souls
of men from sin and transgression, and to lead them to the kingdom
of heaven. And there is no other way. Then do not put it off any
longer; do not procrastinate any longer; do not say to-morrow, but
immediately turn inward, for the day calls aloud for it--everything
around us calls for us to turn inward, to that which will help us to
do the great work of our salvation."[143]
[143] "The Quaker," Vol. I, p. 97-98.
There seems to have been little, if any, public demonstration against
the preaching of Elias Hicks in meetings where he was present, except
in Philadelphia. That is especially true before the coming of the
English preachers, and the strained conditions that existed just
preceding and during the various acts of separation. It will thus be
seen that the concern and purpose of the ten men elders of Philadelphia
remained persistent until the end.