2021/03/24

Brinton CH 8 The Meeting and the World

 --

CHAPTER 8

The Meeting and the World

It was inevitable and essential that the type of behavior devel­oped within the Meeting Community should spread to the world outside. Community, equality, harmony and simplicity create at­titudes of mind and heart which cannot be confined to any one place or group. Because life within the Meeting Community is different but not too different from life outside it, this radiation is possible. The code of behavior developed in a monastery, for example, is so different from that of the world around it that it is more difficult for the monastic way to be universalized. The Quaker code of behavior can be universalized and has been widely extended with the possible exception of the doctrine of pacifism. This doctrine, therefore, will receive particular atten­tion here. "There is no better test," writes William E. Hocking, "of any rule of life than its way of settling accounts with pug­nacity."'

Quaker efforts toward social and political reform have been largely carried on in the fields of religious liberty, education, the abolition of slavery, help for Negroes and Indians, improvement of mental hospitals, relief work during and after wars, prison re­form, and endeavors toward removal of the causes of war. As these efforts have received wide attention and as they involve no principles different from those already discussed, a brief outline will be sufficient.* The Society of Friends is a small group and the amount which it has accomplished may appear quantita­tively insignificant. Quaker work has, however, sometimes proved important because of its pioneering quality. Friends have not

* Quaker work for temperance and in foreign missions is omitted for the sake of brevity. This work has involved no unique principles.

144 THE MEETING AND THE WORLD

hesitated to support new and unpopular undertakings. In many cases, after their endeavors have received the support of larger groups, they have withdrawn and expended their energies else­where in behalf of less popular causes. The names of persons who are prominently associated with certain causes, such as William Wilberforce and William Lloyd Garrison in the cause of slavery, John Howard in prison reform, and Dorothea Lynde Dix in the reform of mental hospitals, are not Quaker names. However, the initial steps in the reforms they effected had been taken by Quakers and these leaders received much of their backing from members of the Society of Friends. In all of their major efforts at social betterment the Quakers have been assisted by many like-minded persons outside their membership.

The pioneering quality of Quaker social work is largely due to the character of the meeting for worship. Silent waiting worship permits a fresh and direct facing of facts under conditions in which the conscience becomes sensitized. There is no screen of words and abstract concepts between the soul and reality. Music, sermons, prayers, responses, all such spiritual exercises may be received passively or with a resistance of which the recipient is often quite unaware, but that which arises from within is closer to the springs of the will. The worshiper finds a certain condition in the outside world presented to his mind at the very time at which he is seeking God's guidance for his actions. The horizontal human relationship becomes correlated with the vertical divine-human relationship in such a way that certain actions appear to be required independently of any human opinion or demand. A concern develops and with it a sense of uneasiness over a situa­tion about which something needs to be done. This uneasiness persists until the required action is undertaken either successfully or unsuccessfully. If unsuccessful, the Friend who had experienced the concern can at least feel that he has lived up to the measure of light and power given him. Needless to say, all meetings for worship are not sources of inspiration; many are unfruitful due to drowsiness or inertness. Also it must be remembered that the spirit of creative worship may be fruitful at unexpected times and places outside the united gathering.

146 FRIENDS FOR 800 YEARS

Work among Negroes and Indians

"Let your Light shine among the Indians, the Blacks and the Whites that ye may answer the truth in them," writes George Fox in 1690.

From earliest times until the present the disabilities suffered by Negroes and Indians in a culture dominated by the "whites" have been an object of Quaker concern. William Penn's policy of buying land from the Indians and of making treaties with them began a lasting friendship which resulted in safety for the Friends on the colonial frontier. No peaceful Quakers suffered injury during the French and Indian War. An interesting side­light appears in the early Disciplines which strongly condemned the sale of rum to the Indians.

In 1795 the Yearly Meetings began to appoint committees on Indian affairs. These were the earliest standing committees. They still continue their labors. Quaker delegations often went to Wash­ington to plead for the aborigines. The Associated Executive Committee of Friends on Indian Affairs and the Indian Rights Association have been active in these efforts. When General Grant was elected President he met with a Quaker committee sent to plead for a peaceful Indian policy. He told them that, if they would send him the names of Quakers fit to be Indian agents, he would appoint them. This was done. The Quaker Indian agents succeeded in pacifying tribes then at war with one another. They distributed supplies, taught the Indians agriculture, and set up schools on the pattern of the Quaker Boarding Schools. To this work the Yearly Meetings made regular contributions. During the succeeding administrations most of the Quaker Indian agents were dismissed.

Quaker Indian schools first appeared in western New York in 1796, in Ohio in 1822, in Kansas in 1837, in Maine about 1850, and in North Carolina in 1888. In 1898 there were two boarding schools and seven day sch000ls in Oklahoma. These schools have gradually been merged with the public school system. The Tunes-sasa school in New York has recently become a community center.

When George Fox visited Barbadoes in 1671, he advised Friends to let their slaves go free after a certain length of time, but not

TILE MEETING AND THE WORLD 147

empty-handed. The first protest in America against slavery was made by German Quakers in Germantown, Pennsylvania, in 1688. In 1711 the Quaker Assembly of Pennsylvania forbade by law the importation of Negroes, but this enactment was vetoed by the Royal Council in England. The gradual steps by which the Society of Friends freed its own slaves, so that by 1776 there were no Quaker slaveholders, have already been noted. From the begin­ning until long after the Civil War, the Disciplines and minutes of all the American Yearly Meetings, North and South, contain instructions regarding the care and "spiritual and temporal" edu­cation of Negroes and the obligation of Friends "to advise them in respect to their engagements in worldly concerns" (1778). Many Friends abstained from the use of anything produced by slaves, such as sugar. They were mainly instrumental in develop­ing "The Free Produce Association," a group which refused to buy the products of slave labor.

Friends in the South had a difficult time freeing their slaves, for the freed slaves were captured and sold to harsher masters. Laws were passed forbidding anyone to free his slaves. Largely as a result of these difficulties, most of the Southern Quakers migrated in covered wagons to Ohio and other states of the Old Northwest, where slavery was forbidden. This was near the be­ginning of the nineteenth century. In some cases the members of a meeting migrated together and maintained the continuity of their meeting organization.

Many Quaker homes were stations of the Underground Rail­road by which slaves were handed on from one hiding place to another in their escape to the North. Thomas Garrett and Levi Coffin were each instrumental in effecting the escape of some three thousand.

After the Quakers bad freed their own ranks of slaveholding, they set to work to abolish slavery altogether. Books by John Woolman and Anthony Benezet exerted a wide influence. In 1780 the Assembly of Pennsylvania passed the first law abolishing slavery. Abolition societies multiplied during the early years of the nineteenth century, both in England and in America. Several Quaker periodicals devoted to the cause of emancipation were published. One of these, edited by Benjamin Lundy, converted

148 FRIENDS FOR 800 yiis

William Lloyd Garrison. Lucretia Mott, Thomas Shipley, Levi Coffin, Isaac T. Hopper, Elizabeth Comstock, John G. Whittier, were active leaders in the abolition movement, though they did not go along with those who advocated violence. In England the Friends and others engaged in the abolition movement were more successful than were those in America in bringing about nonviolent emancipation. In the British colonies from 700,000 to 800,000 slaves were freed by purchase about 1838. As a result of this nonviolent emancipation there is today a less serious race problem in the West Indies than in the United States, where the war and its aftermath produced tensions and hatreds which still continue.

During and after the Civil War about three million Negroes were set free without education or resources for making a living. All the Yearly Meetings formed committees and associations to help them. Food and clothing were distributed in areas where the destitute Negroes were gathered in concentration camps. Im­plements for farming were furnished. When state and federal agencies took over this work, the Quakers turned their attention to education which included industrial and agricultural training. Every American Yearly Meeting set up Negro schools. The Phil­adelphia Freedman's Association at one time maintained forty-seven schools. Gradually after 1875 these schools became merged with the public school system.

Quaker schools for Negroes had existed long before the Civil War. In 1770 and 1786 Negro schools were set up in Philadelphia. Many Monthly Meetings appointed special committees to look after Negro education. After 1760 the records of Virginia and Baltimore Yearly Meetings regularly contain instructions regard­ing the education of Negroes. This was never a popular task in the South. In the North in 1882 one Quaker who admitted Negroes to her Boarding School had her school practically destroyed by a mob.

Today the concern for fair treatment of Negroes and Indians finds its main outlet in the work of standing committees against all forms of discrimination based on race. The American Friends Service Committee, east and west, sponsors local groups further

THE MEgflNG AND THE WORLD 149

ing this interest. The acute conditions in South Africa are stirring the few Friends in that area to examine their own responsibility for the present serious situation.

Education

The story of Quaker education is long and will not be rehearsed here.2 Only those aspects which exhibit a pioneering spirit will be cited. The Quakers have on the whole followed conventional educational methods, but their schools have demonstrated a few innovations.

Quaker schools, either privately owned or under the care of committees of meetings, existed in considerable numbers during the first century of Quaker history. Toward the end of the eight­eenth century in America special efforts were made by the Yearly Meetings to see to it that every Monthly Meeting sup­ported, or aided in supporting, an elementary school. A number of these still survive, either as elementary schools or secondary day schools. The first half of the nineteenth century witnessed the founding of eight American Yearly Meeting Boarding Schools; the second half, the founding of ten American Quaker colleges. In the twentieth century adult education was undertaken in summer schools, conferences, institutes, and in two special institutions founded for the purpose, Woodbrooke in England and Pendle Hill in the United States.

The Quaker schools were pioneers in at least three fields: the equal education of boys and girls, the use of nonviolent methods, and the introduction of scientific and practical subjects into the curriculum. Other Quaker educational policies, such as the development in the students of the sense of belonging to a re­ligious community, the creation of a religious atmosphere in the school, and "simplicity and moderation in dress, speech and deportment," are distinctive only in the degree to which they were carried out. The Quaker schools did not attempt to teach the truths of religion directly. Friends have maintained that only the divine Spirit within can accomplish this end. Verbal instruc­tion, which results in "head knowledge," cannot be relied upon to effect knowledge which is of the heart. The school community, through its meetings for worship often attended by visiting

150 FRIENDS FOR 300 YFARs

Friends, its daily readings from the Bible followed by periods of silence, and by the influence of religiously minded and dech cated teachers created a setting in which religious feelings de­veloped. The Quaker pattern of behavior was reproduced as far as possible in the school. The older schools were distinguished by their efforts to guard the students against every influence from the outside which would tend to weaken or change this way of life.

The equal education of boys and girls was a natural outcome of the equality of the sexes in the Quaker meeting and ministry. The co-educational Quaker Boarding School was a unique insti­tution carried on like a large family. The heads of such a school were, as in the case of a family, a man and wife, who divided executive responsibilities. Since Quaker women received an edu­cation equal to that of men, which was a better education than other women received, they became leaders of their sex, particu­larly in the struggle for women's rights in the nineteenth century.

Since the Light of Christ in the conscience exists in children as well as in adults, it is appealed to or "answered" in cases of misdemeanor. The Puritan doctrine of total' depravity had a different educational result. According to this doctrine, goodness can be imposed by instruction, often enforced by fear. Al­though the Quaker schools were by no means free from attempts to coerce in maintaining discipline, they tended on the whole to depend more than did other schools on an appeal to the in­ward sense of right and wrong.

The doctrine of simplicity, in so far as it meant absence of superfluity, was the source of most of the Quaker educational innovations. In the days when the curriculum was largely based upon the classics, mathematics and other subjects designed pri­marily to polish and adorn, the Quaker schools emphasized practical subjects. George Fox set up the first Quaker schools in 1668 to teach "whatsoever things are civil and useful in crea­tion." Quaker schools were among the earliest, if not actually the first, to introduce science into the curriculum. In the days when trades were learned by apprenticeship to a master craftsman, the Quaker schools gave instruction in applied sciences. It was natural that a religious body which believed in a religion based

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 151

on experience should relate education to that which can be experienced.

By far the most important recent innovation in this field is the type of education afforded since 1934 in the work camp move­ment. While these work camps have other than educational objectives, such as giving help to those who need it and the re­moval of tensions in conflict areas, the effect of the work camps on the campers themselves, both young men and young women, is often highly educational, sometimes revolutionary. In these camps where the campers work along with persons who need help or who are engaged in thp practice of their regular daily tasks, education through action and experience is carried as far as possible. Such education to be most effective must be sup­plemented by intellectual efforts characteristic of more conven­tional education.

The Method,of Nonviolence

(A) PRISONS

The Quaker peace principles can be best understood when viewed in a context considerably wider than the refusal to take part in war. Prison reform, renunciation of violence in the case of the mentally ill, contributions toward a democratic constitution for the United States, and the struggle for religious liberty are also evidences of the same fundamental doctrine that the best way to deal with men is "to answer that of God" in them. Vio­lence when applied to human beings reduces them and the user of violence to the level of the physical world where only force operates, but men who are open to the divine Light are most effectually moved by spiritual influences from within. By force men are degraded to a subhuman level; by friendship they are uplifted to the divine.

Thousands of Quakers who were imprisoned and treated like common criminals during the forty years of persecution learned by experience of the horrible condition of seventeenth-century prisons, dungeons and underground rooms, unventilated, over­crowded, covered with filth and alive with vermin. There was no separation of the healthy and the diseased, of hardened criminals and the young or even innocent, the sane and the insane. Some‑

152 F1UEr'ms FOR 300 YEARS

times there was no separation of male and female prisoners. Those unable to pay the jailer for their food and bedding suffered severely from hunger and cold. The Quakers refused to pay bribes to the jailers. In consequence, they often suffered as severely as the poorest. Prisoners awaiting trial were treated in the same way as those who had been sentenced. There was no work for anyone. It would be difficult to imagine conditions more completely demoralizing and degrading.

In England the Quakers could at first do nothing except issue memorials to Parliament and to various officials, such as Fox's address To the Protector and Parliament of England in 1658, but in Pennsylvania there was full opportunity for radically changing the whole system. The Pennsylvania prisons became models, highly praised by foreign visitors as the best in the world. No con­vict paid for his board and lodging. Work was compulsory, there was classification of inmates and religious instruction was pro­vided. Later in establishing the Eastern Penitentiary in Penn­sylvania the Quakers carried this principle of isolation too far. They are credited with initiating the system of solitary confine­ment. Fiske writes in his history of The Dutch and Quaker Colonies that Pennsylvania was distinguished throughout the world for the administration of its prisons and the humanity of its discipline. Unfortunately, Penn's law to abolish imprisonment for debt was canceled at an early date. He did, however, succeed in reducing the number of crimes which could be punished by death from two hundred to two; namely, treason and murder.

Many Friends who traveled in the ministry insisted on in­specting the prisons in the cities which they visited and on ministering to the spiritual needs of the prisoners. This was par­ticularly true of Stephen Grellet, Willian Alien, Thomas Shihitoe and William Forster. After a visit to a prison they reported what they had seen to the chief authorities. Conditions were often so bad that even the most hardened officials admitted that some­thing ought to be done.

The first systematic attempt to reform the prisons through an organization was initiated by Elizabeth Fry in 1813. In visiting the women's section of Newgate Prison in London, she found conditions as bad as those described by the early Quaker

THE MEETING AND THE wonin 153

prisoners. The reforms which she, and the Association she founded, brought about transformed this "hell on earth" in­habited by idle, savage, drunken, unruly women whom visitors feared to approach, to a peaceable, industrious group. Children, naked and uncared for, were clothed and taught. Eventually her work led to better conditions in prisons throughout England and on the Continent as well.

Friends continued to make efforts to improve prisons and to prepare discharged prisoners to re-enter society. The events in this story are not so important for our present purpose as the underlying motives which brought about this humanitarian work. The Friends believe that prisoners have certain rights which be­long to all human beings regardless of their character or crimes. The revenge of society on those who offend it is inconsistent with the gospel of Christ and the doctrine of the nature of man as a child of God. It is also ineffective. In the undeclared war between society and those who violate its rules, peace can be based only on love, understanding and good will, not on violence, hatred and vengeance. To those who hold a low opinion of man as naturally inclined to evil this doctrine may appear fantastic, but the few hesitating steps already made to treat a defect in character as we treat a defect in the body have been richly re­warded. To go beyond punishment to measures obviating the need for it is the ideal today.

By those who believe that the object of punishment is reforma­tion, capital punishment is obviously condemned. That a human being should suddenly be deprived of the possibility of reforma­tion or of making amends for his misdeeds is not only futile but morally wrong. If the taking of life is a crime for an individual, it is also a crime for the state. In America Friends are now slowly reawakening to their historic interest in this important subject.

(B) NiENTAL HOSPITALS

If the Quaker method as applied to criminals seems to many unworkable, it may seem even less practicable when applied to the mentally ill. Nevertheless, the use of this method has pro­duced important and unexpected results.

154 FRIENDS FOR 800 yns

In the eighteenth century and earlier the treatment of the in­sane was more inhuman than the treatment of criminals. They

were imprisoned, chained, beaten, deprived of the ordinary necessities of life, and made objects of ridicule by visitors who were free to torment them.

As early as 1709 Philadelphia Monthly Meeting proposed the erection of a general hospital for the sick and insane, but the

plan did not materialize. The first general hospital in America,

the Pennsylvania Hospital in Philadelphia, was founded in 1756 largely by Friends who appealed to Benjamin Franklin to lead

the effort. "It was the first institution where cure rather than custody and repression was the underlying principle in the treat­ment of the insane."3

"It was also the first where a humane approach to the prob­lem of insanity was attempted. "4 Friends are given credit for

introducing occupational therapy in this hospital as a means of cure.5 But there was nevertheless at this hospital much harshness and crudity in the methods of treatment which showed little in­sight into the nature of mental illness.

The first institution expressly founded to carry out nonviolent ideas in the treatment of the insane was established by Quakers

in York, England, in 1796. This institution was called The Retreat

to avoid the stigma attached to the words "asylum" or "mad­house." Here a "family environment" was created and institu‑

tional characteristics were avoided. Patients were treated as guests, though employment was required. Chains were forbidden and also all resort to terrorism. There was little medical therapy. Mechanical restraint was sometimes used, but it was reduced to a minimum.

The influence of Samuel Tukes' Description of the Retreat near York was soon manifest in the establishment of two similar in‑

stitutions in America: the Friends Asylum in Frankford, Penn­sylvania, opened in 1817; and the Bloomingdale Asylum in New York, opened in 1821. The constitution of the Friends Asylum expressly stated that it "is intended to furnish, besides the requisite medical aid, such tender sympathetic attention and religious oversight as may sooth agitated minds." The system of treatment instituted at the York Retreat was followed. No chains

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 155

were used. The Bloomingdale Asylum, developed as part of the New York Hospital, was founded by its president, Thomas Eddy, a Quaker who established the methods of "moral management" used at the York Retreat. Eddy was helped in this effort by correspondence with his friend, Lindley Murray, the Quaker grammarian and author of School Readers, who was then resid­ing in York.

Another aspect of this same subject appears in the wide differ­ence between the Puritans and Quakers in their attitude toward witchcraft. The Salem witchcraft mania of 1691-92, and the trials and executions for witchcraft elsewhere, were undoubtedly evidences of serious mental disorder in both accusers and ac­cused. Nothing like this occurred in the Quaker colonies. The Quakers believed in divine possession but not in demoniacal possession. In Pennsylvania there was one trial for witchcraft. The jury found the culprit guilty only of "having the fame of being a witch." The early meeting minutes record several cases of action by the meeting in requiring acknowledgments of error from persons who took seriously witchcraft, necromancy or any "black art."

In recent times a new phase of the concern for the mentally ill has appeared. During World War II many Quaker conscien­tious objectors were assigned to mental hospitals as assistants. They and other pacifists were much less dependent on violent methods than were other attendants. Sympathy and kindness proved to be more effective than force, though force applied in a sympathetic manner was sometimes necessary. These conscien­tious objectors, both during and after their service, succeeded in bringing about changes for the better in several hospitals, and helped in establishing an organization to improve administration, facilities and care.

(c) THE STATE

The extreme form of democracy prevailing in the Quaker meet­ing for worship and the meeting for the transaction of the church business was a pacifist technique for creating co-operation with­out compulsion. It was inevitable that, when the Quakers had the power to determine the form of government in a state, they

156 FRIENDS FOR 300 YEARS

should make it as democratic as possible. In five of the American colonies—Rhode Island Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware and North Carolina—the Quakers took the lead politically for a long or short period of time, but only in Pennsylvania and New Jersey did they have the opportunity to make the constitutions. When William Penn was writing the Concessions and Agree­ments for West Jersey in 1676, he said, "There we lay a founda­tion for after ages to understand their liberty as men and Chris­tians, that they may not be brought into bondage but by their own consent; for we put the power in the people." New Jersey lost some of its earlier freedom when it became a crown colony in 1702, but the Frame of Government given by Penn to Pennsyl­vania lasted till the American Revolution and carried on the same democratic philosophy. There was complete religious liberty. Anyone who believed in Cod could hold office. The Frame of Government provided ways for its amendment and was changed three times in the first ten years. The Assembly met and ad­journed by laws passed by itself. Affirmation was permitted as a substitute for a legal oath. All these provisions were unique and far ahead of current practice. Two provisions, one for universal education at the expense of the state and the other for the abolition of imprisonment for debt, turned out to be too advanced for the Pennsylvania colonists.

There can be no doubt that the Constitution of the United States, written in Philadelphia, owed much to Penn's "Holy Experiment." Penn's theories, because they had been carried out in practice and not just written in books, had a powerful in­fluence. John Locke's Second Treatise of Government (1688) also influenced the members of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, and there is evidence that Locke himself was in­fluenced by Penn.6 The Charter written earlier by Locke for Carolina was based on aristocratic feudalism and authority based on fear. Later Locke became acquainted with Penn and assisted him in writing the Frame of Government for Pennsylvania. This, apparently, caused a radical change in Locke's political philos­ophy. The Frame exists today in Penn's handwriting interlined with notes and comments by Locke and Sidney. Later the doc­trines that government is based on the consent of the governed,

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 157

that Church and State should be separated completely, and that the legislative and executive branches should be separate, as embodied in Penn's Frame, became the basis of Locke's political theory in the Second Treatise. Penn's influence on the American Constitution was exerted also through his suggestion for a po­litical union of the colonies. This plan was presented to a Royal Commission in 1697. It contained some provisions and even words and phrases later embodied in the American Constitution; such as, for example, an annual "congress" (our modern senate), made up of two representatives from each province, to arrange for the interprovincial administration of justice, to regulate inter­provincial commerce, and to consider ways and means to support and protect the union.

Penn was the only political theorist of first rank produced by the Society of Friends. Yet the long and bitter struggle on the part of many persons for religious liberty both in England and America laid the basis for that type of political thought which later became fundamental in American life. One important result of this struggle is the exemption from military service of religious conscientious objectors. It was not the theocracy of New England nor the aristocracy of the. South, but the liberal democracy of the middle colonies which determined the future form of the American state.

The histoian George Bancroft writes:

The rise of the people called Quakers is one of the memorable events in the history of man. It marks the moment when intellectual freedom was claimed unconditionally by the people as an inalienable birthright!

(D) RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

The nonresistant method of creating changes for the better by refusal to obey a law is illustrated in the bitter struggle for religious liberty. About 21,000 Friends suffered fines and im­prisonment in England, many of them more than once. About 450 died in prison. At one time there were as many as 4,200 in prison. 230 were banished, of whom, however, only a score were actually transported.

There were many factors which brought about the passage

158 FRIENDS FOR 300 YEARS

of the Toleration Act in 1689, but it is certain that the stubborn resistance of the Quakers to the Quaker Act of 1662 which was explicitly directed against attendance at Friends meetings, and to the Conventicle Acts of 1664 and 1670 directed against all nonconformist religious services, had much to do with the ad­vent of religious liberty in England. That Friends bore the brunt of the persecution is indicated in the records which show that many more Quakers were convicted under the act than noncon-formists.8 This was because the Quakers met openly while others met secretly. This fact was admitted by some nonconformist writers. Baxter says:

here the fanatics called Quakers did greatly relieve the sober people for a time; for they were so resolute, and gloried in their constancy and sufferings that they assembled openly—and were dragged away daily to the Common Gaol, and yet desisted not, but the rest came the next day nevertheless, so that the Gaol at Newgate was filled with them. Abundance of them died in prison and yet they continued their assemblies still—yea, many turned Quakers because the Quakers kept their meetings openly and went to prison for it cheerfully?

Efforts to stop the Quakers from meeting together by destroy­ing their meeting houses failed. They then met on the rubbish. When every adult member was taken to prison, the children kept up the meeting. No human power could reach them. Much credit for the final victory is due to the persistent work of the Meeting for Sufferings, the central executive committee in London led by William Penn, the foremost champion of religious liberty in England. The care and leadership of this body unified the Society, so that the fires of persecution could not consume it. For a century after the Act of Toleration Friends continued to suffer heavy losses through fines, and occasional imprisonment for refusal to pay tithes to the Church of England.

In part of America the struggle for religious liberty was carried on as bitterly as in England. The Independents (Congrega­tionalists) had largely accepted religious liberty in England under the Commonwealth but they themselves denied it to others in New England. Only the Baptists of Rhode Island tolerated the Quakers. Historians who say that religious liberty is a special

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 15

gift of Protestantism are partly right, but they tend to forg the persecution of Quakers by non-Quakers and the complete at sence of persecution of non-Quakers by Quakers. Only th colonies of Pennsylvania, Delaware and Rhode Island, wher the Quakers were strongest, did not at some time have a stat church. Brooks Adams writes:

Freedom of thought is the greatest triumph over tyranny that bray men have ever won. . . . we owe to their heroic devotion the mos priceless of our treasures, our perfect liberty of thought and speech and all who love our country's freedom may well reverence th memory of those martyred Quakers by whose death and agony th battle of New England has been won.1°

(E) INTERNATIONAL PEACE

If nonviolent methods, based on good will and an appeal to th inward sense of rightness in every man, are frequently successful in dealing with abnormal persons, they are more frequently suc­cessful in dealing with normal persons. No pacifist claims thai his method is always successful. Every method fails sometimes, including the method based on violence. If two persons or two nations resort to fighting, one is bound to lose, so the method of fighting cannot at the most be more than 50 per cent successful. The nonviolent method may, however, operate in such a way that both sides win. Together they may arrive at a decision which is better than that which either one of the parties desired in the first place. This pacifist technique was fully discussed in the chap­ter "Reaching Decisions."

The Quakers who traveled abroad on missionary journeys as­sumed that their hearers already knew something of the Truth which they wished to communicate. George Fox, for example, appealed to the Koran in writing to the Bey of Algiers. When Mary Fisher had addressed the Sultan of Turkey and his Court she was asked what she thought of Mahomet. She replied "that she knew him not, but Christ enlightened every man who came into the world. Him she knew.... And concerning Mahomet," she said, "they might judge him false or true according to the words and prophecies he spoke." The Turk confessed this to be true. With this reply we can contrast the reply of Thomas of Tolento

160 FRIENDS FOR 300 YEARs

in Malabar, India, in 1307 to the same question: "I tell you Mahomet is the son of perdition and hath his place in hell, and not only he but all such as follow and keep his law, false and persistent and accursed as it is and hostile to God and the salva­tion of souls."

The difference between the two answers illustrates the nature and source of Quaker pacifism. When John Woolman visited the Indians in order to hold a Friends meeting with them, he gave as one of his reasons, "that I might learn something from them." The method of nonviolence is not a method for pushing one's own ideas. It is a method for arriving at the truth on whichever side it may be.

The refusal to take any part in war or preparation for war was not universal among Friends at the start. Some Quakers in Cromwell's army were dismissed because of their equalitarian principles. Others became pacifists long before the Quaker move­ment began." Not until 1661 was there a public announcement from the leaders that a Quaker would not fight. This was written in protest against the arrest of Quakers who were thought to have participated in the insurrection of the Fifth Monarchy Men who tried to seize London by force in preparation for the Second Coming of Christ. No regularly constituted body of the Society of Friends has ever made a declaration contrary to the strict pacifist position, but in every war some members have, as indi­viduals, supported the war or taken part in it.

Friends arrived at their pacifist position in the same two ways by which they reached their other social testimonies: they fol‑

lowed the Light of Christ in their conscience ey followed

the words of Christ in the New Testament. The Quaker scholars, such as Barclay, Penn, Penington, Claridge and Fisher, were fa­miliar with the writings of the early Church Fathers and quoted them in defense of their position. Barclay, in the Apology, gives about forty quotations or references to show that, for the first three centuries, the Christian leaders opposed participation in war. He quotes, for example, the answer of Martin to Julian called the Apostate, "I am a soldier of Christ, therefore I cannot fight."

The Friends were not disturbed because fighting can be de­fended by the Old Testament. If the Old Testament is to be taken

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 161

literally, then it would be necessary, as Barclay points out, for Christians to follow all the precepts of the Mosaic law. Chris‑

tianity, they believed, is a new dispensation which has replaced the old. In using the New Testament in their controversies with the Protestants who accepted the Bible as authoritative, they met their opponents on their own ground. Such texts were used as "Love your enemies," "Blessed are the peacemakers," "Resist not evil," "All they that take up the sword shall perish by the sword," "If my kingdom were of this world then would my servants fight," "We wrestle not against flesh and blood," "The weapons of our warfare are not carnal," "Render to no man evil for evil," "Wars and fightings come of your lusts." But it was not so much par­ticular texts as it was the example of Christ being led to the cross without resistance and the whole spirit of New Testament reli­gion, commanding its followers to take up the cross in the same way, that formed the principal basis for this position. Two say­ings of Jesus, "I came not to bring peace but a sword" and "He that hath no sword let him sell his cloak and buy one," were in­terpreted in the light of their context which gives them a figurative turn. Ambrose and Origen, Barclay shows, gave these texts the same symbolic interpretation.

Friends believed that their pacifism followed so naturally and inevitably from their other more fundamental principles that little is said about it in early Quaker writings. It was taken for granted that a consistent Friend would not fight. As we have seen, the whole procedure of the meeting for worship and the meeting for business was based on a technique which did not admit the overcoming of some persons by other persons. Rather it tended to create an integration of various points of view into a new one on a level higher than any individual opinion. The Light, as has been shown in every application of Quaker doctrine to social prob­lems, is a source of unity. It is not one force among other forces. The Light is in all men, and the closer they come to it, the closer they come to one another. Force can produce a superficial unity like that which exists in a machine or in a social mechanism such as an army. It cannot produce organic unity any more than a human body with a soul can be manufactured in a machine shop. To appeal to the Light of Truth in another man is to influence

162 FRIENDS FOR 300 YEARS

him from within. In appealing to this Light in him, we also appeal to the same Light in ourselves and as a result we may find that he is right while we are wrong. We cannot honestly set out to change other men without being willing to be changed ourselves.

All the world admits that a peaceful solution to a controversy is better than a violent solution, but some hold that, men being what they are, peaceful methods are impractical. The realistic pacifist, they say, will wait until others are also pacifists. But Friends have believed that the only way to bring about a peaceful world is to begin here and now, regardless of the risk involved. When Joseph Hoag in 1812 was publicly pleading for his peace principles, a man in the audience said, "Well, stranger, if all the world was of your mind I would turn and follow after." Joseph Hoag replied, "So then thou hast a mind to be the last man to be good. I have a mind to be one of the first and set the rest an example."12 Isaac Penington writes of the peaceable kingdom foretold by prophecy:

When so ever such a thing shall be brought forth in the world it must have a beginning before it can grow and be perfected. And where should it begin but in some particulars, (individuals) in a nation and so spread by degrees. . . . Therefore, whoever desires to see this lovely state brought forth in the general. . . must cherish it in the par-ticular.13

Joseph Sturge correctly states the manner in which all causes for human betterment originate:

It seems to be the will of Him who is infinite in wisdom that light upon great subjects should first arise and be gradually spread through the faithfulness of individuals in acting up to their own convictions."'

The common argument that the pacifist can apply his principles only in an ideal society is untrue. We are not commanded to love our enemies only when there are no enemies, nor to overcome evil with good only when there is no evil.

The object of the Christian religion is to bring about the King­dom of God on earth, not by the power of men, but by the power of God working through men. This can be done only by methods which are compatible with the code of behavior described by Christ as characteristic of God's Kingdom. The Kingdom begins

THE MEETING AN]) THE WORLD 163

o exist when Christ's way of life begins to be lived. The King-lom, the ideal society which men work for and pray for when hey utter the Lord's Prayer, cannot he brought about by means nconsistent with itself. If fighting is inconsistent with an ideal ociety, then fighting will not bring the ideal society. A spiritual esult is produced by spiritual means and a material result by iiaterial means. If war is evil, as almost everyone today admits, then it cannot be the right way to produce a good result. The bildren of Mars are not angels of peace. As William Penn says, 'A good end cannot sanctify evil means, nor must we ever do evil that good may come of it.31015

Barclay and Penington point out that the state, not having ac­cepted the gospel of Christ as its standard of behavior, may be expected to engage in war as consistent with its own principles. It is under the old dispensation which existed before the coming of Christ. It acts accordingly. But this behavior of the state is no excuse for those individuals who have themselves accepted the higher standard of Christianity. They have received a greater measure of Light and must be faithful to it. This is not to be in­terpreted as vocational pacifism, as if God had called some to fight because fighting is necessary and others to be peaceful so as to show by their lives the nature of the Christian goal. All men and nations are called to be peaceful but every man must live up to his measure of light, however dim. We cannot censure the in­sensitive for not going beyond what they have. As their measure increases they will come closer to that peaceable Kingdom in which swords are beaten into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks. For seventy-five years it was demonstrated in Pennsylvania that even a state can be devoted to the ways of peace.

Friends have generally favored the use of police power if that power impartially protects the rights of the criminal and the rights

of society. Such power must be reduced to a minimum and used

with sympathetic understanding. The exercise of police power differs from international war in which the innocent often suffer

more than the guilty and where the object is the taking of life. Under present international conditions a so-called international police force wages war. This police action is not directed toward guilty individuals as is the case with the police action of the fed‑

164 FRIENDS FOR 300 YEARS

eral government of the United States. Friends have never been anarchists. They hold that the state is important. They support it as long as its reqUirements do not Oppose the leadings of the Light.

Friends are often asked what they would do if attacked by a person intent on murder. Many would protect themselves by force if that force did not involve serious injury or the taking of life. Some would reply to this question as Thomas Chalkley did: "I being innocent if I was killed in my body, my soul might be happy; but if I killed him, he dying in his wickedness would con­sequently be unhappy; and if I was killed he might live to re­pent; but If I killed him, he would have no time to repent."',' In the case of being called upon to protect another person, the deci­sion would be more difficult, but the same general line of reason­ing might apply. Death is not itself an evil, but the taking of life is an evil. The soldier who is killed suffers a material injury; the soldier who kills suffers a spiritual injury.

There are many instances in Quaker history of bandits who were persuaded to desist from attack. The famous Quaker doctor Lettsom on encountering a highwayman "converted him into a useful member of society."17 Catharine Shipley said to a man who was attempting to snatch her purse on a dark street, "Let us kneel down on the pavement and ask Heavenly Father whether He means thee to have it." The man fled.

In defending their pacifism the Quakers have seldom given as their reason the destruction of life and property caused by war. Loss of life and property is not in itself an evil. The loss of life might lead to a happier condition hereafter, and the loss of prop­erty is sometimes an actual benefit for a person who is too closely tied to his possessions. The evil results of war—hatred, brutality, callousness to suffering and deceit—are spiritual and moral rather than material.

It is now possible to defend pacifism by an appeal to biology which was formerly thought to align itself with militarism. The theory that higher species evolved in the course of evolution through a process of savage competition by which the strong over­came and eliminated the weak has been superseded by the view that co-operation plays a greater part than competition. Those

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 165

species which are most sensitive to the needs of others and are most adaptable to changes in environment because of greater sen­sitivity to a wider range of existence are most likely to survive. The heavy fighters, equipped with strong claws, disappear in the course of evolution; the small, tender, sensitive, adaptable species survive. According to Whitehead, "Any physical object which by its influence deteriorates its environment, commits suicide."8 This is true among nations as among animal organisms. The militaris­tic empires such as Assyria and Rome, where the soldier was most admired, have had comparatively short careers; the some­what more pacific cultures, such as those of China and India, where the scholar or the holy man was most admired, have con­tinued since the dawn of civilization. The two recent world wars have shown that those nations which are least militaristic have the greatest power of survival.

There is a story told of the Chinese sage Lao-tse, the founder of Taoism, which illustrates this point. When he lay dying he asked his disciple to look into his mouth. "What do you see?" the old man asked. "I see nothing," replied the disciple. "No teeth?" "No, no teeth, but I see a tongue." By this Lao-tse taught him this les­son: that which is hard, sharp and brittle disappears, while that which is soft and yielding survives.

Pacifism is not a doctr which can be practiced with absolute consistency by one who is an integral part of society. The Quakers have not generally retreated from society in order to be consistent pacifists. They believe that God does not require more than is possible for human beings living a normal life. Inward peace and the sense of freedom from guilt is not the result of complete suc­cess in an undertaking. It comes rather from living up to what appears to be the divine requirement, however small or large the requirement is. The primary virtue is obedience to the Inward Light which may not, at the particular stage of religious growth attained by an individual, require absolute consistency. Incon­sistency is not the worst evil. It is better to be inconsistently good than consistently bad. The pacifist finds strength to be good in a particular area of life. If he succeeds, more may be required later. If his inconsistencies result in humility, they are not without value.

The doctrine of some Protestant theologians that man is doomed

166 FRIENDS FOR 300 Y.ns

to perpetual inner tension and a constant sense of guilt because of original sin or because he cannot avoid sinning finds no sup­port in the Quaker Journals. Once the journalist, after a period of conflict, has learned how to submit himself to divine Guidance, he finds peace. There is no sense of guilt until he again disobeys. The main evidence of obedience to the Light is inner peace, and many Quaker lives have demonstrated that life can be lived in a state of almost continuous inner peace, even in this evil world. John Pemberton writes to Susanna Fothergil in the midst of the French and Indian War: "There are such as can in humility and thankfulness say they are favored with a quiet habitation." When Christ said, "My peace I give unto you," he was not making a promise which could not be fulfilled. His followers learn that, even if they, like him, take upon themselves the burden of the world's suffering, it is still possible to feel within a sense of his peace. William Penn writes of those who accepted the message of the early Quakers: What "people had been vainly seeking with­out, with much pains and cost, they by this ministry found within

the right way to peace with Cod."'°

Pacifists who have no inner sense of peace are not well fitted to work for peace. Their own inner conflict will infect what they do. Inner conflict, as modem psychologists have often pointed out, produces outer conflict, especially when that inner conflict is not recognized by him in whom it exists. The person beset with inner conflict seeks relief by projecting it on the situation around him. A whole nation may be so afflicted with an inner conflict that it seeks relief by projecting it on other nations or races and war re­sults. The peacemakers are called blessed because they are chil­dren of God, and God, as Paul truly says, "is not a God of confu­sion, but of peace" (I Cor. 14:33). God does not appear in the world as one force among other forces, but as the source of unity among conflicting forces. "God is Love."

The assault on the pacifist position by the older Protestantism has been renewed today in somewhat different form by the Neo-Calvinists. Pacifists are chided for perfectionism and utopianism. The Neo-Calvinists hold that perfectionism is a mistaken theory because man as man is bound to sin, not only because of original sin, but also because he is an integral part of a sinful society.

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 167

We have no choice between evil and good, but only between one evil and another. War and tyranny are both evils. When we are forced to choose one or the other, we choose war as the lesser evil. Therefore, war is justified in spite of the fact that it is con­trary to the teaching of Christ and the Will of God. Christ's teachings cannot be followed literally in an evil world. They exist for the purpose of creating a perpetual tension between the ideal and the real so that the real may seek the ideal, even though this ideal is forever beyond its reach.

Utopianism is held to be wrong for the same reasons. The Kingdom of God is not in history, that is, it does not exist as a real possibility here on this earth. It exists only in a timeless eternity where it has already come to pass. Christ's work is finished. Man's task is to accept it through faith.

All this seems to be so much at variance with the teachings of the New Testament and the religious experience of the great Christians that it is difficult to see how it can be held sincerely. In the first place, it seems to deny the central Christian doctrine of the Incarnation. If Christ lived a perfect life in a sinful world, then such a life is clearly possible; either that, or the Incarnation was not real, but only an appearance. The Incarnation means that Christ was a revelation of God in genuinely human terms and, if genuinely human, then he expressed, by his life and teachings, a real example for men to follow. If Jesus was himself a pacifist, as even the Neo-Orthodox admit, then we must be pacifists also if we obey his command to follow him.

That the New Testament code of behavior is applicable only in some timeless heavenly realm is inconsistent with the whole spirit of the gospel which tells us how to behave here and now. Christ's commands are not expressed in a future tense but in the present. To hold that the Christian religion cannot be lived here on this earth is an acceptance of defeatism which finds no support in New Testapient Christianity which was

triumphantly optimistic, even though the early Christians were opposed by a great totalitarian state. In the early Church each

Christian community thought of itself as an island of the Kingdom of Heaven, confident that, as the number of islands increased, they would eventually unite to form the great continent of the

168 FRIENDS FOR 300 YEARS

new perfected social order where the Spirit of the Living Christ would rule. Pentecost was not a revival meeting. When Peter

stood up to explain what had happened, he did not proclaim

Christ as a personal savior but as one who would introduce a new order in the world. Christ had said that the Kingdom was al‑

ready germinating. It was a grain of mustard seed which would grow into a great tree, a creative leaven operating in the world to transform the world unto itself. This conception does not necessarily conflict with the belief that the Kingdom has already come in a timeless eternity nor with the apocalyptic belief held by many Christians that the Kingdom would come suddenly. The sun may burst suddenly above the horizon, but its coming is predicted by the twilight before the dawn. Did not the early Christians feel that they tasted "the powers of the age to come" (Heb. 6:5)?

That our choice is always between one evil and another, between war and tyranny, for example, is not true. There is a third choice which has often been taken in Christian history, though it may lead to martyrdom. If we refuse war, and, as a result, are subjected to tyranny, we can refuse tyranny also and go to prison or to death. The prisoner may be free spiritually, however confined in body, but he who submits to tyranny or war is free neither spiritually nor physically. In On the Duty of Civil Dis­obedience Thoreau says of a prison that it is "the only house in a slave state in which a free man can abide with honor. . . . As they could not reach me, they had resolved to punish my body, just as boys, if they cannot come at some person against whom they have a spite, will abuse his dog."

At the Assembly of the World Council of Churches in Amster­dam in 1948 it was agreed that the will of God is against war and that the will of God takes precedence over the will of the state. That the moral law takes precedence over the will of the state was the basis of the condemnation of the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials. The pacifist who disobeys the law and goes to prison engages in civil disobedience for the sake of principle. He is as willing to sacrifice himself for his cause as the soldier to sacrifice himself for his cause. He uses a spiritual weapon in a spiritual warfare. The present conflict between East and

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 169

West is a spiritual conflict, a conflict of ideas and moral princi­ples. As such it will never be settled by material weapons with which ideas and moral principles have nothing in common. As Barclay says peace comes not by "knocks and blows and such like things, which may well destroy the body but never can inform the soul, which is a free agent, and must either accept or reject matters of opinion as they are borne in upon it by something proportioned to its own nature."20

So far the Quaker principle of pacifism has been treated in the negative way, as refusal to take part in war. The positive side, which is equally important, inclqdes the efforts to remove causes of war and repair damage done by war, particularly damage in terms of hatred and prejudice. International agreements by which differences between nations can be settled by arbitration have been a concern of Friends from the beginning. William Penn's Essay towards the Present and Future Peace of Europe (1693) and John Bellers' Some Reasons for a European State pro­posed to the Powers of Europe (1710) offered plans for an organ­ization not unlike the present United Nations. On a number of occasions Friends have endeavored to promote the settlement of differences by arbitration. Such instances include Barclay's letter in 1678 to the plenipotentiaries who were negotiating the terms of peace at Nimeguen; Joseph Sturge's attempted media­tion between Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein in 1850; the peace deputation to the Czar of Russia in 1854 headed by Joseph Sturge, which, had there been less hysteria in England, might have prevented the Crimean War; John Bright's successful efforts to secure arbitration between England and the Northern States in 1861; the attempt of the Quaker government of Rhode Island to avert by arbitration King Philip's War in 1675; the efforts of John Fothergill and David Barclay in frequent con­ference with Benjamin Franklin to avert the American War of Revolution and the successful efforts of George Logan, grandson of Penn's secretary James Logan, to prevent war between the United States and France in 1798 after the American Commis­sioners had failed to secure the release of American sailors in French prisons. In addition to these and other efforts of indi­viduals, Quaker bodies frequently address governments through

170 FRIENDS FOR 300 YF.Ams

epistles and visiting committees on the subject of the peaceful settlement of differences Peace Societies beginning in England in 1814 and in America in 1815, worked continuously for arbitra­tion.

The suffering incurred by Quakers and other pacifists in every war in the Western World during the past three centuries because of their refual to fight is too long a story to rehearse here, even in outline. The adventures of ship captains who did not carry guns as a defense against pirates and privateers and attacks by mobs on Quakers who refused to put lights in their windows in celebration of military victories are among the less known events in this story. That a peaceful attitude inspired by good will and complete absence of fear is often a greater source of safety than weapons has been demonstrated by many instances. In the Indian wars on the frontier in colonial times and in the Irish wars of 1690 and 1798, Quakers were seldom harmed.

(F) BELIEF WORK

Relief work undertaken to repair damages caused by war or conflict is a natural corollary of the peace principle. Although this work has not been large in material terms, the results have been disproportionately great in terms of bridging gaps created by hatred and misunderstanding.

Relief work inside the Society of Friends was essential from the beginning, owing to the general loss of property by fines for civil disobedience. Relief work outside the Society seems to have first occurred during the Irish war in 1690 when Quakers sup­plied prisoners of war with food and clothing. In 1755 the Acadians, banished from Canada, were aided by Friends of Philadelphia, largely through the efforts of Anthony Benezet. In 1775-76 Friends in the Philadelphia area collected a large sum of money for the relief of sufferers from the siege of Boston and the blockade of the New England coast by the British fleet. Towns through which the Quakers had once been whipped recorded their thanks. During the Napoleonic wars soup kitchens were set up to relieve distress in London. During the nineteenth century the Balkan countries were in almost continuous revolt against the Turks and there were many refugees in European

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 171

cities. In 1822 English Friends sent a large sum to the Greek refugees. In 1876 relief supplies were distributed in Macedonia and Bulgaria and again in 1912. In the Crimean War in 1854 the English fleet had ravaged the coast of Finland which then be­longed to Russia and caused widespread destruction. Under the leadership of Joseph Sturge food and clothing, seed corn, fishing nets and other supplies were sent to repair the damage. Whittier's poem on this event ends with the words

The baffle lost by England's hate By England's love is won.

thus indicating the main motive and result of relief work. In 1892 Friends distributed a fund of £40,000 in the famine-stricken parts of Russia.

When the great Irish Famine of 1846-47 occurred, Friends committees raised £200,000, largely from non-Quaker sources, and a group of English and Irish Friends distributed relief. In the American Civil War relief was administered and educational work done for the Negro freedmen as already mentioned. The Franco-Prussian War of 1870 wrought great devastation and misery in France. About forty English Quakers distributed relief supplies including seeds and cattle. At this time the red and black "Quaker star" was first used as a distinguishing mark. Today this emblem designates Quaker Service of all kinds all over the world.

In the Boer War of 1900 Friends sent a delegation to South Africa that succeeded in arousing British feeling against the crowded concentration camps in which Boer families were con­fined. This resulted in improved conditions. The subsequent relief included the restoration of the. Boers' most treasured heir­looms, their family Bibles.

World Wars I and II witnessed an expansion of Quaker relief which eventually included work in all the countries affected by the wars. The introduction of universal military conscription into England and the United States led Friends everywhere into an effort to substitute relief work for military service. There was a general determination to make personal sacrifices as great as those made by persons who supported or took part in the war. This work began in England in 1914 with the "Emergency Corn‑

172 FRIENDS FOR 300 'i.&ns

mittee for the Assistance of Germans, Austrians, Hungarians, and Turks in Distress," "The War-Victims Relief Committee ," and the "Friends Ambulance Unit" which took care of men wounded in battle. This Unit was too closely tied to the war effort to receive the official endorsement of the Society of Friends, but the larger part of its members were Friends. Soon after the United States entered the war in 1917 the "American Friends Service Commit­tee" was formed to assist conscientious objectors and, send relief workers abroad. Later, conscientious objectors were furloughed by the government to the Committee for relief work in France. The devastation caused by the war in France had already led English Friends to send workers there. These were joined by the Americans. This work consisted of relief and reconstruction operations of various kinds, including medical help and the revival of agriculture. At the same time a number of English and American Friends were sent to Russia to administer aid.

Such were the beginnings of a service which has continued to, widen and has carried, and is carrying, Friends into many parts of the world on errands of mercy. At one time a million children were being fed in Germany. World War II added China and India to the countries assisted. Home service was begun in 1920 by the American Friends Service Committee. In the thirties Friends helped the stricken coal miners in West Virginia and elsewhere. This beginning has expanded into a great variety of undertakings, internes in industry, work camps, community inte­gration of minorities, and, in the basic sense, adult education through institutes and seminars. Today in many parts of the world there are centers in which, by action and word, a spirit of reconciliation is demonstrated.

This long story of Friends Service has been told in many books and pamphlets. In all their work the Quakers have been sup­ported and assisted by a much larger group of like-minded persons outside their membership for whom they have acted as instruments and with whom they have collaborated. The primary motivation of this relief work is humanitarianism, the removal of suffering and the repair of destruction. Secondarily, it is a form of preaching through action. War creates ill will which is the seed of more war. Relief work creates good will which is a seed of

THE MEETING AND THE WORLD 173

peace. War, unlike floods, earthquakes and famines, is a man­made evil which results in wrong human attitudes—hatred, greed and fear. These attitudes can be changed by a practical demon­stration of their opposites, love, self-sacrifice and confidence. Friends may take their share of responsibility in repairing dam­ages caused by the convulsions of nature, but their main concern is to create ties of good will and understanding in areas of con­flict between nations, races and classes.

Another motivation of Quaker relief work is a sense of guilt. As an integral part of a society so constructed that war recurs, the Quakers must assume a share of responsibility for the causes of war. If this responsibility cannot be avoided, it may be partially atoned for by attempting to remedy the evils caused by war. A relief worker who believes in his own goodness because of his superior principles has not faced the real facts of the situation. Woolman deals with this problem:

Where men profess to be so meek and heavenly minded and to have their trust so firmly settled in God that they cannot join in wars and yet by their spirit and conduct in common life manifest a con­trary disposition, their difficulties are great at such a time.2'

Quaker relief workers have received maintenance, but no salary. They are expected to live as near the standard of living of those whom they help as health and efficiency permit. They become, as far as possible, members of the community in which they find themselves and 'share in its problems and activities. In France, for example, the members of the Unit ploughed in the fields beside the peasants and built houses in co-operation with them. There is a consistent effort by such companionship to avoid the sense of help handed down, though this is difficult to avoid, especially in the distribution of food and clothing. Quaker relief workers are in the main nonprofessional, that is, they are not necessarily technically trained social workers. This helps to close the gap between them and those whom they help. They leave positions at home, spend one or two years in the field and return to the work they left. Thus the nonprofessional character of the religion of the Society of Friends is carried over, as far as possible, into its humanitarian work. Another policy which distinguishes

174 FRIENDS FOR 300 YEAR

the Quaker relief team is the effort made to be absolutely im­partial and to distribute help regardless of race, nationality, religion or political opinion. Thus in the Spanish Civil War, help was given on both sides of the battle line in spite of private feel­ings which tended to sympathize with the Loyalists. Although many workers in Friends Service are not Friends, the Quaker type of meeting for worship and the Quaker method of arriving at decisions prevails.

Friends Service is a demonstration of all four of the primary social doctrines. It demonstrates community because it endeavors to unite the whole human race into one interdependent com­munity; it demonstrates equality because of its impartiality; it demonstrates simplicity because of the standard of living re­quired of its workers; and it demonstrates harmony by its main objective—the promotion of peace.

CHAPTER 9 The Four Periods of Quaker History

and Their Relation to the Mystical, the

Evangelical, the Rational and the Social

Forms of Religion

The history of the Society of Friends falls into four periods which are marked, conveniently though only approximately, by the turn of the centuries. These periods can be designated as follows:

1. The heroic or apostolic period, about 1650-1700

2. The period of cultural creativeness, about 1700-1800

3. The period of conflict and decline, about 1800-1900

4. The period of modernism, from 1900—.

These four periods represent four stages through which Quak­erism in different areas has passed, is passing or will probably pass. The transition from one stage to the next takes place grad­ually. Changes occur in different places at different times and to different degrees. Some small areas of Quakerism are still in the second period which in their case can hardly be called crea­tive, though it follows the form of the old creative epoch; others, more extensive, are still in the third period, the time of conflict and decline. Perhaps the dates suggested fit the Philadelphia experience more closely than that of any other area.

These four periods differ from one another primarily in the proportion in which four different elements or four different manifestations of religion are emphasized: mysticism, evangel-175

Brinton Ch 7 The Meeting Community

 CHAPTER 7 The Meeting Community

The Quaker meeting with its double function of worship and business constitutes a community. If it carries out its functions successfully, it becomes a well-integrated group in which the in­dividual is united to the whole as a cell is united to an organism. "Organism" is a figure of speech used to suggest the kind of unity which exists in a group of free self-conscious personalities

Obviously, this is different from the coherence which exists within a biological organism where individuality and freedom of the parts is nonexistent. A unity based not only on a single free choice at the beginning, but on a continued series of free choices, is an achievement which can take place most easily in a comparatively small group. Having been achieved there, it can then be carried over more readily by the same individuals into a larger group. The habits of behavior formed in the small group inevitably spread to wider associations. -

The family, for example, is a small group which can be a valuable training ground for right behavior in a larger com­munity. The members of a normal family co-operate with one another and share equally the family resources, the weak being entitled to receive what they require on the same terms as the strong. The food placed on the table is distributed according to need, not power to seize it. This kind of behavior differs from that of the competitive world. For example, in an area where oil is discovered, everyone seizes as much as he can regardless of other persons. Yet the difference between the code of behavior in the family and the code of behavior outside it is mitigated by the fact that the habits of co-operation and sharing found within the family frequently continue to be exercised when its [118]members go out into the world. In similar fashion, a religious group may so conduct its affairs that the habit of behavior formed within it as a direct result of its doctrines and habits may find expression beyond its borders. The early Christian Church did not condemn slavery. But when Paul wrote to Philemon asking him to take back his escaped slave who had become a Christian, he said that master and slave were equal within the Church. This equality within the Church led Christianity eventually to condemn all slavery.

Participation in the activities of a group is the oldest and most effective form of education. It is older than the human race. Beginning at birth, it can continue to the end. Such an edu­cation of the whole person in body, mind and spirit becomes deeply ingrained in character. By participation in group activities the members learn by living rather than by formal instruction, though instruction may prove to be an important part of life it­self. Participation in life as a whole reaches down below the level of ideas to the deeper feelings which move the will. Ideas in themselves, received in the schoolroom or from books, have little motive power unless they are linked to this deeper process. They require reinforcement through activity. If the bridge between thought and action is crossed often enough, thought and action become integrated and the result is training in its most profound and enduring form.

a]The Origin of Social Concerns

The meaning of the group in Quaker practice can be suggested by a diagram. 

  • Light from God streams down into the waiting group. 
  • This Light, if the way is open for it, produces three re­sults: 
  • unity, knowledge and power. 
  • As a result we have the kind of behavior which exists as an ideal in a meeting for worship and a meeting for business. 
  • Because of the characteristics of the Light of Christ, the resulting behavior can be described in a general way by the four words Community, Harmony, Equality and Simplicity, though these are not to be taken as all-inclusive. 
  • These four types of behavior which are closely interrelated, being first generated in the intimate circle, become applied more widely as its members go out beyond its limits to the larger world.
  •  The members acquire habits in the meeting which are inevitably re­tained, at least to some degree, in whatever business they may engage. 
  • But because these habits can be acted upon with less opposition in the small, congenial, comparatively homogeneous group than in society at large where conditions are less favorable, there will probably be a certain adjustment and compromise. 
  • Some members, more devoted than others, will attempt to avoid compromise.

The Light Within

+ Concernsoriginating in the Quaker Community as a result of the impact of the Light Within become directed toward Society at Large. 

Concerns may result from the impact of Authority or Reason though this is not typical of the Quaker method.

Image

---

In a vital and dynamic meeting a concern may arise first in a meeting for worship or for business which is at the outset thought of as applicable only 'to the membership. It may, how­ever, eventually emerge as an activity to be performed outside the little group in the field of society at large. Thus a sense of responsibility for extending economic aid to fellow members who need it should become a concern to extend economic aid to all who are in need. A habit of dealing with members of the meeting in a peaceable manner should similarly become a habit of dealing with others in a peaceable manner.‑[121]

A requirement may originate, not as a result of the Light Within operating upon the soul of an individual, but through the compelling power of some authority or as a result of a logical process of reasoning. This would be a process different from the usual Quaker method. Authority and reason are indispen­sable supplements to inward guidance. Their absence would indicate a state of ineptitude. But by themselves they are not enough. To take a specific example, if someone should refuse to be drafted into the army, this refusal 

  • might arise out of obedience to the Sermon on the Mount, or 
  • it might arise out of a philosophic or scientific theory, or a knowledge of instances of the futility of war. 
  • It might also arise out of the guidance of conscience illumined by the divine Light while waiting upon God.

The Quaker stresses the guidance of the enlightened conscienc. He relies upon illumined reason and authority as checIcs.  His position may appear, even to himself, to be contrary to reason and to respected authorities. But if  the Ligit in his con­science gives him a clear leading, he must follow it as the primary organ for ascertaining religious and moral truth. 

Con­science is cognitive in its field as thought is in its field. The psychologist Jung, in describing the principal mental functions which he calls Thought, Feeling, Intuition and Sensation, lists thought and feeling as cognitive. 

Feeling gives us our knowledge of values. This agrees with the Quaker point of view. In a Quaker meeting for worship or for business a speaker seldom remarks "I think" but generally "I feel." If he agrees with another speaker, he will probably say, "That is in accord with my feel­ings," or, "I would feel most comfortable [or perhaps 'most easy'] if that were done." 

A sense of inward tension and discomfort is frequently interpreted as a sign that something needs to be done. 

A feeling of inward peace is a sign that the right thing has been done. 

Authority and reason are transferable  tests 

Because of this they are essential in convincing other persons. 

Feelings arising out of conscientious scrrp!es cannot be transferred from one person to another any more than aesthetic judgments can be transferred. 

But the conscience of another person can be appealed to on the theory that the same Light is within all men to illumine and bring all consciences into agreement. [122]

 In this way the Light in one person will "answer" the Light in another, to use George Fox's figure of speech. This kind of "answering" can take place under any conditions but most effectively in a small worshiping group.

In addition to authority and reason there is also the pragmatic test

An action is judged to be good if its results are good. This irhas some affinity to that of reason because the results of a proposed action must be viewed in the light of similar past actions. Reason makes the comparison and concludes that if the results were good or bad in the past, they will be good or bad in the future if the conditions are the same. 

The pragmatic test also has its roots in feeling, for it is by feeling that we judge whether results are really good or bad. If we used only the prag­matic test, we might fail in decision because immediate results would have to be judged in terms of their results, and these results in terms of further results, and so on without end. Since no one can foresee a final result, some test not wholly pragmatic is essential.

That Friends do not, as a rule, judge the merits of a proposed action in terms of apparent consequences may be illustrated by two examples. William Allen, highly successful both as a scientist and businessman, writes in his diary:

I think I have been instructed not to look for great things in reli­gious matters but to go on in the simplicity, to labor more and more to get rid of all reasonings and the apprehension of consequences.'

John Woolman writes in his Journal:

Travelling up and down of late I have renewed evidences that to keep pace with duty and to be content with the allotments of Divine Providence, is a most necessary and useful lesson for me to be learn­ing; looking less at the effects of my labor than at the pure motion and reality of the concern, as it arises from heavenly love.2

In seeking guidance regarding a proposed course of action, we find ourselves using four main tests: authority, reason, results and intuitive feeling. If the four agree, we have a secure basis for action. 

In using authority we appeal to the insights of persons past and present whose judgment we respect. As most of our knowledge is based, not on our own experience, but on the ex­perience of others, this test is probably the criterion most often used. A scientist, for example, can test very little of his scientific knowledge by his own experiments. He must accept as fact what he has learned from the experiments of others. In the same way the Christian will depend on the insights of the writers of Scripture, the Church Fathers, the outstanding persons of his own religious group, and others whom he respects as being of saintly character. Important also is the test of reason which, as has been pointed out, is the test of consistency. The pragmatic test is also helpful. "By their fruits ye shall know them."

But it can be shown that ultimately in the field of religion and morality the test of feeling must be trusted. By feeling in this field is meant our intuitive apprehension of the Light of Truth. By feeling we accept some authorities and reject others. By feeling we accept certain premises as a basis for our reasoning and reject others. By feeling we accept certain results as good and reject others as bad. When early Friends placed the Light above Scriptures, Church, Reason and short-range experience of results, they assumed a tenable position.

The position of the Quakers would have been more difficult in practice if they had based the test of feeling on a purely individual apprehension of truth. In appealing to the group to confirm each one's inward leading, a useful check is provided. Nevertheless, if the individual feels clearly and strongly that the group is wrong, he may be obliged to ignore its judgment.

Instances of appeals to the group, followed by disregard of all other tests but that of feeling, not infrequently appear in the Quaker Journals. An event in the life of Thomas Shillitoe will serve as an example. Traveling in the ministry in Europe, he came to the German city of Hamburg in 1821 and found the Sabbath observed as a time of merry-making with scant attention to religion. He had no friends in the city and did not know the language, but he resolved after a time of inward retirement to attempt to remedy the situation. He prepared an address to the people of the city and forwarded it to London for the approval or disapproval of Friends there. [124]


Finally, his address came back, translated into German, with the approval of London Friends. He himself aided in distributing the appeal throughout the city. His arrest brought about some desirable publicity for his concern and an opportunity to speak with public officials. His main objective was constantly present to his mind—that "I should be clear in the sight of my Maker was all I was to aim at." When he was put in prison, he said, "My heart leaped for joy to feel myself once more so much of a free man." This freedom resulted from the sense that he was no longer carrying the burden of an unfulfilled requirement. Thomas Shillitoe left Hamburg with a feeling of inward peace in spite of the fact that his work appar­ently had no result. He had followed feeling when his reason might have told him that his mission was hopeless. He had secured the approval of his meeting and his conscience. The results could be left to God.

One more instance may suffice. In 1762 John Woolman felt "a motion of love" to visit Indians two hundred miles from Phila­delphia because "some of them were measurably acquainted with that Divine Power which subjects the rough and froward will of the creature."3 He laid the matter before his Monthly, Quarterly and General Spring Meeting and secured approval. Before start­ing, he learned that the Indians were on the warpath. He writes:

My heart was turned to the Lord for his Heavenly instruction. In this conflict of Spirit there were great searchings of heart and strong cries to the Lord that no motion might be in the least degree attended to but that of the pure Spirit of Truth.'

Proceeding on the journey he saw many signs of war with the English. Though in danger of being captured and tortured, he writes that "the Lord in great mercy gave me a resigned heart in which I found quietness." A satisfying meeting was held with the Indians. John Woolman returned home safely. It would be difficult to say just what was accomplished by such a journey, but John Woolman never for a moment doubted his leading. The evidence of right guidance was the constant inward sense of peace and resignation, not the results in more visible terms.

[125]When John Woolman was a member of a committee to per­suade Friends who held slaves to give them their freedom, his appeal had little to do with the evil results of slavery, though mention of these was not wholly omitted. The appeal was to the feelings of the slaveholder. Did he feel comfortable in holding these men and women in bondage? The slaveholder often had to admit that he did not feel comfortable about it. He could reason that he needed slaves in order to compete successfully with others who held slaves, and he could quote authorities, even scriptural authorities, in support of slaveholding, but his feelings, if he admitted the truth, did not give him inward peace.

The Quaker methods for guiding conduct were implemented by two devices:

  1.  committees to visit those who fell short of the standard, and
  2.  the Queries. 

In the early years of the eighteenth century the visiting committees were gradually replaced by over­seers appointed to exercise pastoral care, especially in matters involving morals. The overseers (or special committees appointed for the purpose) usually visited every family in the meeting at least once a year. 

Moral offenders were lovingly and sympatheti­cally labored with and, if brought to repentance, were asked to make an acknowledgment of their error in writing and to bring it in person to the monthly meeting. If the offender refused to make an acknowledgment, the committee continued its labors for at least a year. If no signs of change or repentance were ob­served and the offense was sufficiently serious, the. offender was then dropped from membership by the meeting.

The overseers were guided by the Queries, which were ques­tions answered by the lower meetings to the higher meetings at first vocally by appointed representatives and later, after 1755, in writing. 

Answers to the Queries were expected to reveal short­comings in the membership. Thus the Quarterly Meeting could learn the state of the Monthly Meetings, and the Yearly Meet­ing could learn the state of the Quarterly Meetings and extend advice and help as might be required. The Queries were a kind of group confessional by which every individual and every meet­ing was able at regular intervals of a year or less to check actual conduct against an ideal standard of behavior. The Queries covered all that was expected of the consistent Friend. They were frequently revised as new moral insights prevailed or old testi­monies become obsolete.*

° A modem set of Queries appears in the Appendix.

[126]

The following entry in the minutes of Sadsbury Monthly Meet­ing in 1780 will indicate the procedure:

The committee appointed in that weighty service of reformation with respect to due and wakeful attendance at our religious meetings, plainness of speech, behavior, apparel and household furniture, with other deficiencies complained of in the Queries, report they attended to the service and find that there appears a willingness in most to endeavor to remedy deficiencies; and many things that appeared superfluous have been removed.

To be successful such committees must proceed in the right spirit. Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in 1719 declared:

It is the advice of this meeting that in speaking to or dealing with any, it be done in a Christian spirit of love and tenderness, laboring in meekness, by laying the evil before them, to bring such persons to a sense of it in themselves, that they may be restored if possible. 

And although such as transgress or lose their hold on Truth are apt to be testy, while they are in that condition, yet we ought patiently and meekly to instruct and advise them, that so we may not only have a testimony of peace within ourselves, but that it may likewise so affect the spirit of the Friend spoken to, that he may be sensible we have performed a truly Christian duty and an office of brotherly love toward him.

b] Community

The Quaker meeting used to be, and to some extent still is, both a religious and an economic unit. The members sometimes found themselves dependent on one another for material support. This was especially important in the early days when the Quakers lost much of their property through fines and imprisonment. Some were dismissed by their employers because they became Quakers. Others found themselves engaged in businesses which had to be abandoned because of their principles; for example, employment which had to do with luxuries or equipment for war. This eco­nomic interdependence still exists to some extent in Quaker meet­ings and continues to be the subject of an annual Query.

In 173tTi f persons entitled to support was drawn up by each meeting. This list constituted the first list of members and introduced the concept of a definite membership. [127]

Since the children of members would also be in need of help, their names ap­peared on the list. This occasioned the provision for birthright membership. Birthright membership results from the assumption that a meeting is like a large family whose members are depend­ent on one another, not only for material necessities, but for in­tellectual and spiritual well-being. Children are born into the meeting in a sense similar to that in which they are born into a family. As in the case of the family, they are free to detach them­selves at the age of maturity. Since they are children of the meet­ing as well as children of their parents, their education is a meeting responsibility. If the parents cannot pay for the educa­tion of the children, the meeting is expected to do so, or at least to assume the responsibility. That the children are considered members of the meeting community from the start is an important factor in their education. As has already been pointed out, par­ticipation in community activities is the most potent form of edu­cation. Birth, marriage, death, all the important events and crises of life, are concerns of the meeting and call for its care.

As membership in the meeting is membership in a community, the test of membership is compatibility with the meeting com­munity. Members are either born into the meeting or join it be­cause they desire to fit into the pattern of behavior peculiar to the meeting and find themselves able to do so. The test of mem­bership is not a particular kind of religious experience, nor ac­ceptance of any particular religious, social or economic creed. Sincere religious experience and right religious belief are both important, but they develop in the course of participation in the activities of the meeting. Anyone who can become so integrated with a meeting that he helps the whole and the whole helps him is qualified to become a member.

The following selections from early minutes are typical of many that indicate the character of the economic interdependence de­veloped in the meeting community:

  • Ordered Caleb Pusey and Walter Fawcett take care to hire a cow for the Widow Riidiman and the Quarterly Meeting is obliged to answer them SOs. [Chester, 1689]128
  • Information being given this meeting that W.P. is very poor and in necessity, the meeting orders A.B. to get a good pair of leather britches and a good warm coat and waist coat, one pair of stockings and shoes and make a report of the charge to the next meeting. [Falls, 1701]
  • The condition of J.C. (a Friend of Bucks County) being laid before the meeting, having lost by fire to the value of 162 pounds, this meet­ing orders that a collection be settled in each particular First Day's meeting and two appointed to receive them. [Chester, 1691]
  • The friends appointed to make Inspection concerning Mary Moot report she bath a right to our meeting and also is in real need of relief, we therefore recommend her to the Friends appointed for the care of the poor of this meeting as a proper object thereof. [Concord, 1768]

The following minute indicates the care which Friends took of those not in membership with them who suffered from the block­ade of the New England coast during the Revolutionary war:

  • The Friends appointed to take in subscriptions for the relief of the poor and destitute in New England reported they have taken in subscriptions in the amount of £33 14s. [Darby, 1775]

Because of its responsibilities in taking care of the poor, the meeting was alert to prevent poverty. It watched over its mem­bers to see that they were not taking undue risks in business and not spending more than they earned. "Are Friends careful to live within the bounds of their circumstances and to keep to modera­tion in their trade or business?" was long an annual Query. The following minute of a Yearly Meeting was issued in 1710:

It is the advice of this meeting to the several Quarterly Meetings, that care may be taken that substantial Friends be appointed to visit every family among us where they think there is occasion to suspect they are going backward in their worldly estate.

That the meeting exercised oversight over the members as all parts of one family may be indicated by the following acknowl­edgments of error:

  • William Williams, son of Robert, and Joan, daughter of James Pugh declared their intentions of marriage with each other before this meeting and he acknowledged his misstep in proposing his mind to the young woman before he had her father's consent, but is allowed to proceed. [Goshen, 1723] [129]
  • Whereas I was forward and hasty in making suit to a young woman after the death of my wife, having made some proceedings in that way in less than four months, which I am now sensible was wrong. [New Garden, 17401

In the early eighteenth century business meetings were at­tended only by those who because of the excellence of their judg­ment were invited to attend so that aid to the poor, personal de­linquencies and quarrels between members which ought not to be made public could be discussed within closed doors. Today, as the business meetings are open to all members and to the public as well, personal matters are considered more privately in special committees. For this reason examples of meeting action in such matters can only be found in the older minutes.

The meeting community is probably more needed today as a stabilizing element in society than ever before. The family is small and often unable to withstand the storms which sweep over it in our unstable economic system. This was less true in the days of the large, patriarchal family, which often included grandparents, aunts and uncles as well as a number of children. For the unmar­ried woman the Society of Friends has always had significant work of an educational, social or religious nature to claim her full attention.

Today the state is assuming the function of providing a degree of economic security. But the state is so large that its functioning is impersonal. It may provide economic maintenance, but it is not in a position to offer the psychological support which is equally necessary. The family being too small a unit and the state too large, the religious group, the meeting or church, in which all the members have a strong interest in one another's welfare, may be able to fulfill the need. Within such a group the required aid can be extended with the same warmth and understanding as within a family. More groups of this size and kind, having a cer­tain degree of economic interdependence, are urgently needed at present to offset the increasing atomization and disintegration of our social structure. Due to the disappearance of the village form of life and of the even older types of multiple family life, modern society finds itself to be an incoherent mass of lonely individuals. [180]

c] Harmony

The means of obtaining harmony within the meeting have a!-ready been discussed in connection with the Quaker method of reaching decisions in the meeting for business. 

By harmony is meant a pacifist technique by which unity of action is reached without the use of any form of coercion, such as the exercise of personal authority or the prevailing of a majority over a minority. The appeal to the Light Within as the source of unity does not imply the victory of a person or a party over another person or party, but the victory of Truth which is often on the side of the weak.

The Query which has been longest in continuous use by the Society of Friends is this: "Are love and unity maintained amongst you?" It dates from 1682. Any quarrels or disagreements within the group become an object of concern to the meeting and the old Query, 

"Where differences arise are endeavors made speedily to end them?" could usually be answered in the affirmative. 

It was contrary to the Discipline for any Quaker to settle his differ­ence with another Quaker by a lawsuit. He must appeal to the meeting. A few examples will illustrate the action of the meeting in settling differences.

  1. Considered and agreed upon by the hearing of differences between Joseph Richards and Charles Ascham about the admeasure of land—that the said Joseph shall pay Charles for the same without any further disturbance. The same is ended between them and the money is paid in the presence of the meeting. [Concord, 1684]
  2. The difference between Joseph Richards and William Woodmansey offered to the meeting in order to a composure of the same. William Woodmansey acknowledges he spoke foolishly in comparing him to a London pickpocket and the like and that he was grieved and sorry for the same, which Joseph Richards did accept of, desiring and in­tending hereby that there be an end of strife from the beginning to this day. [Chester, 1686]
  3. Friends, whereas I contended with my neighbor William Shipley for what I apprehended to be my right, by endeavoring to turn a certain stream of water into its natural course, till it arose to a personal difference, in which dispute I gave way to warmth of temper so as to put my friend William into the pond, for which action of mine, being contrary to the good order of Friends, I am sorry and desire through Divine Assistance to live in unity with him for the future. From your friend Joshua Way. [Wilmington, 1751]131

Sometimes the meeting did not believe the claim of Friends who had quarreled that they had composed their differences.

  • It is our opinion that Concord Friends have been put by their proper business in the case of John Larkin and Robert Pyle by giving way to their outward appearance of love and friendship being restored between them, when their hearts have been evilly affected toward each other. And, as we fear the testimony of Truth has suffered by too much delay, we think that unless something more of love appears between them than has hitherto done, Friends should testify against them.

This report was signed by a committee of twelve of Concord Monthly Meeting in 1769 after laboring with the offenders for two years. Both were in consequence disowned from membership.

d] Equality

Equality was the earliest Quaker social testimony. Even before the Quakers became pacifists Quaker soldiers were dismissed from the army because they refused to treat their officers as superiors. This testimony may have been in part an inheritance from the Levellers and Diggers, pre-Quaker groups with strong equali­tarian leanings. Lilburne, the leader of the Levellers, became a Quaker, but Winstanley, leader of the Diggers, did not. Except for his communism, Winstanley's opinions coincided with those of George Fox.

The Quaker doctrine of equality does not mean equality of ability, economic resources or social status. It means equality of respect and the resulting absence of all words and behavior based on class, racial or social distinctions. It did not, for example, place on an economic equality employer and employee or master and servant. 

The Quakers agreed with the Puritans that each person must follow his vocation, a religious word indicating God's call to a particular kind of occupation appropriate to one's ability and interest. The doctrine of equality tended to eliminate the sense of superiority or inferiority attaching to different callings.

[132]

Advices concerning the treatment of servants appear as early as 1656 in statements on church discipline Dewsbury writes in a letter that "now mistress and maid are to be hail fellows well met." Some of the greatest of the early Quaker women ministers were maidservants. One such was Mary Fisher who addressed the Sultan of Turkey and his Court, and Dorothy Waugh who was jailed by Peter Stuyvesant for preaching in the streets of New York. Servant and master addressed each other by their given names and servants often ate at the family table.

Within the meeting equality appears in the equal opportunity for all to take part, regardless of age, sex or ability. No persons enjoy special privilege, though some, because of unusual gifts, have more weight than others in the meeting's deliberations.

Outside the meeting this doctrine brought the Quakers of an earlier time into serious disrepute, many of the prevailing cus­toms hiving as their base the highly stratified condition of English society. Friends were compelled to disregard these modes of be­havior and in consequence they often appeared rude or ill-man­nered.

Friends refused the use of titles of honor and salutations which implied that one person was superior to another. 

There were three reasons for this. 

  1. First, the Quakers wished to remove all recog­nition of social distinctions based on class or race. 
  2. Secondly, they were opposed to any form of flattery which tended to puff up self-esteem. 
  3. And, thirdly, most titles were out of harmony with the truth. Addressing a superior by the plural "you" instead of which was customary practice in the seventeenth century was given up for these reasons. 

Barclay writes of the prevailing custom of saying "you" to one person:

  • This way of speaking proceeds from a hi: and proud mind.. . be­cause that men commonly use th& sin lat.to beggars and to their servants; yea and in their prayers to Cod—so hath the pride of men Placed Cod and the beggar in the same category.5

° In America "thou" has become "thee." It is not unusual in the develop­ment of language for the accusative to replace the nominative, as, for example, "you" an accusative has replaced "ye' a nominative.

[133]

Friends might have avoided this distinction by using "you" to everyone, but that'would, with the then current norms of speech,have been considered as flattery. Also "you," being a plural, would have been considered untruthful. For similar reasons "Mister" and "Mistress" were avoided as no one used these titles to persons rated as inferior. Titles such as "Your Grace," "Your Highness," "Sir," "Your Honor," "Your Humble Servant," "The Reverend," "Your Majesty," "Your Obedient Servant," were ruled out not only as flattery, but because they were false descriptions of the person Addressed. The prefix "Saint" was omitted even in place names.

Who are they that are honorable indeed? Is it not the righteous man? Is it not the holy man? Is it not the humble hearted man, the meek-spirited man? . . . Now of these may there not be poor men, laborers, Silly fishermen?'

The "plain language" included also the designation of the names of the monthsand the days of the week by numerals rather than by their usual names which were derived in most cases from heathen deities (Ex. 23:13). At one time the adoption of the "plain language" like the adoption of the "plain dress" followed a spiritual crisis and was a symbol of the new way of life and the "taking up of the cross." Today the plain language, including the use of the accusative "thee" as a nominative, in America has be­come a sign of family intimacy and religious fellowship rather than a testimony.

The Quakers were often hailed into court for one reason or an­other. On such occasions their refusal to doff their hats as a mark of respect to the judge aroused anger and resulted in harsh treat­ment. Though they never removed their hats to any human being, in worship the head was uncovered during vocal prayer in rever­ence to Cod. Young converts appearing before their parents wear­ing their hats suffered stern rebuke and sometimes violence. This happened to young Thomas Ellwood who lost three hats in rapid succession. Sometimes the hat was quietly and deftly removed by a servant or official deputed for this act, as was the case when Stephen Grellet had an audience with the Pope. Advices issued by Yearly Meetings condemn all "bowings and scrapings" and every form of subservience whatsoever.[134]

Before the Friends freed their slaves they treated them with respect. Slaves were taken to meeting, which was against the law in the West Indies, and often their children were sent to Quaker schools along with the white children. It took Friends some time to realize that slavery was not a "calling," like that of a servant.

In general, except for a few notable exceptions, such as John Bellers who in 1695 proposed a communistic form of community life, and William Allen who- was associated itliibert Owen in the ownership of the colony in New Lanark ,7 Friends were not interested in radically altering the social order. "Any form is good if administered by good men," writes William Penn. Perhaps Friends came the nearest to being social radicals when, like John Woolman in his "Word of Remembrance to the Rich," they found the seeds of war in the love of possessions.

A recent Query is a sign of modern interest in the reform of the social order.* There are a number of examples of Quaker business­men who have introduced a considerable degree of labor par­ticipation in the management of their factories, but this has not been sufficiently extensive to merit particular attention.8 Quaker relief workers frequently try to put themselves on an equality with those among whom they labor. This is particularly true of the work camps of the American Friends Service Committee. Ra­cial equality is being slowly realized in Friends schools today, but not in all. Many Quakers have an active concern against all forms of racial discrimination. They maintain committees to seek solu­tions to this pressing problem. There is a growing endeavor to eliminate what Joseph John Gurney called "the aristocracy of the skin."9

e] Simplicity

Simplicity, the fourth aspect of the Quaker code of behavior, finds primary expression within the meeting for worship in the simple manner of waiting upon the Lord in surroundings un­adorned in respect of furnishings and architecture. 

In the eight­eenth century simplicity was insisted upon. The meeting houses of that period exhibit not only plainness but fitness, beauty and proportion. In the nineteenth century this good norm was de­parted from, but recent structures show a return to functional simplicity. While the concern for simplicity was fresh and living, its expression showed good taste, but when it became largely tra­ditional, Quaker meeting houses as well as Quaker homes and furniture degenerated in form and style.

* See Appendix, Query 7. 

Friends have had no testimony against excellence of quality. Their testimony was against superfluity in "dress, speech and be­havior."

an unnecessarily or excessively large amount or number of something

In general, Friends are not ascetics who find virtue in a mortifi­cation of the flesh. They condemned pleasure when it existed as a superfluity, interfering with more serious undertakings. The fol­lowing passage from Clarkson's Portraiture of Quakerism illus­trates this attitude:

  • Music, if it were encouraged by the Society, would be considered as depriving those of maturer years of hours of comfort which they now frequently enjoy in the service of religion. 
  • Retirement is con­sidered by the Quakers as a Christian duty. The members, therefore, of this Society are expected to wait in silence, not only in their places of worship, but occasionally in their families, or in their private chambers, in the intervals of their daily occupations, that, in stillness of heart, and in freedom from the active contrivance of their own wills, they may acquire both directions and strength for the perform­ance of the duties of life.
  •  The Quakers, therefore, are of the opinion that, if instrumental music were admitted as a gratification in leisure hours, it would take the place of many of these serious retirements and become very injurious to their interests and their character as Christians.10

The same used to be true of the arts in general. Simplicity meant the absence of all that was unnecessary, such as ornamen­tation in dress, speech, manners, architecture, house furnishings. Dispensing with that which was qualitatively and functionally good was not advocated.

There was also an economic reason for simplicity. William Penn says that "the very trimming of the vain world would clothe all the naked one."1' John Woolman writes:

  • As He is the perfection of power, of wisdom and of goodness, so I believe He bath provided that so much labor shall be necessary for men's support in this world as would, being rightly divided, be a suitable employment of their time; and that 
  • we cannot go into super­fluities nor grasp after wealth in a way contrary to His wisdom, without having connection with some degree of oppression and with that spirit which leads to self-exaltation and strife, and which frequently brings calamities on countries by parties contending about their claims. 12[136]

Luxuries and superfluities cause an increase in the amount of labor required of men. They therefore, contribute to oppression in exacting this labor, and oppression leads to self-exaltation and war. John Woolman would have had small sympathy with the modern argument that in buying luxuries people aid the poor by providing employment. He firmly believed that luxuries are a source of vanity, oppression and ultimately war. If men would remain humble and confine their desires to real needs, overwork, oppression and strife would disappear and there would be enough of the necessities of life to go around.

In his Conversations on the True Harmony of Mankind, John Woolman expresses the intimate connection between his religion and simplicity:

If I put forth my strength in any employ which I know is to support pride, I feel that it has a tendency to weaken those bands which. . . I have felt at times to bind and unite my soul in a holy fellowship with the Father, and with his Son, Jesus Christ.

From the Quaker dress all the ornamentation, so characteristic of the age of the Stuart kings, was removed. Sober-minded Puri­tans bore a similar testimony. Later the Quakers continued to dress in the fashion of an earlier time. Eventually this became standardized and was adhered to on the theory that submission to changes in fashion which compelled people to buy new clothes when they did not need them was a useless concession to worldly ways. There is nothing in Quaker theory to support the avoidance of bright colors except, perhaps, their tendency to increase self-esteem. Margaret Fox condemned what she saw to be a growing insistence on drab in the early eighteenth century.

The uniform costume which became habitual was a quick and effective way of telling the world where one stood, and some Quakers claimed that it kept them out of places where they should not go. Once having assumed the Quaker dress they felt com­pelled to live up to it. Eventually many came to recognize it as an empty form, modern dress being for the most part plain and functional.137

Simplicity in speech was also a distinguishing mark of the con­sistent Friend. Ornamental and superfluous words were omitted in speaking and writing. This gave the Quakers a reputation for bluntness. In speaking in meeting or elsewhere oratorical flour­ishes were discouraged. Attempts at fine writing are seldom found in Quaker books. Reverent restraint is always shown in speaking of the deepest religious experiences. William Penn in listing twelve characteristics of Friends gives as number eight, "They recommend silence by their example, having very few words upon all occasions."

The doctrine of simplicity or absence of superfluity is applicable to all aspects of life. Committees are appointed to see to it that plainness is observed at weddings and funerals. For more than a century tombstones were testified against as superfluous. When they came to be used as markers, they were small and inconspic­uous. In the testimony for simplicity in house furnishings the most modern usage has now come around for aesthetic reasons to the early Quaker point of view. 

Friends objected to the arts not only because they seemed useless but also because they were repre­sentations of life, which tended to take the place of life itself. The actor in a theater, for example, expresses feelings which he does not genuinely feel, and the writer of a novel gives an account of events which never took place. 

Music arouses feelings which find no outlet in action and hence may be harmful. For similar reasons St. Augustine calls singing "this contentment of the flesh, to which the soul must not be given over to be enervated."13 The arts were thought to cultivate an untrue and misleading picture of reality inclining those who follow them to live in an imaginary, unreal world. The modern motion picture is an example of an art which may have the effect of causing its viewers to live in a realm of dreams.

The early Quakers were certainly mistaken regarding the true nature of the world of imagination. Art has a reality of its own and a language of its own which can convey meanings beyond the reach of ordinary action or speech. Modern Friends do not hesitate to give to the arts their appropriate place, though long [138] disinclination to appreciate some forms of beauty has left the Society of Friends somewhat dormant aesthetically.

Since Friends condemned superfluities, Quaker businessmen could not sell them and this often limited their business severely. Tailors, hatters, booksellers, funeral directors, printers, silver­smiths and merchants were affected by this tenet. John Hall (1637-1719), a Quaker tailor, "was willing to lose all rather than his peace with the Lord."

But business itself could become a waste of time and a super­fluity if overindulged in. When its claims became too absorbing the Friend found that he could no longer attend to his religious duties. If religion was his primary interest, he reduced his busi­ness. That was most frequently true in the case of traveling min­isters. Almost all the Quaker Journals contain examples of curtail­ment of business when it had become so engrossing as to require time that properly belonged to religion.

A few examples taken from the Jcurnals will indicate the reasons for this limitation of business. Daniel Wheeler found his business as a seed merchant so prosperous that it interfered with his career as a Friend:

  • As I have from time to time endeavoured to dwell near and abide in and under the calming influence of His power, I have been led to believe that something sooner or later would be required as a sacrifice on my part. . . . I therefore fully believe that it will be most conducive to my present peace, as well as future well being, entirely to give up the trade I am at present engaged in, and retire with my family into a small compass.14

William Evans (1787-1867), when offered a partnership in a large dry goods business, refused it:

  • My present business, being small and one that I understood, was managed with ease. It required little capital and involved me in no engagements that I did not hold the means to meet; so that I was free from anxiety on that account, and at liberty to attend, unincum-bered, appointments of the Society or any impression of duty to go to a meeting that I might have. . . . It seemed that if I pursued the prospect of adopting the proposed change of business, that I should be lost to religious society and to the work of religion in my own heart. . . . I looked forward with renewed peace and satisfaction at the path and the business before me, though small, remembering that the earth is the Lord's and the cattle on a thousand hills."139

Thomas Shillitoe (1756-1836) speaks of an apprehension which at times presented to my mind that 

  • the time was fast approaching. when I must be willing to relinquish a good business and set myself more at liberty to attend to my religious duties from home. The language which my Divine Master renewedly proclaimed n the ear of my soul, was "Gather up thy wares into thy house for I have need of the residue of thy days.""'

Thomas Shillitoe bad five children to settle in life, 

  • but he left that "to the same Almighty Power who had so abundantly cared for us." Nevertheless he writes, "The prospect of relinquishing a good business was at times a close trial to my soul."

Martha Routh whose school was too large for its quarters de­scribes how she went out to-look at a larger house:

  • As I passed from room to room I was attended by a secret but clear intimation that I was not to entangle myself with a greater number of scholars than the house we already had would accommodate, so I entirely gave up the thought and found peace.17

Sometimes Quaker scholars found it necessary to reduce their studies in order to give more time to religion. William Allen, a notable scentist, writes in his Journal:

  • Rather comforted this morning, it seemed to open on my view with respect to my great attraction to natural science that when I felt it strong and likely to get the ascendency, it would be my duty to indulge less in it, abridge the time devoted to it and fast from it.'8

John Rutty, Irish physician and author of important medical books, prays:

  • Lord deliver from living to eat, drink, sleep, smoke and study.'9

Simplicity not only meant absence of superfluity in speech. It also meant genuineness and sincerity. Quakers leaned over back­wards and sometimes made themselves objects of ridicule in their efforts to tell the exact truth.

  • Fearing overstatement they resorted to understatement. 
  • Phrases like "As far as we know," "Nothing appears," were used in answering the Queries. 
  • A Friend would [140] not say, "I object," but more probably, "I cannot see my way clear to unite."

One by-product of truth-telling was the initiation of the one-price system in business. It was the custom in the seventeenth century for merchants to ask more than they expected to receive and for the customer to offer less than he expected to give. By a process of bargaining a price was agreed on. 

The Quaker stated at the outset the price which he was prepared to accept. As a re-suit Quaker business flourished. A child could be sent to make a purchase from a Quaker merchant.

The search for an understanding of the creation and insight into its beauty, sincerity and genuineness 

  • led many Quakers to scientific pursuits, particularly botany and ornithology.조류학
  • Some be­came professional scientists. 
  • Science seemed closer to reality than did art. With the exclusion of many forms of amusement, it also afforded delight. 
  • Superfluities in education were eliminated as completely as other nonessentials. 

Jonathan Dymond, the Quaker moralist, writes in 1825:

  • Science is preferable to literature, the knowledge of things to the knowledge of words.20
Verbalism and formalism were opposed in education as they were in religion. 
  • Knowledge of nature as God's creation was thought to bring man nearer to the divine than a knowledge of man's works. 

To quote Dymond again:

  • It is of less consequence to man to know what Horace wrote or to be able to criticise the Greek anthology than 
  • to know by what laws the Deity regulates the operations of nature and 
  • to know by what means those operations are made subservient to the purposes of life."

As a consequence of this scientific interest, which was a direct result of the effort to come closer to sincerity and reality, the list of Quaker scientists is a long one. 

A. Ruth Fry observes in Quaker Ways that between 1851 and 1900 in England 

  • a Quaker "had forty-six times more chance of election as a Fellow of the Royal Society than his fellow countrymen."

[141]

No testimony resulted in more suffering than the Quaker stand against judicial oaths. 

Many Friends spent long years in foul prisons and some died there in support of this testimony. 

The Quaker refused to swear for at least two reasons:

(1) swearing was contrary to the command of Christ—"Swear not at all." (Matt. 5:34)—and of James—"But above all things, my brethren, swear not" (James 5:12); 

(2) it also set up a double standard of truth, one in the courtroom and one outside it, with the implication that untruth would be uttered in the absence of an oath.

 When Quakers were brought to trial and the evidence against them was faulty or lacking, they could be tendered the oath of allegiance and imprisoned for refusing to take it. 

By refusing to take an oath, Friends were also disqualified from conforming to customs regulations, from suing for debts, from giving evidence in court, from defending titles to property, and from holding office

Penn's epigram, "People swear to the end they may speak truth; Christ would have them speak truth to the end they might not swear,"22 summed up the Quaker case. Penn points out how futile oaths had been in the past hundred years in England when each ruler required an oath for the support of a particular form of religion which was quickly renounced by many of the clergy when an oath to support another form of religion was required by the next ruler. Finally, after a long struggle, an act was passed by Parlia­ment in 1696 permitting affirmation. But a minority of Friends felt that they could not use the new formula because it contained the word "solemnly," a religious word. For twenty-five years London Yearly Meeting struggled to agree on a form of words which would satisfy everybody. This was an example of the extremely patient efforts made by a majority to satisfy a minority. Finally, in 1722 a formula was agreed upon and its enactment into law was secured.

In Pennsylvania, Penn's Charter allowed affirmation, but it was not until 1725 that a special act of the Colonial Assembly was rati­fied by the King in Council permitting a form of affirmation which satisfied all Friends. Quaker magistrates who administered oaths were disowned in the early period.

Joseph Thornton so far condemns his having administered an oath, as to declare himself determined not to accept of any office for the future which may subject him to the necessity of doing it, and that he now sees the practice inconsistent, both with the rules of the Society and the convictions of his own mind, which this Meeting agrees to accept of as satisfaction for what is past. [Middletown Monthly Meeting, 1762][142]

After the Revolutionary War laws were enacted imposing a test oath or affirmation abjuring the King and declaring allegiance to the new government. Many Friends suffered for refusing to take this oath, with the result that enforcement of the law was soon given up. Although affirmation was permitted, the Yearly Meet­ing declared, "We cannot be instrumental in setting up or pulling down any government."

In America the meeting community, acting according to a well-defined code of behavior, reached its highest development in colonial times when the number of competing interests was small and when the meetings were surrounded by a population largely Quaker. The minutes of this period contain many references to the care taken for implementing the testimony for simplicity. A few typical examples follow:

Our Women's Meeting enters a complaint against Elizabeth Ben-nell for much deviating from plainness in dress and address and frequenting places of musick and dancing. John Milhouse and Liba Ferriss are appointed to joyn women Friends in treating with her and report her disposition at next meeting. [Wilmington, 177811

N. H. bath given in a paper condemning himself for his playing at cards, which paper the meeting receives, and orders him to read the said paper in the place where he was playing, in the presence of Benjamin Fredd and William Halliday and he is desired to forebear coming to meetings of business until Friends are better satisfied with him as to conversation and sincerity to Truth. [New Garden, 17251

A Concern having taken hould of this Meeting to suppress pride and it seems to appeare somewhat in women in wearing of hoopes pettecouts which is a grate truble to many friends minds and it is the unanimous sense of this Meeting that none amongst us be in the practis thereof that all our Overseers and other solled friends do inspect into their members and where any appeare to be guilty do deal with them and discharg them either in that of hoops or other indecent dresses. [Concord, 1739][143]

On two occasions, 1695 and 1723, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting issued warnings to its members to keep clear of all astrologers sorcerers or anyone professing to practice the black arts. Acknowl­edgments of error were required of all who had recourse to such persons. Joseph Walter offered an acknowledgment "for going to a man to be informed concerning my horse. I can truly say I had no desire he should make use of any bad art in that affair" (Con­cord, 1738).

From the earliest days the Quaker meetings were swift to deal with members who used intoxicating beverages to excess or who were engaged in manufacturing or selling them. The following Query was answered beginning in 1755:

Are Friends careful to avoid the excessive use of spirituous liquors, the unnecessary frequenting of taverns and places of diversion and to keep to true moderation and temperance on account of births, mar­riages, burials and other occasions?

This Query was gradually modified in the direction of greater strictness. "Spirituous liquors" was changed to all liquors. The in-elusion of all liquors in the Query was brought about in Philadel­phia by a revolt in 1874 of the young men against the older men on the facing benches of the meeting. Joshua L. Baily, writing of this, says: "It was like the House of Commons against the House of Lords and the Commons prevailed."23 Finally, but not until near the beginning of the twentieth century, was the Query ap­plied to total abstinence.

The ancient doctrine of simplicity might be applied today to diminish the superfluous activities which prevent leisure and re­laxation. The multiplication of time-saving gadgets seems, para­doxically, to increase the general busyness and complexity of life. The baton of some invisible conductor seems to be gradually in­creasing the tempo of life. The solution, as the sages and seers of all the great religions have pointed out, is not to increase our at­tainments but to decrease our desires; in other words, to follow the path of simplicity.

-