Quakers

part 2 The Foundation Years. (approx. 1650 to 1690)

The history of any new movement and, in particular, of the Quaker movement, concentrates to a great extent on those individuals who were responsible for the beginning and maintaining of the work, and without whom the enterprise might well have foundered. There are dangers, however, in concentrating too much on biographical details. For one thing it is possible to idolise these pioneers - to put them on to saintly pedestals. There were indeed many courageous and spiritual women and men in those days; I intend in the next chapter to say something of their work and influence; but we should not live in the past or attempt to copy it. This has been well said by Elton Trueblood in his book "The People called Quakers" (p.l9):- "The past cannot be repeated and ought not to be repeated even if it were possible.

What is important is that the vision of greatness demonstrated in an earlier time may help man and women of this generation to know how to discover the secret of an equal vitality, with relevance to their contemporary situation." Furthermore, by concentrating too much on details of individuals, it is possible to lose sight of the general situation; how it may have appeared to people living at that time who were outside the movement, or how it may appear to those like ourselves of a later generation. So I hope in this chapter to give some sort of over-view of events and ideas; to pose and possibly to answer some further questions such as:- "What were the Quakers trying to say?", "Why did so many people listen and what sort of people were they?", "Why did they meet with such opposition?"

We must always remember that the Quakers were people of their times and that some understanding of those times is necessary for understanding the Quakers themselves and what happened to them. Although the Quaker movement had no recognisable beginning until about 1650, we must start by looking at the previous century, namely, in "Good Queen Bess's Glorious Days". They are glorious enough as they are portrayed in the school history books: how she defeated the Spanish Armada; how she put the Church of England on a firm foundation. But it was not so glorious if you happened to disagree with her politically or religiously (the two were closely connected). History books remind us of the executions and martyrdoms during the reign of her half sister Mary ("Bloody Mary") but say little about those in the reign of Elizabeth herself. There were probably about as many, although they were spread over a longer period.

It has been said that during her reign freedom of opinion may have been permitted, but there was no freedom of religious observance. Of the several forms of deviation from orthodoxy two have special significance as having a particular place in the Quaker explosion of the next century. These are the Puritans and the Separatists. The Puritans have had a bad press (as did the Pharisees of New Testament times). They did develop a rigidity and a fanaticism; as we know, many of them in the 17th century were iconoclastic, delighting in knocking off the heads of statues considered to be idolatrous. Still, basically they stood for a "purer", more spiritual, religion than was to be found generally among the Church and clergy of the late Tudor times. They aimed at a regeneration not only of religion, but also of personal morals and behaviour. It was only later that this developed into political resistance to the established Church. The term "Separatists" refers more to groups of free-thinking people than to any organised movement. These groups would include many who are referred to as Anabaptists or Mennonites, some of whose ideas had much in common with Quakers later on. They were forced to be in a silent minority and, as a result, many looked for support to the Low Countries; as has been mentioned, it was from there that the "Mayflower" expedition in 1620 was initiated.

"The Quaker Explosion"

This is a somewhat dramatic expression to apply to the beginning of the Quaker movement, but it is not inappropriate. Before 1650 the Quakers were comparatively unknown; in a year or two they seemed to be all over the place. We hear how George Fox saw "a great people to be gathered" and this "people" included Puritans, Separatists, Seekers and, presumably, others without label. Among all these, what was there in common to make them feel that Fox had just what they wanted? The answer is probably that they were looking for a spiritual religion, rather than the religion of conformity which was insisted upon by Elizabeth and also under the early Stuarts. There was resentment against ecclesiastical authority and so a readiness to listen to Fox's assurance that there was only one authority - namely Christ himself; and that this authority was to be known directly in the human heart. The message that "Christ has come to teach his people himself" may be called the slogan of the early Quakers. The "Quaker Explosion" was made all the more easy by the already well established custom of listening to visiting preachers. It was a kind of public entertainment to gather to listen to sermons and to enter into religious debates. It is traditionally reported that there were over 1000 people present to listen to George Fox, when he preached from his rock "pulpit" above Sedbergh on his way to Swarthmoor in 1652. This visit to Swarthmoor Hall was critical in the history of Quakerism. Margaret Fell was a "Separatist" at heart; she had already welcomed visiting preachers at the Hall and was emotionally ready to listen to George Fox, when she arrived home one day to find him visiting at Swarthmoor. The really important factor was the attitude of her husband, Judge Fell, who refused to accept the verdict of friends who met him on his home across Grange sands with the alarming news that his wife had been "bewitched" by Fox. He made Fox welcome and later permitted the Quakers to use the Hall as a meeting place. His influence and status, not only locally but also nationally, ensured that this was one place where they were free from persecution and where they were able to consolidate their strength. --

THE YEARS OF OPPOSITION AND PERSECUTION -

(a) Under the Commonwealth. George Fox had already met with opposition and indeed with imprisonment before he visited Swarthmoor and the nationwide spread of the Quaker movement began. In 1649 he was imprisoned at Nottingham for interrupting a church service (if he had waited until the end, he could have had his say without infringing the law!); in 1651 he was imprisoned at Derby under a new Blasphemy Law. This pattern of opposition and frequent imprisonment developed increasingly when the movement spread after 1652. In fact, like most vigorous movements based on deeply held convictions, the early Quakers invited opposition. Although they were a "peaceable people", they were not "Quiet" in a worldly sense. Many spoke loud and long and wrote in the same manner. Confrontation and vituperation were common in 17th century religious writings and the Quakers did not lag behind. Those of the present day who uphold the value of "conflict" would find much to support their views in the writings of these early Quakers! They were a very determined people and their determination was inevitably seen by their opponents as obstinacy - (the distinction between determination and obstinacy is a highly subjective one). Nevertheless, it was this steadfastness which eventually enabled the Quakers to survive as a group. Doubtless, they were frequently infuriating. They were full of confidence that they possessed the "Truth of God"; and they were not slow to point out that others were in darkness. Above all, they refused to give in to violent treatment; a response which always brings out the worst in those in power. Still, it is matter of some surprise to learn the extent of the hatred and brutality which these first generation Quakers engendered.

They encountered this from the magistrates and from the judges, from the prison warders and, in a less physical manner from many of the clergy. The crimes they were charged with were such things as blasphemy and disturbing the peace, but their offences were really against the authority of those in charge locally. There seems to have been little direction from the State Commissioners for this ruthless persecution. Cromwell, who was ruling until his death in 1658, did have some understanding of the Quakers. Fox met him in 1656 and in each of the following years; Cromwell listened to him when Fox told him of the persecution of the Quakers and also, apparently, when Fox urged him not to accept the Crown which was being offered him. Still, Cromwell seems not to have been able to do anything about the harassment at the local level and so this continued. This period of history is the occasion of many often-told stories of Quaker happenings, the details of which may be found in the many Quaker histories.

(Elizabeth Vipont's "The Story of Quakerism" is as easy to read as any.) The stories tell of Quakers, ordinary men and women, who showed amazing enterprise and courage and who, spurred on by the strength of their faith, felt the need to "publish the Truth" against all odds. In addition to the many who suffered in Britain, there were some who felt called to go further afield. A notable example was Mary Fisher who, having suffered imprisonment and brutality at York and at Cambridge, went with Ann Austin across the Atlantic, first to Barbados and then on to Boston (Mass.). Boston was governed by a Puritan regime, who regarded all Quakers as dangerous heretics and enacted strict and harsh laws against them. Mary Fisher and Ann Austin suffered no more than imprisonment followed by banishment, but the laws against Quakers were strengthened in the following years.

Some, including Mary Dyer in 1660, were executed. The spread of Quakerism into America during these years makes a remarkable story. The best known event is the voyage in 1657 of the "Woodhouse", which was sailed to New Amsterdam (New York) by a group of Quakers "acting under guidance"; their safe arrival in America is a matter for wonder. It was this group of Quakers which later met with such persecution from the Puritans of Boston. There are many more stories about the doings of Quakers of this period. Just one may be mentioned here because of its bizarre nature. Once more it is about Mary Fisher; in 1658, she decided that she must visit the Sultan of Turkey - and so she did. How she managed the journey, which included some 500 miles on foot, and how she persuaded the Grand Vizier to arrange an interview with the Sultan remains a mystery! However, she did meet the Sultan and he listened to her; and Mary Fisher was satisfied.

INTERLUDE

Before going on to a summary of the events during the 30 years after the Restoration of the monarchy, we may go back to the general questions posed at the beginning of this chapter:- "What were the Quakers saying?"... "Why did some people listen so eagerly?"... "Why did others oppose equally eagerly?"..... Here are some indications; they are not meant to be definite answers. The message centred on "The Inner Light". More correctly this should be termed the "Inner Light of Christ", because a basic part of the message was that "Christ had come to teach his people himself". People listened because it was a message of hope - of sureness. No longer did they have to look to Priest, or Church, or Book as the final authority; the authority and the "Truth" (a much used word, though hard to define) was to be found by the individual through direct knowledge of the spirit of Christ - the "Christ in the heart". They became convinced that by "waiting on the Lord" they would come to know the will of God through direct communication. It is easy to see why this was bound to cause opposition. The authority of those who had the responsibility for the religious faith of the people was threatened, whether Priest or Minister of the Church.

Those who reject the authority and the dogma of any "Establishment", whether religious or secular, are accused of Anarchy and Heresy. The Quakers were accused of both these and, in many cases, the crime of Blasphemy was added to the indictment. (The Blasphemy Act was passed in 1650, so Blasphemy had become a secular crime as well as an ecclesiastical sin.) It may seem strange that a group, which maintained that they were living under the guidance of God and who claimed Christ as their Lord and Teacher, should be charged with blasphemy. Presumably it arose from the Quaker conviction that all people could be in possession of the Inner Light, the Light of Christ. Some of their accusers interpreted this to mean that they were claiming to have divine powers, thus assuming a God-like nature for themselves. It was a charge which was seldom used and even then was not made to stick when brought to the courts. When in the case of James Nayler (described later) there was no valid charge of blasphemy which the magistrates could bring.

The most common charges were such things as "disorderly behaviour", "breach of the peace", "contempt of court", the usual sort of reasons given for dealing with those thought by authority to be an intolerable nuisance. There were numerous cases of imprisonment, a number of sentences of whipping, but in Britain no cases of execution, as did occur in America.

(b) After the "Restoration" in 1660. From the outset of the Restoration, both the Monarchy and the Church were anxious to establish their authority. The perennial plea of the "defence of national security" (though the phrase would not have been used at that time - the term treason was used instead) was a strong weapon against dissidents. Admittedly, there was some cause for concern during the early years of Charles II's reign. There were certain religious enthusiasts, notably the Fifth Monarchy Men, whose aim was the establishment of the rule of God (or Christ) on earth and felt that this necessitated the overthrow of the present temporal monarchy. Not unnaturally, such people were accused of treason.

The Quakers, though proclaiming the rule of Christ, did not see this as a temporal rule. They were in no way concerned with any treasonable plot to overthrow the monarchy and they were determined to disassociate themselves from any thoughts of violence. This was the main reason for the famous letter, written by Fox and other Quakers to Charles II in 1661 - a letter which has been widely accepted in the Society of Friends as "Our Peace Testimony". This letter appears to have served its purpose, for there were few if any charges of treason made against Friends. The persecution of Quakers, however, continued; in fact, it was greater than before because of an increasing number of edicts which were brought in. These formed part of the "Clarendon Code", introduced by the Lord Chancellor Clarendon to enforce conformity with the Church of England. Two of these which most affected the Quakers were the "Quaker Act" (1662) and the "Conventicle Act" (1664). Quakers were known to refuse oath-taking on religious grounds and the former Act made the refusal to take the Oath of Allegiance illegal - tantamount to treason. Under both Acts it was made illegal to hold any religious meetings other than those of the established Church.

The Quakers continued to meet openly, rather than in secret as many dissidents did. As a result, many Friends were imprisoned in the middle 1660s, including most of their leaders. Fox was in prison from 1664 to 1666. His release in 1666 was providential, because the Society was being badly weakened for lack of leadership. The statutory penalty for repeated conviction under these laws was transportation, but it was easier to prescribe such a penalty than to have it carried out. It was not easy to find captains willing to use their ships for this purpose; partly perhaps through a revulsion against the harshness of the penalty, but also through a shortage of shipping. Consequently, few if any Friends were transported. In 1670 there was a new Conventicle Act passed; transportation was abandoned, but sequestration of goods and property was increasingly used as a penalty.

There was also a more aggressive approach to any preaching in a "Conventicle". This resulted in Friends' Meetings being broken up and some Meeting Houses destroyed, as well as a considerable number of imprisonments. It was at this time that the famous "Bushel's Case" took place. This is well worth reading about. Briefly: two Quakers, William Meade and William Penn (more about him later) were arrested for holding a Meeting outside the Meeting House in Gracechurch St. Ill-advisedly, they were charged with "causing a riot", a charge which required trial by jury. The Judge directed the jury to return a verdict of guilty but, led by their spokesman, Edward Bushel, they refused to do so, although under considerable physical duress. This case established the right of juries to bring in independent verdicts (and probably indirectly helped the Quaker cause in the public mind).

Consolidation of Friends into a Society

The period 1660-1670, although one of persecution, was also one of consolidation. What was originally a number of scattered groups was gradually forming into a larger body with some sense of unity and community. During the 1650s, Friends had begun building Meeting Houses, the beginning of the establishment of local stable worshipping groups. There were already many of such groups up and down the country when Fox was released from prison in 1666. During the next two or three years, Fox spent much time organising these groups. The first step was the establishment of monthly meetings, the origins of the modern Society of Friends. Part also of the process of consolidation was the regularisation of Quaker marriage procedures and the founding of schools for Quaker children. Both of these steps did much to ensure the continuity and survival of Friends as a Society. The establishment of a centrally organised representative body took some time to accomplish, but finally in 1678 "London Yearly Meeting" came into being and was recognised as the Meeting which exercised the representative authority of the Society of Friends. Details of organisation inevitably take a low place in the interest of those wishing to learn something about Quakerism; personal exploits and accounts of ill-treatment patiently endured make much more exciting reading! Nevertheless, there is cause for wonder that this work of organisation should have been able to continue during such a troubled period. One must acknowledge this and have respect for those responsible; without them, it is likely that there would be no Quakers today. During the next ten years or so matters remained much the same, but there was a great change when James II was deposed and William-and- Mary came to the throne. In 1689 the Toleration Act was passed, which greatly reduced the pressure on all dissenters, giving them liberty of conscience and making it an offence to disturb anyone else's worship.

The Quaker scruple about taking oaths was apparently recognised and, while Quakers may have been seen as a very peculiar people, they were no longer regarded as a potential threat either to secular or religious authority. These forty years, 1650 to 1690, were very rich in Quaker people. It was the period of George Fox himself, of the "Valiant Sixty" (those who in early days travelled the country "publishing Truth"), of Margaret Fell, of William Penn and of others. Too much attention to biographical details, even about the best of women and men, can become burdensome; I propose to give little. Still, the work of any society is done by its people and the life of it resides in them. So, in the next Chapter I have chosen to say something about a few of those living in the 17th century. My choice is made partly to show the variety of those who were attracted to Quakerism and who furthered it during these years.