Vickipedia

FRIENDS,SOCIETY OF, the proper designation of a sect of Christians, better known as Quakers. Their founder was George Fox (q. v. for the origin of the name Quakers), born at Dray ton, in Leicestershire, in 1624, who at first followed the occupation of a shoemaker, but afterwards devoted himself to the propagation of what he regarded as a more spiritual form of Christianity that prevailed in his day. In spite of severe and cruel persecutions, the Society of F. succeeded in establishing themselves both in England and America. They have, indeed, never been numerically powerful (having at no time exceeded 200,000 members); but the purity of life which from the beginning has so honorably distinguished them as a class, has unquestionably exercised a salutary influence on the public at large; while in respect to certain great questions affecting the interests of mankind such as war and slavery, they have beyond all doubt originated opinions and tendencies which, whether sound or erroneous, are no longer confined to themselves, but have widely leavened the mind of Christendom. For an account of the more eminent representatives of the Friends, see the biographies of BARCLAY, FOX, PENN, &c.. We confine ourselves here to a brief notice of their doctrine, practice, and discipline, as it is laid down in their own publications.

Doctrine.—It is perhaps more in the spirit than in the letter of their faith that the Society of F. differ from other orthodox Christians. They themselves assert their belief in the great fundamental facts of Christianity, and even in the substantial identity of most of the doctrinal opinions which they hold with those of other evangelical denominations. The Epistle addressed by George Fox and other Friends to the governor of Barbadoes, in 1673, contains a confession of faith not differing materially from the so-called Apostles’ Creed, except that it is more copiously worded, and dwells with great diffuseness on the internal work of Christ. The Declaration of Christian Doctrine given forth on be- . half of the Society in 1693, expresses a belief in what is usually termed the Trinity, in the atonement made by Christ for sin, in the resurrection from the dead, and in the doctrine of a final and eternal judgment; and the Declaratory Minute of the early meeting in 1829 asserts the inspiration and divine authority of the Old and New Testament, the depravity of human nature consequent on the fall of Adam, and other characteristic doctrines of Christian orthodoxy, adding: ‘ Our religious Society, from its earliest establishment to the present day, has received these most important doctrines of Holy Scripture in their plain and obvious acceptation.

It is nevertheless certain that uniformity of theological opinion cannot be predicated of the Friends, any more than of other bodies of Christians. As early as 1668, William Penn and George Whitehead held a public discussion with a clergyman of the English Church, named Vincent, in which they maintained that the doctrine of a tri-personal God, as held-by that church, was not found in the Scriptures, though in what form they accepted the doctrine themselves does not appear; and some time later, Penn published a work himself, entitled the Sandy Foundation Shaken, in which, among other things, he endeavored to show that the doctrines of vicarious atonement and of imputed righteousness did not rest on any scriptural foundation. But in general, the Society of F., in the expression of their belief, have avoided the technical phraseology of other Christian churches, restricting themselves with commendable modesty to the words of Scripture itself, as far as that is possible and avoiding, in particular, the knotty points of Calvinistic divinity (see Barclay’s Catechism and Confession of Faith, published in 1678, where the answers to the questions— to avoid theological dogmatism—are taken from the Bible itself).

This habit of allowing to each individual the full freedom of the Scriptures, has, of course, rendered it all the more difficult to ascertain to what extent individual minds, among the Society, may have differed in their mode of apprehending and dogmatically explaining the facts of Christianity. Their principal distinguishing doctrine is that of the ‘ Light of Christ in man,’ on which many of their outward peculiarities, as a religious body are grounded. The doctrine of the internal light is founded on the view of Christ given by St. John, who, in the first chapter of his gospel, describes Christ—the Eternal Logos—as the ‘ life ‘ and ‘ light of men,’ ‘ the true light,’ ‘ the light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world,’ &c. Barclay taught that even the heathen were illumined by this light, though they might not know—as, indeed, those who lived before Christ could not know—the historical Jesus in whom Christians believe. In their case, Christ was the light shining in darkness, though the darkness comprehended it not. The existence of ‘ natural virtue ‘ (as orthodox theologians term it) among the heathen was denied by Barclay, who regarded all such virtue as Christian in its essence, and as proceeding from the light of Christ shining through the darkness of pagan superstition. These opinions would seem to be somewhat freer than those expressed in the General Epistle of the Society published in 1836, wherein they refuse to acknowledge ‘ any principle of spiritual light, life, or holiness inherent by nature in the mind of man,’ and again assert, that they ‘ believe in no principle whatsoever of spiritual light, life, or holiness, except the influence of the Holy Spirit of God bestowed on mankind in various measures and degrees through Jesus Christ our Lord;’ but, on the other hand, in a little treatise published by the Society in 1861, it is affirmed that ‘ the Holy Spirit has always been afforded in various measures to mankind; while stress is also laid on the statement of St. Paul, that ‘ the grace of God (understood by Friends to signify the ‘ operation of the Divine Spirit’) that bringeth salvation, hath appeared to all men;’ while another exponent of their views, Mr. T. Evans of Philadelphia (see Cyclopædia of Religious Denominations, Lond., Griffin & Co., 1853), states that ‘ God hath granted to all men, of whatsoever nation or country, a day or time of visitation, during which it is possible for them to partake of the benefits of Christ’s death and be saved.

‘ For this end, he hath communicated to every man a measure of the light of his own Son, a measure of grace or the Holy Spirit, by which he invites, calls, exhorts, and strives with every man, in order to save him; which light or grace, as it is received, and not resisted, works the salvation of all, even of those who are ignorant of Adam’s fall, and of the death and sufferings of ‘Christ; both by bringing them to a sense of their own misery, and to be sharers in the sufferings of Christ inwardly; and by making them partakers of his resurrection, in becoming holy, pure and righteous, and recovered out of their sins.’ Hence it may be safely asserted that they hold a broader (or, as others would say, a more latitudinarian) view of the Spirit’s working than any other Christian church or society. In America, about the year 1827, Elias Hicks, a Friend of very remarkable powers, created a schism in the Society, by the promulgation of opinions denying the miraculous conception, divinity, and atonement of Christ, and also the authenticity and divine authority of the Holy Scriptures. About one-half the society in America adopted the views of Hicks, and are known as Hicksite Friends; their opinions, of course, are repudiated by the rest of the Society, who may be described as Orthodox Friends. The Hicksite schism thoroughly alarmed the latter, both in England and America, and a movement was begun in favor of education, of a doctrinal belief more nearly allied to that of the so-called ‘ Evangelical’ party, and of a relaxation in the formality and discipline of the Society. The leader of this movement was Joseph John Gurney, of Norwich. This new tendency, however, excited considerable opposition among some of the Friends in America; and the consequence was a division among the Orthodox Friends themselves, and the formation of a new sect, called ‘ Wilburites,’ after the name of their founder, John Wilbur, who are noted for their strictness with which they maintain the traditions and peculiarities of the Society. (See Friendly Sketches in America, by William Tallack. Lond., Bennett. 1862.) Some slight indications of theological differences have manifested themselves in England also.

2. Practice.—It is in the application of their leading doctrine of the ‘ internal light’ that the peculiarities of the Friends are most apparent. Believing that it is the Holy Spirit, or the indwelling Christ, that alone maketh wise unto salvation, illumining the mind with true and spiritual knowledge of the deep things of God, they do not consider ‘ human learning ‘ essential to a minister of the gospel, and look with distrust on the method adopted by other churches for obtaining such—viz., by formally training after a human fashion a body of youths chosen on no principle of inward fitness. They believe that the call to this work now, as of old, is ‘not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father;’ and that it is bestowed irrespectively of rank, talent, learning, or sex. Consequently, they have no theological halls, professors of divinity, or classes for ‘ students.’

Further, as fitness for the ministry is held to be a free gift of God through the Holy Spirit, so, they argue, it ought to be freely bestowed, in support of which they adduce the precept of the Saviour—’Freely ye have received, freely give;’ hence those who minister among them are not paid for their labor of love, but, on the other hand, whenever such are engaged from home in the work of the gospel, they are, in the spirit of Christian love, freely entertained, and have all their wants supplied: in short, the Friends maintain the absolutely voluntary character of religious obligations, and that Christians should do all for love, and nothing for money. It also follows from their view of a call to the work of the ministry, that women may exhort as well as men, for the ‘ spirit of Christ’ may move them as powerfully as the other sex. The prophecy of Joel as applied by Peter is cited as authority for the preaching of women : ‘ On my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my spirit, and they shall prophesy.’ They also adduce the New Testament examples of Tryphæna, Tryphosa, the beloved Persis, and other women who appear to have labored in the Gospel. Their mode of conducting public worship likewise illustrates the entireness of their dependence on the ‘ internal light.’ In other religious bodies, the minister has a set form of worship, through which he must go, whether he feels devoutly disposed or not. This seems objectionable to the Friends, who meet and remain in silence until they believe themselves moved to speak by the Holy Ghost. Their prayers and praises are, for the most part, silent and inward. They prefer to make melody in their hearts unto God, considering such to be more spiritual than the outward service of the voice.

The doctrine of the ‘internal light’ has also led the Friends to reject the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper as these are observed by other Christians. They believe the Christian baptism to be a spiritual one, and not, like the Jewish and heathen baptisms, one with water; in support of which they quote, among other passages, the words of John the Baptist himself : ‘ I baptize yon with water, but there cometh one after me who shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.’ Similarly do they regard the rite of the Eucharist: it is, say they, inward and spiritual, and consists not in any symbolic breaking of bread and drinking of wine, but in that daily communion with Christ through the Holy Spirit, and through the obedience of faith, by which the believer is nourished and strengthened. They believe that the last words of the dying Redeemer on the cross, ‘ It is finished,’ announced the entire abolition of symbolic rites; that under the new spiritual dispensation then introduced, the necessity for such, as a means of arriving at truth, ceased, and that their place has been abundantly supplied by the Comforter, the Holy Ghost, whose office it now is to lead and guide men into all truth. The true Christian supper, according to them, is set forth in the Revelations—’ Behold I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come unto him, and will sup with him and he with me.’ For the same reason—viz., that the teaching of the Spirit is inward and spiritual—the Friends ignore the religious observance of days and times, with the exception of the Sabbath, which some at least among them regard as of perpetual obligation.

The taking or administering of oaths is regarded by Friends as inconsistent with the command of Christ, ‘ swear not at all,’ and with the exhortation of the apostle James—’ Above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath : but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.’ They have also refused to pay tithes for the maintenance of what they hold to be a hireling ministry, believing that Christ put an end to the priesthood and ceremonial usages instituted under the Mosaic dispensation, and that he substituted none in their place. In consequence, all consistant Friends have been regularly mulcted of plate, furniture, or other goods, to the value of the amount due. The recent conversion of tithe into rent-charge, however, has, in the opinion of many Friends, largely removed objections to the payment to this ecclesiastical demand. In regard to the civil magistracy, while they respect and honor it, as ordained of God, they are careful to warn the members of their Society against thoughtlessly incurring its responsibilities, involving as it does the administration of oaths, the issuing of orders and warrants in reference to ecclesiastical demands, the calling out of an armed force in cases of civil commotion, and other duties inconsistent with the peaceful principles of the Society. The Friends have likewise consistenly protested against war in all its forms; and the Society has repeatedly advised members against aiding and assisting in the conveyance of soldiers, their baggage, arms, ammunition, or military stores. They regard the profession of arms and fighting, not only as diametrically opposed to the general spirit of Christ, whose advent was sung by angels in these words : ‘ Glory to God in the highest, and on earth, peace, good-will towards men;’ but as positively forbidden by such precepts as—’ Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you;’ also, ‘ Resist not evil : but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also;’ and while they acknowledge that temporary calamities may result from the adopting the principle of non-resistance, they have so strong a faith in its being essentially the dictate of divine love to the Christian heart, that they believe God, by his wise and omnipotent providence, could, and will yet make it ‘mighty to the pulling down of the strongholds of iniquity.’ The world, they believe, will by and by confess that the peacemakers are most truly the children of God. The efforts of the Society for the emancipation of the slaves are a part of modern British history. They may most certainly lay claim to having cultivated the moral sense of their fellow-countrymen in regard to this important question. As early as 1727, they commenced to ‘ censure ‘ the traffic in slaves, as a practice ‘ neither commendable nor allowed,’ and gradually warmed in their opposition, until the whole nation felt the glow, and entered with enthusiasm on the work of abolition. In respect to what may be called minor points, the Friends are also very scrupulous; they object to ‘ balls, gaming-places, horse-races, and playhouses, those nurseries of debauchery and wickedness, the burden and grief of the sober part of other societies as well as of our own.’

The Printed Epistle of the yearly meeting of 1854 contains a warning against indulging in music, especially what goes by the name of ’sacred music,’ and denounces musical exhibitions, such as oratorios, as essentially a ‘ profanation ‘—the tendency of these things being, it is alleged, ‘ to withdraw the soul from that quiet, humble, and retired frame in which prayer and praise may be truly offered with the spirit and with the understanding also.’ They object, besides, to ‘ the hurtful tendency of reading plays, romances, novels, and other pernicious books;’ and the yearly meeting of 1764 ‘ recommends to every member of our Society to discourage and suppress the same.’ A similar recommendation was issued by the Society in 1851 for the benefit of ‘ younger Friends’ in particular, who would appear to have been eating the forbidden fruit. The Printed Epistle of the yearly meeting of 1724 likewise ‘advises against imitating the vain custom of wearing or giving mourning, and all extravagant expenses about the interment of the dead,’ and this advice has been repeatedly renewed. A multitude of other minute peculiarities, which it would be tedious to note, distinguish the Friends from their fellow-Christians.

3. Discipline.—By the term discipline the Friends understand ‘ all those arrangements and regulations which are instituted for the civil and religious benefit of a Christian church.’ The necessity for such discipline soon began to make itself felt, and the result was the institution of certain meetings or assemblies. These are four in number: the first, the Preparative meetings: second, the Monthly meetings; third, the Quarterly meetings; and, fourth, the Yearly meetings. The first are usually composed of the members in any given place, in which there are generally two or more Friends of each sex, whose duty is to act as overseers of the meeting, taking cognizance of births, marriages, burials, removals, &c., the conduct of members, &c., and reporting thereon to the monthly meetings, to whom the executive department of the discipline is chiefly confided. The monthly meetings decide in cases of violation of discipline, and have the power of cutting off or disowning all who by their improper conduct, false doctrines, or other gross errors, bring reproach on the Society, although the accused have the right of appeal to the quarterly meetings, and from these again to the yearly, whose decisions are final. The monthly meetings are also empowered to approve and acknowledge ministers, as well as to appoint ‘ serious, discreet, and judicious Friends, who are not ministers, tenderly to encourage and help young ministers, and advise others, as they, in the wisdom of God, see occasion.’ They also execute a variety of other important duties. The quarterly meetings are composed of several monthly meetings, and exercise a sort of general supervision over the latter, and from whom they receive reports, and to whom they give such advice and decisions as they think right. The yearly meeting consists of select or representative members of the quarterly meetings. Its function is to consider generally the entire condition of the Society in all its aspects. It receives in writing answers to questions it has previously addressed to the subordinate meetings, deliberates upon them, and legislates accordingly. To it exclusively the legislative power belongs. Though thus constituted somewhat according to Presbyterian order, yet any member of the Society may attend and take part in the proceedings.

Women have also a special sphere of discipline allotted to them: they inspect and relieve the wants of the poor of their own sex, take cognizance of proposals for marriage, deal with female delinquents privately, and under certain restrictions may even do so officially, though in the ‘ testimony of disownment’ they have always the assistance of members of the other sex.

The Society of F., in the multitude of its regulations, has not forgotten the poor; charity in its narrower, as well as in its broader sense, has always been a beautiful feature of its members. The care of the poor was one of the earliest evidences which Christianity afforded to the Gentiles of the superiority and divine character of its principles; and it is honorable to the Society that a similar provision for those united to them in religious fellowship appears to have been one of the earliest occasions of their meetings for discipline. Nevertheless, in accordance with their ruling principle, that all Christian duty should be left for its fulfilment to the spontaneity of Christian love, and not performed under compulsion of any kind, ‘ the provision for the poor is purely voluntary ; yet their liberality is proverbial throughout Britain and America.

Their number at present amounts, it is believed, to about 120,000, of which more than 90,000 belong to the United States. See Fox’s Journal; Gurney’s History of the Quakers (1722); Gurney’s Observations on the Peculiarities of the 8- of F. (1824); Neale’s. History of the Puritans.