WATCHMEN OF ENGLAND:
EARLY QUAKER THEOLOGY AND SOCIAL PROTEST
by
GARY MICHPLEL KNARR
A thesis submitted to the Department of History
in confomity with the requirements for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Queen's University
Kingston, Ontario, Canada
October, 1998
copyright O Gary Michael ban; 1998 Nationai Libmy Bibliothèque nationaie du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Weltington Street 395. rue Wellington OttawaON K1AûlU4 Wwa ON K1A ON4 CaMds Canada
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence dowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, di!stri%ute or seil reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la fome de microfiche/fïh, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format élecîronique.
The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits subsîantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. .. II
ABSTRACT
The earliest Quaken confionted the people and denof mid-seventeenth cenhuy
England with a millenarian message of Christ's imminent deon earth and an accompanying social transformation. in hope of assisting the establishment of Chnst's earthly reign, Quakers challenged the hierarchical nature of English society, confronted society's govemors regarding practices which Quakers considered unjust, expressed concern for the poor, and nonviolently defied England's govemment through the adoption of a pacifist position. Nevertheless, some histonans point to the Quakers' theology as evidence that they retreated fiom practical efforts for social refm. Some argue that Quaker religious beliefs fostered withdrawai fiom social revolution and offered a consoling "Kingdom of God within" for those whose revolutionary hopes had been obstnicted. However, this dissertation will argue that the theological beliefs of the prominent early Quaker leaders George Fox, James Nayler, and George Fox the Younger fostered their outspoken activism, their adversarial relationship with the English govemment and society, and their political and social radicalism. The Spiritualist, perfectionist, and millenarian beliefs which these men shared encouraged and inspired their political and social beliefs and protest. These Quakers challenged their society and its governments with full confidence that God had assigned them a prophetic role to warn
England's rulers and people of the judgments that awaited al1 who opposed God's will, and that God spoke and acted through them to establish his Kingdom on earth. Although a gradua1 withdrawal fiom confrontational political activity began by the conclusion of the Lnterregnurn and continued fier the Restoration, the Quaker movernent had not
originated as an inwardly onented retreat fiom the world and social stnisgie. The
earliest Quakers' theology had inspired their social protest as they stniggieci to build
Christ's Kingdom on earth through prophetic confrontation of England's society and government, 1 would like to express my sincere thanks to a number of penons who have been helpfül to me as 1 prepared this thesis. 1 am most gratefui to my supervisor, Dr. Paul
Chriaianson, for his pinstaking criticisms of my work, and for the direction and encouragement he has aven me during the last several years. 1 also express my appreciation to the staffs of the libraries of Queen's University, the University of
Waterloo, the British Library, the InstiMe of Historical Research, Christ Church College,
Oxford, and most especially of the Friends' Reference Library in London, United
Kingdom for their assistance and patience. My th& is also extended to the staff of the
Quaker House, London, for their kind hospitality during rny stay there. I th& also the
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the School of Graduate
Studies, Queen's University, for the financial assistance which they have provided me.
Finally, 1 extend special thanks to my wife Christine and my son Joshua, who have been most understanding, supportive and helpfid throughout these years of dissertation research and wn'ting. v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract
Acknowledgernents
Table of Contents
Chapter One: Introduction
Chapter Two: The Early Quaker Movement in Histonography
Chapter Three: Spiritualisrn
Chapter Four: Perfection, Mallibility, and Divine Inhabitation
Chapter Five: The Quaker bfiiiemimi and English Society
Chapter Six: The Quakerst Transition to Pacifism
Chapter Seven: Egalitarian Protest and Ractice
Chapter Eight: Conclusion
Bibliography
Appendices
Vita cmONE
INTRODUCTION
The writings of the early Quaker leaders George Fox ( 1624- 169 1 ), James Nayler
( 16 1 8?- 166O), and George Fox the Younger (d. 166 1 ) indicate that the faith of these three
Friends focused largely upon the immediate work of God's Spirit in human lives, the
complete spiritual and moral transformation of believers through the Spirit, and the final
victory and reign of Christ on earth. Social, economic and political concems are evident
and vitally important in their publications, but their faith clearly was not their social
thought presented in theological terms. Rather, their social and plitical thought and
protest grew out of the Spiritualist, perfectionist, and millenarian character of their
theological convictions, and from a strong commitrnent to the God of perfect justice and
compassion. Due to their Spintualkt convictions, these Friends expected the Kingdom
of Christ to arrive on earth through spintual means rather than through ''camal" violence
or political stratagems. Moreover, Fox and Fox the Younger did not anticipate a physical
remof Christ to assume his reign because they believed that Christ had corne already
in Spirit, and was working within and through his people to establish his Kingdom.
Christ would reign through those in whom he ded While Nayler also celebrated the
present coming of Christ in Spirit wïthm persons who would work to establish the
Kingdom and rid the world of evil, he believed there would be a fume coming of Christ
, as well. Since the statements of Fox and Fox the Younger that deny a fllture penonai -7
reign of Christ are dated near the end of the 1650s and after, it may be that the elder and
Younger Fox's positions on this developed only near the end of Nayler's life. This would suggest that Quaker eschatology, like Quaker pacifism, took approxirnately a decade to develop. Since these three Quakers believed that sinless perfection and i nfall ible divine guidance were available to redeemed persons, they could conceive that perfect laws and
institutions could be established by perfected persons through whorn Christ wodd work to rernove every evil from govemment and society as every evil and error would be removed from tmnsformed individuals. The Quakers' belief that God offered everyone the opportunity to respond to the divine offer of salvation and complete transformation awakened Quaker hopes that a sufficient nurnber of their countrymen would join the community of believers and assist in the perfection of English society, and ultimately of the world.
The English Civil Wan and Revolution of the mid-seventeenth century eogendered and al lowed for the propagation of increasingly radical rel igious, social, and political beliefs. Through these beliefs English radicds expressed their Mevances and aspirations and contested the daims of the social and econornic elite who niled the realrn.' Mile the victors of the Civil Wan had overthrown the monarchy and aristocracy, the members of the gentry who dorninated both central and local govemance did not intend to countenance a revolt against themselves fiom their own social subordinates. However, the Civil Wars had opened oppomuiities for the middle ranks of
1 Barry Reay, "Radicalism and Religion in the Engiish Revolution: an Introduction," in Radical Relieion in the Enelish Revol~~on,ed by J.F. McGregor and Barry Reay (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1W), pp. v, 34, 12- 18. 3 the people to speak and publish their concems, and had awakened hopes of Mersocial and political change that some expressed as millenarian expectations for a spiritually and moraily renewed society?
Like many of their contemporwies, the Quakers were heir to the English apocalyptic and millenarian traditions that interpreted hurnan events as part of the struggie between God and Satan. In apocalyptic thought the worid is a theatre of constant strife between the spiritual and mord polarities and their hurnan agents until the day of God's ultimate and assured victory.' Hope in this divine conquest of the world encouraged radical new social and political visions of a nation and world transformed by the godly. In hope of assisting God to accomplish this divine social transformation, the earliest Quakers confionted the people and nilen of mid-seventeenth centuy England with a millenarian message of Christ's imminent nile on earth and an accompanying social reformation. Through their social protest, the Quakers launched an egalitarïan challenge to the hierarchical nature of English society, rebuked unjust govemments and economic practices, expressed a concern for the poor accompanied by outrage against wealthy and powerful oppressors, and developed a pacifist position through which they nonviolently defied the English government.
The writings of George Fox and James Nayler, the two rnost prominent leaders of
Christopher Hill, A Nation of Change and Novelty: Radical Politics. Relieion. and Literature in Seventeenth Centwy England (London: Routledge, 1990), pp. 5 1-53,2 18- 21.
Paul Christianson, Refomen and Babvion: Endish Apocalvptic Visions fiom the Reformation to the Eve of the Civil War (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978), pp. 5-6. the Quaker movement in its first years, and of the les noted but politically vocal pamphieteer George Fox the Younger dernomte the manner in which the early
Quakers' Spiritualism, perfectionism and milIenarianism informed and activated their stniggle for the establishment of Christ's Kingdom. For the purposes of this dissertation the writings of Nayler, Fox the Younger, and the elder Fox to 1666, a year of great eschatological expectation, will corne under consideration. By that year, the Quaker movement had gone a long way toward taking on a somewhat different character, in part by moving away from the apocalyptic and prophetic fervor of its earliest years. WhiIe
Nayler and Fox the Younger died within the fint decade of the movement, the more prominent Fox lived on to see the disappointment of his eschatological hopes, and to adjust both himself and the Friends to the deferrai of the Kingdom's arrival. CHAPTER WO
THE EARLY QUAKER MOVEMENT IN HlSTORIûûRAPHY
Some historians have cited the early Quaken' eschatological expectations and their Spiritualist theology as evidence of a religious retreat from practical efforts for social reform. They depict the Quaker rnovement as a quietist religious refuge for discouraged poli tical activists whose revolutionary social goals were mûtrated by the relatively consewative Interregnum governrnents of the 1650s.'' Othen argue that
Quaker beliefs fostered wiùidrawai fiom social revolution and offered a consoling
"Kingdom of God within" for those whose revolutionary hopes had been thwartedS
These historians seem to find a concem for social and political reform as incompatible with religious beliefs. This dissertation will argue, however, that it was precisely the earliest Quakers' eschatological beliefs, as well as their Spinhialist and perfectionkt theology, which fostered their radical social and political convictions, their intensely advenarial relationship with English govenment and society, and their outspoken activism. Far from behaving like sectarians in retreat, the earliest Quaken were such confrontational attacken of social injustice and inequality that they aroused hostility and persecution against themselves.
Arthur Leslie Morton, The World of the Ranten: Religious Radicalism in the En~lishRevolution (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1970)' pp. 10- 12, 16- 18.
Michael R. Watts, The Dissenters, Vol. 1: From the Reformation to the French Revolution (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1W8), p. 207. THE EARLY QUAKER MOVEMENT AS A SPIRITUAL REFUGE
The perspective that the Quaker movement was an otherworldiy development that was unconcemed with social problems was argued by hist0ria.n~such as George H.
Sabine. More than a half century ago, Sabine's work on Genard Winstadey ( 1609-
1676?) contrasted Winstanley with his Quaker contemporaries by stating that he sought a new kind of human community of "mutuai aid" rather than a society based on individualisrn. Winstanley could not "content himself with a religious experience that ended with a change of a personal morality, nor imagine a moral reform that did not include the elimination of poverty and the removal of political oppression."' Sabine did not state why he believed that Quakers did so content themselves, nor why he thought that they confined themselves to questions of "personal morality." Sabine seemed unaware that the Friends shared many of Winstanley's social concerns, built a permanent cornmunity that practised mutual ai4 and welcomed many radicals (probably including
Winstanley) into their movement. Although few recent historians have followed
Sabine's contention that the early Quakers were otherworldly, not al1 have gained a full appreciation of the Friends' social radicaiism and protest, nor recognized the relationship between their protest and their theology.
Writing in 1970, Arthur Leslie Morton indicated a perception of the early
Quakers similar to that of Sabine. Morton argued that the very emergence of the Quaker movement was evidence that persans himed to religious beliefs for solace when the
'George K Sabine, ed, Works of Gemd Winstanlev (New York: Russell and Russell Inc., 1941), p. 51. secular poli tical aspirations whic h had developed during the English Revolution were
disappointed Morton argued that there was an increasing secularization of thought as
the Revolution grew more radical until it reached a climax in 1649. Then a reaction
occurred in which religious ideas no longer developed into political thought, but political
ideas becarne expressed through religious thought and language. Morton asserted that the Quaker movement appeared after the radicals who had supported Parliament's cause in the Civil Wars became disappointed with the socially conservative governrnents of the
Interregnum. The Quaker movement arose to offer a less radical ideology, and "a new stage in the retreat from revolution." Such religious radicals gradually withdrew from the world to comprise a less politically interested religious dissent.' Morton interpreted
Quakers as pesons who advocated withdrawai from political engagement, as if he assurned that people tumed to religion oniy when they had ken discouraged by events in the authentic world of secular experience.
Developing this interpretation mer,Christopher Hill argued that the Quakers were arnong those who shared an "experience of defeat" when their radical social goals were thwaried by the Interregnum govemments. They therefore sought an inward spirituai Kingdom when the outward Kingdom of social justice Failed to appear. Unlike
Morton, however, Hill argued that the Quakers were socially radical during the 165Os, and that their discouragement occurred as they encountered repeated defeats throughout the Interregnurn until the Restoration delivered %e final blow" to their hopes. These quickly "depolitized" Quakers and other contemporary religious radicais who comforted
sp or ton, World of the Ranten, pp. 10- 12, 16- 19, 137. themselves by finding, in John Milton's words, "a paradise within, happier far."' Like
Morton, Hill seemed to view spiritual concem as a symptom of the discoufagement that
was brought on by events that were disheartening to radicals. As it will be demonstrated
in this dissertation, regard for the intemal Spirit constantly marked the Quaker movement
from its ongins in the late 1640~~and was not at dl symptomatic of a retreat that
occurred later. Indeed, the Friends' Spintualism contributed to their radical social
thought Furthemore, it will aIso be argued that the Restoration itself was not initially
discouraging to the Quakers, but seemed more like a fulfilrnent of their prophetic
warnings to the Interregnum govemments, and brought to power a King who had stated
his willingness to extend religious toleration. Hill noted the social radicalisrn of the
earliest Quakers and their millenarian hope for a new wor~d,~but depicted an abrupt shiA
to a less activist position and interpreted their religious beliefs as an adjustment to
political defeat Hill and Morton both seemed to assume that religion was the refuge of
those who were disappointed by the events which occurred in the "real" world.
Nevertheless, Hill cannot be placed within the camp of those who overlooked the
socially and plitically radical nature of the early Quaker movement. He cleariy
recognized that the early Friends were radical, even though he emphasized the haste of their departure fiom an activist stance and characterized them largely as a people in
8Christopher Hill, The World Tumed Upside Down: Radical Ideas Durine the English Revolution (London: Temple Smith, 1972), pp. 203-206,327; Experience of Defeat: Milton and Some Contempomies (London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1984), pp. 17-18, 16445,327.
%II, Nation of Change. p. 22 1. retreat fiom their former position-
One author who did not fully recognize the socially radical nature of the early
Quaker movement was Bryan Ball. In his study of seventeenth-century English
Protestant eschatology, Ball appropriately observed that the Quakers heid to a "realised
eschatology" in which they believed that they were experiencing the Kingdom's presence
within themselves already and did not perceive the Kingdom's arriva! to be only a fiiture
event. Ball stressed the Quakers' present, i~er,personal and spiritual enjoyrnent of the
Kingdom in the sou1 to such a degree that he minimized the importance of their anticipation of the outward future Kingdom which would replace the contemporary
society and political system. Noting that Quakers believed the saints would assist the
Kingdom's amival as more individuals came to experience the inner Kingdom transforming their lives, Ball did not relate this moral transformation to Quaker anticipations of radical social change. Instead, he depicted them as peaons who emphasized the enjoyment of inner and individual spiritual satisfaction rather than as prophets who struggled for the transformation of society. 'O
In the first volume of his history of religious dissent, Michael Watts maintained a perspective sirnilar to that of Morton, arguing that the Quaker movement was a "refuge for those whose political hopes had ken eclipsed.'' Watts pointed to the Leveller " John
Lilburne's conversion to the Quaker movement as evidence that the Friends' message of
'O'Bryan W. Ball, A Great E-ctation: Eschatolo@cd Thought in Enelish Protestantism to 1660 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1979, pp. 195-2 10. an inner spiritual Kingdom attracted such disillusioned and weary radicals whose vision of earthl y reform had been disappointed l2 Although Lilburne's imprisonment and his discouragement at the loss of his cause would have predisposed hirn to desire religious cornfort, one should not assume that Lilburne's embracing of a spiritual Kingdom that was not of this world and his rejection of the carnal sword meant that he had forsaken revolutionary stniggle. Quakers would assert that %e Kingdom is not of this World," and that their weapons were "not carna1 but spiritual" even in writings in whic h they promoted a radical social agenda and spoke prophetically to the state. l3 Quakers employed this language to clarify that they were not seeking to overthrow the governrnent of England by violence, but it did not indicate that they were politically uninterested By becoming a Quaker, Lilburne joined a religious body that shared many of his social goals. As Hill noted, when Lilburne joined the Quakers in 1655 they stiil were associated with Level Ier objectives and perspectives. '" Li1bume's conversion to the faith of those who agreed with much of his social agenda wouid not indicate his abandonment of it He joined a religiously and socially radical and politically defiant body of believen which allowed him to retain many of his former beliefs. Lilbume had
"Watts, pp. 128,207-208.
'"dward Burrough, "To the Parliament and Army," 1659, in Barry Reay, 'The Quakers in 1659: Two Newly Discovered Broadsides by Edward Burrough," Journal of the Friends Historical Societv, 54 (1 977), 108.
'"Hill, World Turned Upside Down, p. 193. Although Hill argued bat the Quakers withdrew quickly fiom their stniggle with society after the Restoration, he contended that they supported many aspects of the Leveller programme throughout the interregnum. See Hill, pp. 193-98,305-306. 11
good reason to believe that Gdhad not prospered his previous efforts and that the
success of his vision required a new attitude, method, and spiritual community.
Although Lilbme the Separatist had felt betrayed when the sece withdrew their support
from the Leveller programme in 1649," he discovered a new community of faith with
which to identiQ through his conversion to the radical Quaker movement of the
Interregnum.
The recent dissertation on the earliest Quakers' beliefs by Rosemq Anne Moore
continues to perpetuate the argument that the Friends were not very politicdly active.
Moore noted that there was a measure of radical political concem among Friends and
that many of them sought a new world, but contended that there was little constant
"politically related enthusiasrn" during the hterregnum except in 1653 and 1659. Like
many Friends, she argued, Fox was concerned more for the inner spiritual kingdom,
although "not so as to exclude politics." While Moore held that spintual and political
concerns "were not rnutually exclusive," and that most Quakers believed that the
Kingdom they aiready experienced within themselves was about to have a wider
fulfilment in the world, she did not observe how the Quakers7religious beliefs inspired
their social concem and encouraged their activism. indeed, she considered expressions of concem for the poor and for social justi-ce unusual in Quaker writings, and stated that
Fox had a dim view of the Levellers without noting how much of their agenda he shared.
Moore descnbed Fox as "'withdrawn from the civil stmggle" very early, and identified
''Murray Tolmie, The Triwn~hof the Saints: The Semuate Churches of London 16 16- 1649 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), pp. 37, 182-90. 12
the years 16%- 1656 as already a period of transition in which "some of the early fire was
disappearing under the weight of a mass movement-" This would make for an extremely
brief early radical pend for the Quaker movement By 1657 and 1658, according to
Moore, Quaker concerns for the Kingdom of God on earth had little connection to the
political scene, but were focused on the Kingdom's presence wi-thin their own
community.16 Although Moore offered some statements that qdified this overall depiction of the early Quakers, on the whole she played down their social and political
interest and activity.
THE EARLY QUAKER MOVEMENT AS ACTIVIST
Other scholars have challenged the position that the early Quakers were not political ly and social ly activist. Decades ago, Wil helm Sc henk argued that although
Quakers spoke primarïly of religious issues they were vigorously concemed for social justice as well, and that they believed that justice and liberty could be achieved only with spiritual weapons, and not with violence or "worldly policy." While the Kingdom they anticipated was not like the kingdorns of this world, it was to be established in the tangible world. Schenk also maintained that while Quakers were involved with social issues, the Quaker movement must not be misundentwd as "a political or social
16RosernaryAnne Moore, "The Faith of the First Quakers: The Development of Their Beliefs and Practices Up to the Restoration" (unpublished Ph-D. dissertation, University of Birmingham, 1993), pp. 7 1,79-80,99, 128-32,2 14-261-62. movement" that was merely "disguised as a religious sect." l7
Soon after Schenk's publication, James F. Maclear called attention to events in
early Quaker history which rnany writers had overlooked Maclea. stresseci the early
Friends' political and social radicalism, and their interest in transforming society thnugh
active parhcipation in the political realm. He identified the year 1659 as the point of
cnsis when the Quakers began their retreat fiom political involvement, since their hopes
of social transformation were disappointed by the Interregnurn govemment. Mer the
fa11 of the Commonwealth, the "millenarian social radicalism" of the Friends pdually
declined; amid Restoration persecution, Quakers abandoned their dynamic protest
against social evi 1s. Quakers retained their social concem and humani tarian endeavour,
but abandoned their prophetic witness to society. With the coming of religious toleration
in 1689, Quakers fitted themselves "within the pale of respectable English
nonconforrnity." Maclear thus argued that the Interregnum Quakers were not the mild
social humanitarians they later becarne, and that this fiequently offered depiction of the earliest Friends had ken based upon an erroneous reading of the later Quaker
communih, back upon the earlier movement. While he noted the importance of political
developments for the Quakers, Maclear did not deal substantially with their theology. l8
Also refuting the widely held view that the early Quaken were unconcemed with social and political issues and stood "'doof' from the political scene, Alan Cole noted
t7 W. Schenk, The Concern for Social Justice in the Puritan Revolution (London: Longrnans, Green and Company, 1948), pp. 126-29.
'8~amesF. Maclear, "Quakensrn and the End of the Interregnum: A Chapter in the Domestication of Radical Puritanism," Church History, 19 (1%O), 240-70. 14
that Quakers saw the necessity of the civil force which upholds govemments, and were
not pacifists who refused govemment offices. Quakers were cautious about participating
in political movements because they did not trust the elite to implement just refonns, not
because they were politicaily indifferent. Cole identified the Quaker movement as a
"movement of protest agakt the suppression of the 'good old cause"' throughout the
Interregnum. With Maclex, Cole noted that the Quakers were disappointed by the
Restoration, but also dIed attention to the fact that Quakers continued to work with
others for "limited political goals such as religious toleration. Although Fox led the
Quakers in "uncompromising passive resistance," after his death Quakers becarne more
accommodating to the world around them so that by the eighteenth century they had
"settled dom into the group of respectable philanthropists" which many historians had
assumed they always were. Nevertheless, Cole credited the Quakers with assisting the achievement of religious toleration and helping some radical ideas of the English
Revolution continue during the eighteenth century. Iy
Placing the emergence of the early Quaker movement within the historical context of the English Revolution, Hugh Barbour explored both the Quaken' theology and their social and political beliefs, arguing that like the radical Puritans from whom he believed the Quaker movement drew its theologicd and politicai ongins, Friends looked for God's triumph in histoiy and for the social justice which would corne when his
Kingdom was established on a tmnsformed earth. Proclamation and protest were the
Ig~lanCole, "The Quakers and the English Revolution," Past and Present, 10 ( 1W6), 39-54. 15
Quaker means of fighting Whe Lamb's War," of helping to bring God's victory over evil and to establish Christ's milleonid reign. While Quakers believed Christ had corne already as the inward Light, they sought the establishment of the outward Kingdom which would appear in history when God ruled in the hearts of persons. Thus the
Quakers were not content with the redemption of individuds for the success of the
Lamb's War meant realizing the radical Puritan aspiration of the saints' deon earth.
Instead of withdrawing nom the world, the Quakers confionted it with their message in an effort to convert and transfonn it according to God's will. in this willingness to be used by God to engage, tnuisfom7and dethe world, according to Barbour, the early
Friends were less like those sectarians who retired from socieîy and political involvement and more like the Puritans. Quakers believed that God was to dethe state as well as the church through his saints, who wodd govem according to the Spirit's guidance. Barbour also argued that the onset of the Resîoration did not cause Quakers to retreat fiom eschatological hopes and political concem as Maclear and Cole had contended, for in
1660 Fnends believed that God would use the restored monarchy for the purposes of the
Kingdom. Noting that Friends were still aware that they were fighting the Lamb's War even during the 1680s- Barbour argued that the earnest Quaker social concem which still remains today is comected with that eschatologicai social struggle of the early
The relationship between the Friends' religious and political beliefs and those of
2%~ghBarbour, The Ouakers in Puntan Eng;Land (New Haven: Yale University Press, l964), pp. 1 1, 15,26,40,71, 125-27, 186-92, l97-98,203-2O4,254-S6. 16 their Puritan conternporaries was also explored by Melvin Endy, who maintained that when radical social and political aspirations were disappointed by events the Friends did not abandon their hopes, but expected that the Kingdom would arrive only through the development of the proper spintuality. Like Barbour, Endy argued that Quakers looked for God to transform the state and to raise up saints who would nile over a redeemed society. Since God wodd dethrough the saints, Quakers remained involved with government afEain and shouldered political responsibility. Endy commented that
Barbour failed to recognize that the Fnends did not only anticipate a "coercive nile" by the regenerated saints over the sinfid society, for they also held the alternative hope that the rest of society would becorne converted to their faith and so render the nation a c'consensual utopia. " Endy concluded that Quaken believed God would manage pol itical developments, but that God had no specific fom of govemment in mind since he could dethrough any political system?'
Many writen have stressed that Quakers conformed to English society rather quickly at the Restoration and have ignored the degree to which Quaker militancy continued Michael Mullett challenged this contention with his evidence that Friends retained millenarian aspirations even into the edy eighteenth century. Mullett noted that prosecution of Friends for tithe resistance continued after the introduction of toleration had supposedly embraced Quakers among the "tame dissenters" of England.
Friends responded to this persecution with a sense of dienation fiom the state and
. 21MelvinB.Endy Jr., mlvOOuakerism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973), pp. 87-907310-20. 17
society, and by maintaking a radical eschatology in defiance of their prose~ution.~
Mullet saw the Friends' "domestication" as a considerably longer process thao have sucb
wrïters as Hill and Maclear, and perceiveci that there was a very gradua1 mitigation of
their early millenarian radicalism over a number of decades.
Aithough many authon have recognized the vitality of the earliest Friends' sucial
and political protest, Stephen A. Kent went so far as to seek to reduce the Quakers to a
political movement that ernployed theological language to rationalize its agenda
Characterizhg the Quaker movement as "a social movement organization wirhin the
popular anti-tithe social movement," Kent noted the link between Quaker theology and
social protest, but saw this theology as a rationalization, as providing "sanctified justifications" for tithe resistance. Quaker eschatology and belief in the divine
inhabitation of believers, for Kent, served the purpose of strengthening Friends as they
suffered for tithe resistance and other convictions. The Friends expressed their bel iefs
"in religious Ianguage" because they lived in a Society which had institutions and values that were "thoroughly integrated with a religious system." Kent recognized that not everyone who became a Quaker did so specifically because of the movement's resistance to tithe payment, and identified some theological tenets which drew interest to the movement. Still, he presented the Quaker movement in a marner that largely reduced it to an anti-tithe protest that borrowed a religious vocabulary fiom contemporary society to justie its position regarding this single issue. Certainly, the Friends did insist that
*Michitel Mullett, Relimous Movements in Earlv Modem EUT- (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1980), pp. 94,148. 18 beiieven not cooperate with their own oppression by paying tithes, and Kent has shown that this aspect of Quaker teaching had wide appeal in a society where the abolition of tithes had become a major aspiration However, he emphasized the importance of this issue to an inordinate degree by contending that dl of the Friends7religious beliefs contributed to their protest against tithes and that their main goal was the eradication of the tithe system? This thesis will argue that the Quakers' primary goal was the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth and that their protest and resistance conceniing tithes was merely one important aspect of their stmggle against evil and for the Kingdom's emergence. By arguing effectively against the contention of earlier scholan such as Max Weber that the Friends were "unpolitical," had only religious concerns, and were uninterested in social justice and refonn, however, Kent made an important contri bution.'"
The socially confiontational nature of the early Quaker movement received serious attention in Richard Bauman's monograph on the use of speech and silence among early Friends. Baurnan identified silence as the Quakers7means of opening themselves to God7sdirect revelation so that the divine message could be passed through themselves to others. This interpretation directly related the Friends' Spiritualism to their sense of prophetic mission and protest He systematical ly analysed the Quakers7
"rhetoric of irnpoliteness" and the "biblical invective" that they used in their fight against
23 Stephen A. Kent, "Relative Depnvation and Resource Mobilization: A Study of Early Quakerism," British Journal of Swio10q, 33 ( l982), 533-38.
*%tephen A. Kenc "The Quaker Ethic and the Fixed Pnce Policy: Max Weber and Beyond," Socioloeical Inqui-, 53 (1983), i 8. 19 the world's corruption and hierarchical social relationships. Dunng the Restoration, penecution induced Quakers to abandon the anti-hierarchicai implications of their style of speech so that it became conventional and lacked its earlier radical import Bauman noted that prophetic speech was especially vdued for addressing both religious and social issues due to the apocalyptic expectations of English society during the middle years of the seventeenth centwy, but that it fell into disrepute as an age of scientific rationalism began to emerge a few decades later. He traced the development of a
"routinimtion of chansma" in which the prophetic word increasingly came to be placed under the control of elders and the consensus of the Quaker cornmunity as Friends sought unity among themselves to resist penecution fiom the outside world Baurnan identified the years 1666 and 1672 as special points of transition when leading Friends cautioned against prophetic speech that invited persecution. He suggested that Quaker preachers stopped fighting the Lamb's War and began to exercise a safe "diplomacy." By the time toleration was achieved, Quakers had abandoned their social protest and political engagement in order to be IeA unmolested by the English govemment. The moderating of the prophetic tone was accompanied by a withdrawal fiom political activism. Thus, both hostile forces fiom without and cautious modifjmg forces fiom within came to regdate Quaker pr~phec~.~'
In his book on the Quakers, Barry Reay depicted the Friends as social, political, and religious radicals who were part of a contemporaiy radical milieu that had grown out
25 Richard Bauman, Let Your Words Be Few: Svrnbolism of Soeakine and Silenc~ Among Seventeenth-Centurv Ouakeq (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983)- pp. 23-25,43-59,64-65,84,93-94, 1 18-19, 13747. of the English Revolution. While Reay saw a relationship between the Quaker
movement and the disappointment of the radicals' expectations during the Civil Wars, he
departed fiom Morton and Watts by arguing that persons not only joined the Quaker
movement to find confort in religion, but also to continue the struggle for the
achievement of radical aspirations. Quakers fomed an activist protest movement against
the repression of their radical hopes, and believed that the spintuai transformation of
persons would bring a millennial Kingdom in which their political and social goals
would be achieved He also argued that their activism and protest provoked a
conservative reaction within English society which contributed to the Restoration of the
monarchy. Like Hill, Reay saw the Quaker movement as quickiy beghing to alter itself to adapt to the changed political circurnstances of the Restoration, although he observed that the Quakers did not become totally withdrawn fiom political involvement even then, but held political offices when they could and made political alliances in their quest for toleration,26
Exploring Quaker eschatology and stressing the relationship between their theology and their social programme, Douglas Gwyn contended that Fox's central message was that "Christ is corne to teach his people himself" Since the imer presence of Christ was an accomplished fact, the mission of believers was to respond to Christ's presence so that there would be a revolution withn the self which would lead them to transfomi society and restore God's reign over the earth. Christ's Kingdom would not be
"%rry Reay, The Ouaken and the English Revolution (London: Temple Smith, 1985)- pp. 34'9-10, 19,32, 100-10. merely an interior Kingdom of the spirit, but a Kingdom that would corne in this world and replace the governments of the world?' Gwyn did not, however, highlight the fact that early Quakers expected political structures and civil power would be used by God for the Kingdom's establishment. His emphasis on the apocalyptic, however, better helped to situate the Friends into their contemporary religious context.
In an exploration of the unique and radical nature of early Quaker theology,
Richard Bailey was arnong those who related the social radicalisrn of the earliest Friends to their theology. Their political radicalisrn was intensifie& he argued, by their concept of divine inhabitation, which taught that believers became divinid as the imer
"celestial flesh" of Christ transfonned hem, This belief in their own divinization through the inhabitation of an almost physical presence of Christ contrïbuted to the
Quakers' social protest, since it encouraged them to confiont the social elite even more stridently and confidently as they acted out their role as God's own divine sons and daughten. When some Quakers publicly exaited Nayler as Chnst in 1656 on the basis of this theology, it aroused such a reaction against Friends that they began a retreat from both theological and social radi~alisrn.~~Bailey identifiai this incident as a pivotal dngpoint for the Quakers' retreat fiom social activism, as Hi11 had earlier considered it the Quaken' first "'defeat"which began to alter the radical nature of the rnovement
ougla glas Gwyn, Apocalypse Of the Word: The Life and Message of George Fo% (1624-1 69 1) (Richmond, Mana: Friends United Press, 1986), pp. 30-11 1,160,202- 203.
"Richard Bailey, New Li& on George Fox and Earlv Quakerism: The Making and Umakin~of a God (San Francisco: Mellen Research University Press, 1992). well before the Restoration completed their disappointment-"
The millenarian and socially radical nature of the early Quaker movement was stressed also in H. Larry Ingle's recent biography of Fox Ingle described the attraction of the liberating, empowering, and anti-authoritarian message of the eariy Quakers for those who were resentfùl of the oppression occasioned by the tithe system, the economic elite, and social changes which he saw as portending the emergence of capitalism. Whde
Fox's interest was predominately religious, during the English Revolution the Quaker leader also empbasized issues pertaining to social and economic justice. Paradoxically, while Fox stressed an individualistic and immediate spiritual contact with God, he also sought to build a community of persons who would mite to restore primitive Christianity and to assist in the establishment of a utopian Kingdom in which God wodd dethe world through his people. Along with historians such as Hill and Reay, Ingle argued that the Quaken' expectation of the Kingdom was disappointed by the Restoration, and that when milienarian expectations were thwarted by histoncal events the Quaker movement began to lose its popular appeal and its energy. Fox took "a sharp right tum,' and abandoned his militant and millenarian confrontation of socieîy, as well as his demands for social and political refoms. The movement "gradwilly tumed in on itself' to survive persecution as Friends lost their former confidence that they could help establish the earthly deof Christ and the saints. The individualistic and mdical Quaker movement becarne an authorirarian religious body. In later decades, Fox's message of individual spiritual liberation clashed with the organizational needs of the united and disciplined 23
Quaker community which he helped to form and orgm-ze? Ingle thus noted the initially
radical nature of the movement, and stressed its eady transformation.
Clearly, historians have expressed a wide range of interlocking interpretations
regarding the nature of the early Quaker movement and the haste of its reconstruction.
Authors argue whether the Quakers were originally socially passive or activisf whether their religious beliefs influenced them to withdraw from society or to seek actively its radical alteration, and whether the erstwhile radical Quaker movement retreated from activism quickly or gradually. To resolve these questions, some historians have focused prirnarily upon Fox, and have presented him as a reliable example of a typical Quaker thinker- mers have dealt with the Quaker movement by selecting the writings of a wide variety of Friends in an effort to discover what was characteristic of Quaker thought.
The intention of this dissertation is to explore ail of the known writings of three notable
Quaker spokesmen of the movement's first decade, George Fox, James Nayler, and
George Fox the Younger. The last of these has received very Iittle attention from scholars, so that the following account will be the first to make an appropriate assessrnent of his thought and contribution. This thesis will examine three key components of the theology of these three Quaker leaders and will probe the relationship between these beliefs and their social and political thought and behaviour. Aithough there were significant differences among Fox, Nayler, and Fox the Younger, al1 of them evidenced a Spiritualist, perfectionist, and millenarian theology that directly affected
'OH. Lany Ingle, First Among Friends: George Fox and the Creati'on of Ouakerisrn (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 3-1 1,43,53,58,78, 1 1 1, 1 14, 188-92. 24 their social and political beliefs and goals, and propeiled them into radical social protest.
They challenged their society and its govemment with full confidence that God had assigned them a prophetic role. As Fox the Younger expressed it, they saw themselves as
'-watchmen" sent to warn England's ruiers and people of the judgments awaiting the opposers of Cod's designs." They were certain that Christ spoke and acted through them to establish his Kingdorn on earth. A gradual withdrawal from intense political activism did begin arnong Quakers during the discouraging conclusion of the Interregnum and was accelerated by persecution in the Restoration and by the Kingdom's delay. However, the writings of these three Fnends indicate that the Quaker movement certainly had not origmated as an inwardly oriented retreat fiom the world and fiom social struggle, but rather as a movement marked by prophetic social and political protest that was fueled by
Spin'tualist, perfectionist and millenarian theology. While Quakers provided an altemate
çtrategy to the dareand political machinations that had failed to bn'ng the liberation that many had ho ped the Englis h Revolution would produce, throughout the Interregum and into the Restoration Quaken wntinued to hunger for a new world and to contend for its establishment.
3 1 Fox the Younger, "For You Who Are Called Commonwealthsmen in Army and Parliament," in A Collection of the Writings Bv That Faithfùl Servant of God George Fox. the Youneer, 1665, F 1997, p. 10 1. This self identification of divinely sent watchrnan was shared by many Puritan preachers. See Theodore Dwight Bozeman, Tg Live Ancient Lives: The Pnmitivist Dimension in Puritanisrn (Chape1 Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1988), p. 293. CHAPTER THREE
SPINTUALISM
The Quaker movement emerged from a contemporary milieu of radical
Spiritualism" that Friends shared with ~anten,'~Seeker~,~ and individuals like William
Erbury ( l604-54), Gemd Winstanley, William Del1 (d. 1664) and John Saltmarsh
(d 1647). The Spiritualist perspective of Christianity stressed the work of God's Spirit
within persons and the inability of extemai, material means to mediate spiritual reaiities.
Thus, the material world did not convey God's salvation and revelation, but only the
Spirit's operation within pemns. With other Spirihialists, Quakers upheld the priority of
the inner Spirit over the scriptures and denigrated the value of sacrarnents. Moreover,
instead of stressing salvation through faith in the historical Christ's death and
resurrection, as did most Protestants, Quakers em phasized the li fe transforming work of
32~pirihialisrnmay be distinguished from myticism in that the mystic aspires to enjoy temporary experiences of union with God while the Spiritualist seeks the continuous and immediate indwelling, guidance and empowerment of the Holy Spirit See L Calvin Keene, "Historie Quakerism and Mysticism," Ouaker Relieious Thoueht, 7 ( 1%S), 5-6, 9- 1 1; George Arthur khnson, "From Seeker to Finder: A Shidy of Seventeenth-Century English Spiritualism Before the Quakers," Church Histoq* 17 (1948), 299.
"See Appendix II.
Y The Seekers were individuals who emphasized the inner presence and guidance of the Holy Spirit and rejected al1 existing churches as unfaithful. They awaited a millemial age in which the Spirit would direct the reestablishment of the tme church. Some Seekers met together in silence to await the Spirit's inspiration as did the Quakers. See J.F. McGregor, "Seekers and Ranten," in Radical Relieion, pp. 12 1-29; Kathieen Anne Ellsworth, '"As Sheep Erifolded': William Erbery, the Seeken and Radical Religion in the English Revolution7' (unpublished M.A. thesis, Queen's University, 1989), pp. 26-3 1. the etemal Spirit of Christ within belie~ers.~'
There has been much controversy arnong historians whether the Quaker movement arose from influences of English Puri-tanism or from Continental Spi~tualism
Many similarities have been noted between the Quakers and radical Puritans which has led historians such as Geofiey F. Nuttali, Frederick B. Tolles, J. William Frost, and
Hugh Barbour to consider the Quaker movement a radical form or "'extension7' of
Puritanisrn?' This position countered the previous assessrnent by the prominent Quaker historian Rufus Jones that the Friends ultimately had derived their faith from the influences of Continental Spiritualists such as Jacob Boehme (1 575- 1624), whose writings were available in English translation during the Quaker movement's formative years during the late 1640s." Jones especially noted the similady between Boehme and the Quakers regarding the concepts of the divine Light stmggling against spiritual darkness, and the restoration of the creation from its fallen state." Jones also noted that
Quakers were sectarians in the tradition of the martyreci Separatist Henry Barrow
" Melvin B. Endy Jr., "The hterpretation of Quakensm: Rufus Jones and His Critics," Quaker Histoy, 70 ( 198 1 ), 6-20; Earlv Quakerism, p. 53.
36GeofieyF. Nuttall, The HoIv Spirit in Puritan Faith and Experience (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1946), pp 13-15; Frederick B. Tolles, Ouakers and the Atlantic Culture (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1947), pp. 59-60; Hugh Barbour and J. William Frost, The Oualces (New York: Greenwood Press, 1988)- pp. 14,30.
37~ufusJones, Mvsticisrn and Democracv in the Enelish Commonwealth (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932), pp. 63, 142; S~intualReformers of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries @oston: Beacon Press, 19 14), pp. 53-55,220-26.
'*Rufus Jones, Shidies in M~sticalReligion (New York: Russell and Russell, 1970), p. 495. First Published in 1909. (d 1593), who had opposed the secular govemment's control of the church and advocated voluntary churches in which all believers could use their spiritual gifts corporately. Like the Quakers who came &er him, Barrow also disapproved of penons preparing for ministry though university education, Opposed enforced tithes, and argued for religious to~eration.~~
Michael Finlayson, Richard L. Greaves and Paul Christianson have demonstrated that the definition of the terrn "Puntan" is highly controversial, and there is much disagreement about which seventeenth century religious groups may be so labelled" It is questionable that the Spiritualist sectarian movement under study deserves both of the initially derogatory epithets "Quaker" and "Puntan." John Punshon's position that the movement arose fiom Puritan, Spiritualist, and Anabaptist influences seems to account for al1 similarities with other movements be~t,~'while Melvin B. Endy's observation that if Quakers were similar to Puritans it was to those who are designated Spirituai or
"spiritualizing" ~uritans'~indicates that neither the Puritan nor Spiritualist antecedents of
3gJones,Mvsticism and Democracv, p. 43.
mchael Finlayson, Historians. Puritanim. and English Revolution: The Religiom Factor in English Politics Before and AAer the Interremurn (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985); Richard L. Greaves, 'The Puritan-Nonconformist Tradition in England, 1560- 1700: Historiographical Reflections," Albion, 17 ( 1985), 449-86; Paul Christianson, "Reformers and the Church of England Under Elizabeth 1 and the Early Stuarts," Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 3 1 (1980), 463-82. These authors offer analyses of the problem of defining Puritanisrn appropriately.
"John Punshon, Portrait in Grev (London: Quaker House SeMces, 1984), pp. 10,22, 35.
"%ndy, Earlv Ouakensm. pp. 7-8,309; "The Interpretation of Quakerism," 3-2 1. 28
Quaker thought should be disregarded Historians who support Puritan origins for the movement do not deny the Quaken' cornmitment to Spiritualist concepts, but only argue that radical Puritans shared them. tn this they have provided an important corrective to those wtiters who saw the Quaker movement solely as an alternative to Puritanism and did not see the important similarities between the movements, or who did not recognize that many Quaker concepts were drawn from the immediate environment of the EngIish
Revolution and the radical thought which flourished then Persons who are labelled
"radical Puritans" by historians such as Barbour and Nuttall could more specifically be classified as Spirituaiists. Whether or not they were Puritans at al1 depends upon one's definition of that controversial tenn. What is clear is that there was a milieu of
Spintualists present in England, and that the Friends may be numbered among them. It is no less likely that Continental Spiritualists affected religious thought in England than that other Continental Protestants such as Luther and Calvin influenced English religion.
It seems reasonable to believe that the Quaker movement was influenced primarily by the
Spiritualist milieu within England whic h had ken infl uenced already by Continental
Spiritualism. Thus, as Endy observed, Continental Spirituaiist influence on Quakers was primarily indirect4) and was rnediated through the English sources of their environment.
While some authors have denied that the early Quaker movement was mystical and have insisted that it was instead prophetic, it seems more reasonable to recognize that a rnystical or Spiritualist perspective does not of necessity mie out a prophetic perspective as though the two were mutually exclusive. The early Friends exhibited both 29
Spiritualist and prophetic traits. The early Quaker message certainly offered a prophetic religious and social witness, but the Friends believed that their prophetic message arose fiom the divine i~erpresence which directeci their protest If one was to speak the words of Goci, one must fim receive God's message through an encounter with the Spin? within oneself In the early years of the Quaker movement, the prophetic and the
Spiritualkt components were both manifested and were both of central significance.
GEORGE FOX
George Fox, the son of a prosperous weaver from the village of Femy Drayton in
Leicestershire, is widely regarded as the single most important Quaker leader for the formation of the movement's beliefs, activity and organization. There is some question whether Fox should be considered the founder of the Quaker movement or only one of several leaders who united with Iike-minded persons and eventually came to a chief position among them in Iater years." Fox was a messenger who for the first time
"echoed" the perceptions many people dready held, rather than one who presented
UDouglas V. Steere, Quaker S~intuaiitv:*. Selected Writiw (New York: Padist Press, l984), p. 17. '' Winthrop S. Hudson, "'A Suppressed Chapter in Quaker History," Journal of Reli~on,24 (1944), 108-18. previously uncontemplated beliefs." Certainly there was no such office as "Leader of
the Quakers" that was filled by Fox or any other incumbent, but Fox clearly did emerge
as the leader with the greatest amount of prestige and influence in the eyes of most
Fnends. Fox had tumed to an inner religion of the Spirit when he came to believe that
the clergy and people who professed the Puritan religion of his youth4' had failed to
provide an answer to his spirihial turmoil. Fox left his devout ruraI Leicestershire farniIy
and his apprenticeship to a shoemaker and livestock dealer in 1643 when he was nineteen
years old. He went out to seek an answer for his profound discouragement with what he
perceived to be the dichotomy between the behaviour and the Christian profession of his
contemporan'es, and to find an answer for his unresolved stniggle with temptation and
despair. After soliciting the assistance of several noted clergymen, Fox judged their
ministrations useless and pronounced them "miserable cornforters." In his Journal, he
declared: "They were al1 as nothing to me, for they could not reach my condition."4 He
was to embark upon a lifetime of anticlerical protest and opposition to the established
religion of the "steepleho~se~~which he had experienced so negatively." Mistrusting
&David E. W. Holden, Friends Divided: Conflict and Division in the Society of Friena (Richmond: Friends United Press, 1988), p. 9.
" nie village of Fox's childhood had a history of staunchly Puritan sentiment. See Joseph T. Pickvance, çSeoree Fox and the Purefovs (London: Fnends Historical Society, 1WO), pp. 2 1-22.
" George Fox, The Journal of George Fox, ed. by John L. Nickalls (Cambridge: University Press, 1952), p. 6. Fox's Journal was written in 1675 and first published in edited fonn in 1694. " With some other religious radicals Fox labelled c hurc h buildings "bsteeplehouses"to express his denial that they were churches. He insisteci tbat church buildings were places 3 1 both the established church and the dissenting sects, Fox found the immediate work of the divine Spirit within himself to be the only agent capable of resolving his smiggle. He identified this imer Spirit as Christ the Light Fox reported that in 1647 after four years of spinnial search and anxiety, he realized that there was "nothing outwardly to help me ...then, Oh then, 1 heard a voice which said, 'There is one, even Christ Jesus, that can speak to thy condition' ... And this 1 knew e~~erimentall~."~Fox believed that the voice he heard and the convictions that he was developing proceeded fiom divine revelation," that God gave him ability for "discerning" the spiritual condition of others, and that he had experienced a transformation so radical that, "1 was very much altered in countenance and person as if my body had been new moulded or ~hanged."~~
Fox sensed a divine mission to convince others of his insights and began to cal1 persons fiom their dependence upon the outward churches and their extemal forms of worship to the Light within themselves that would lead believen into al1 th. He
of false worship like the idolatrous "high places" which biblical prophets denounced. He insisted that the church of Christ could not be a physical object but was the perfected spiritual community of God7speople. See George Fox, The Ground of Hieh Places, 1657, F 1 834, pp. 1-2; Catechism for Children, 1657, F 17564 p. 58; George Fox and James Nayler, Saul's Errand to Damascus, 1654, F 1895, p. 9.
"ç arnbridee Journal, pp. 1-1 1. The word "experimentally" indicates that Fox credited only that which he experienced and mistnisted authority extemal to himself
''The Spiritualkt concepts which Fox gairieci were also available fkom human sources that he would have encountered on his travels through an Engiand in political, social, and rel igious turmoil. See Sabine, "[ntroduction," in Works of Winstanlev ,p. 1 1 . If he was aware of hurnan contributors to his thought, perhaps Fox felt that God reveaied to him which of the many ideas he heard were to be rejected and which accepted " Cambridee Journal, p. 20. recalled:
The Lord comrnanded me to go abroad into the world, which was like a briery, thorny wîlderness...1 was sent to turn people from darkness to the light-..I was to bring people off from al1 their own ways to Chri S...and fiom their churches, which men had made and gathered, to the Church in God...and off ftom the world's teachers made by men, to learn of Christ. ..53
In 1647, Fox began a public ministry of teaching and prophehc confrontation?' Over the next few years of wandering he encountered many Iike-minded persons, pnmarily in the north of England, and by 1652 regular meetings of his fellow believers were king established." Hïs vision of "'a great people to be gatherers6as a fellowship of the enlightened and redeemed became fulfilled as the ranks of the Quaker rnovement rapidly
Fox's eschatology infomed him that the last age had come. It was now "the age of the Spirit" which the Bible foretold, when God's liberating Spirit would be poured upon people. He stated, "the age is come. and the gathenng of people into unity, into the power of the Lord God.''" Fox firmly asserted that now, "Christ has come to teach his people himself7and was speaking to them as the Light within.jg He believed that
53 Cambridge Journal, pp. 33-34.
5.4 Cambridge Journal, pp. 13, 1 8.
" Johnson, 308-10.
56 Cambridge Journal, p. 104.
"George Fox, Scriptiunculae Quaedam Anglico-Latine, 1660, FI 896, p. 16. " Saul's Errana p. 7. 33
England 'Bath been long dedby customs, but God is raishg a Iight in men's hearts."
The fint covenant of the ancient Jews with its temple buildings, priestly clergy, and
tithes to support them had been abrogated by Christ, who was calling people to accept
himself as their high priest, and to becorne his temples themselves in which he would
live and work. nie extenial priesthood and temple represented by the clergy and
churches of contemporq society were to be repudiated and resisted" The primitive
church of the New Testament wouid be restored by the same Spirit that had inspired and
guided Christ's apodes in the church's formation. The centuries of apostasy and error
that had begun even within the lifetime of the apostlesMwere at an end, for Christ had
returned as the Light to iead and empower those who wodd turn fiom the false churches to enter the new church founded by his Spirit?
Fox insisted that the Light of which he spoke was not, as many of his contempomies argued, merely a created human faculty such as conscience or reason which like the rest of fallen hurnan nature was ~nreliable.~~The Light was Christ the co-
Creator of the universe now universally present within each person, working within the conscience, and even in spite of a "seared insensitive con~cience.~'Fox often stated
" George Fox, Newes Out of the North, 1653, F1868, pp. 23-24,29.
George Fox, The Great Miste? of the Great Whore, 1659, FI 832, p. 66.
" George Fox, To the People of Uxbridee. 1659, F1959.
62 Fox, p. 19.
63 George Fox, To the Protector and Parliament, 1658, FI 96 1, pp. 4849; Mistery, p. 10. 34
both that the Light was Christ, and that the Light was fkom Christ The suggestion that
this was Fox's method of expressing his belief that Christ was both transcendent in the
heavenly rdmproviding the Light and immanent dwelling within penons as the Light
itself is a helpful one? It is, of course, entirely possible that Fox was not so
theological ly sophisticated as to resolve or even be concemed with this seeming
ciiscrepancy between the Light king Christ and king fiom Christ.
Fox's anthropology was totally negative, for he considered hurnanity completely
fdlen fiom the divine image in which it had &en created, and like other "creatures" was
without naturai ability to understand God or respond to the divine. Therefore, the Light
was not part of the natural person but was the divine Spirit 'bsupernaturallyadded"65 and graciously resident within al1 to redeem and enlighten fallen humans. The Light that first acted within to confkont and convict the individual of sin and lead one into repentance then began to empower one to conquer sin and live in a right relationship with God. Fox urgeci, "heed the Iight, and stand still" in it to "receive power, to overcome al1... be patient and lem of Christ...and thy sou1 shall be ~atisfied.'~~Tuming to the Light was initially a painful experience, as it showed persons their sinfulness before God and their need to repent. As a divine presence within a "fallen7' person, the Light was so "antagonistic to human nameT7that it brought one into inner conflict which oflen led to the physicai
" hoSeppanen, "The Inner Light in the Joumals of George Fox: A Semantic Studyy7(unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Helsinki, 1965), pp. 45-46. '' Seppanen, p. 3. FOX, Catechisrn, pp. 4,52. trembling and quaking for which the Fnends were pejoratively ~rned.~~Fox explained that quaking occurred when Christ "dispossesses" the satank presence mithin one, and
"makes man the temple of God for himseif to dwell in ... which makes the keepers of the house to trembleAt is God that worketh in
Since the Light within was the presence of the etemal Christ, the Light was suffrcient to bring one to salvatiod9 Fox argued that dl "that believes in the light shall become a child of light," and receive power to become "the Son of GO^-"^' Since the
Light entirely enlightened and led those who heeded if believers were ail united in one mind so that if they "be ten thousand of thousands," they were of "one light, one way, one truth, one head, many memben, yet one body, whom Christ governeth with his power.'"' Fox charged that the clergy who relis people of a mediate call, mediate means" and so reject the "immediate" guidance of the Light were turning people from tnith." The Light, not the clergy, was the ?rue teacher who wouid expose the false
"George Fox, Some Princi~lesof the Elect Peo~leof Goa 166 1, F1907, p. 25.
69 George Fox, Replv to the Pretended Vindication, 1658, F1890, p. 35.
George Fox, Testimonv of the Tnith Lieht, 1657, F1929, p. 19. The significance of becoming "the Son of God" will be explored in Chapter Four.
7' George Fox, Teachers of the World IJnvailea 1656, FI9244 p. 25. The supreme irony of Fox offenng this assertion in 1656 will become evident in Chapter Five.
72 George Fox, Declaration Aginst AI1 Profession and Professors, 1654, F 1 784, p. 7. Fox used the term "professors" to indicate those who professed faith in Christ but did not believe in and obey the Light which Fox held to be Christ. 36
extemal trappings of religion and reveal dl. Since the Light lived and worked within
each person, Fox could appeal to the divine presence in ail, saying, "to the Light in a11 your consciences Ispeak, that with it al1 your min& may be tumed to God, and corne to
grow into the life ...that every one may corne to possess what you do profess, for al1
profession whatsoever the marner of it is without the life, opinions, sects, they are al1 in
that nature that acts contrary to the Light."" Since al1 were inhabited by the Lighf salvation was open to ail. Fox argued that while the "pne~ts~~"claimed Christ died to
save oniy the elect, scripture asserted that Christ was offered "for the sins of the whole world."'* None were predestined for damnation or salvation as in the Calvinist thought
which dominated English Protestantism but al1 were responsible for respnding to the
Light's prompting and accepting the spiritual and moral transformation the Light
provided. The elect were those who chose to respond to the Light's operations within them, while the reprobates were those who turned fiom "that of God ~ithin."~~
it is important to note that, like other Quakers, Fox rejected the traditional distinctions made between the persons of the Trinity and especially collapsed the Son and the Holy Spirit into one. Denying that the word "Trinity" may be found in scripture,
Fox asserted that the three persons are one "and so not distincf" for "unity we own"
FOX, Declmtion Aeainst Profession, p. 12.
74 Quakers frequently applied the derogatory terni "priest" to the established clergy. It irnpiied that the clergy were of the Old Covenant priesthood, which Protestants believed Christ had abolished, and that they were akin to the hated Roman Catholic priesthood. without the tension between unity and distinction of pers on^.^ Thus for Fox the Holy
Spirit was the Spirit of Christ, and the Light was both the Holy Spirit and the imer spiritual presence of Christ."
The emphasis upon the Light within and its operation was sufficiently central to the early Fnends that although they were densively labelled "Quakers" due to the trembling and shalcing which overtook many of them in moments of spirituai struggie, by the mid- 1650s Fnends often referred to themselves as the 'Children of Light. ' This terni was likely denved fiom biblical passages such as Ephesians 58, and was a self description used by some outside of the Quaker movement as welLn
Fox insisted that "an extemai opens not the etemal," but only "the etemal opens the etemal ... al1 they are seduced and seducers that thinks and saith the extemal must open the etemal.'" Fox thus repudiated al1 material means of discovenng, receiving, or accomplishing the spiritual and eternal things of Gd For the Quakers the fa11 of the physical creation into sin was so complete that no physical or natural means could be employed in spiritual matters. The outward book of scripture, the physical elements of water, bread, and wine, and the efforts of naturai human reason were totally unprofitable for spiritual purposes. Fox declareci, "this mediate stuff hath reigned long ... this Babylon
'%eppanen, pp. 55-56,19 1.
'Woore, "Faith of the First Quakers", p. 120. Gerrard Winstanley also referred to the faithfid as "Children of Light." See Genard Winstanley, Truth Lifting Up Its Head," 1649, in Works of Winstanley, p. 127. some have builded up ...but now the eîed&y is coming, and the eternal God is
nsing-"*' This eschatological statement indicated Fox's conviction that the time for extemal things to mediate between God and persons was at an end Chria had corne bringing salvation and guidance directly fTom his presence within Fox stated that God was bringing people Wom dl their ways to Christ..and fiom al1 their churches to the church in God." The false faith that Satan had raised "'amongst professors" who were
"keeping up the fom of the saints' words" while king in the nature of the devil was coming to an end. Fox perceived God's Spirit to be declaring, "I'll make religions, professions, teachings, time-serven, callers upon me with their lips and hearts afar oK..gathered into a religion that's vain ...1-11 make mire of them ...the wrath of the Lamb is risen upon al1 apo~tates."~
Contradicting the commonly made assertion that the scriptures are the Word of
God, Fox argued that scriptures are but "the words of God" while only Christ is the
~ord.~He quoted scripture itself to prove that the letter of scnpture kills but the Spirit gives life." While the scriptures were inspired by the Spirit, %e letter, paper, and ink...are carnal, and what is gotten fiom it is brain knowledge without the Spirit."" Fox
'' George Fox, To Ail the Peo~leWho Meet in Steeplehouses, 1657, FI95 1. p. 4.
82 George Fox, Pearle Found in England, 1658, FI 878, pp. 1,3,17.
Fox, Some Principl~p. 16.
" George Fox, Declarabon of the Difference of the Ministem 1656, F 1790, pp. 6-7. 39 insisted that only those who had the same Spirit that "gave forth the scriptures" could understand hem, and that ail others merely stole words from the Bible which they distorted with their fallen rea~on.~~He conceded that the "letter of scripture" was "a declaration of the Light," but that many had only the letter and refused to recognize
Christ the Light within themselves. Only the Light could make one aware of sin, lead to repentance, and empower one to Iive according to God7swill."
Already in 1654 Fox was careful to explain that Quakers did not "deny" the scriptUres. They "were aven forth from the Spirit of the Lord" by those who had ken given that rninistry by Gain contrast to the contemporary clergy who merely used their rational, carnal knowledge of the scnptures as a source of income and social prestige?
However, as a material thing the Bible could not mediate salvation. Fox insisted, "God is the cause of man's salvation, and not the scripture~."~~Expressing the priority of immediate divine guidance in no uncertain terms, Fox declareci, "thou that doth set the scriptures above Christ and God, and the Spirit, art a heathen?' The unaided human min4 reason, and rational education were useless and deceptive in biblical interpretation. Fox asserted that scripture "cannot be opened with the carnal mind," but
%GeorgeFox, Justice and Judgment 1s to Rule, 1656, FI 838, p. 1.
87 George Fox, Message From the Lord to the ParliamenL 1654, F1863, pp. 1, 1 1- 12.
88 w 7:76, George Fox, "To Those Who Say Quaken Deny the Scnptures," 1654. 40
only by the same Spirit lvhich was in them which gave it forth.wg'Furthemore, the
Bible did not contain al1 tnith, for God had other things to reveal in the present beyond
his words which had been recorded by scripture writers in the pastgz Also, before the
scriptures were wrïtten, biblical saints were in relationship with God and knew the divine
will without having the writien let te^^^ The rational education that the clergy obtained at
Oxford or Cambridge was %Il in the fall camal and naturai, and it is fit for none but the
blind to Iead the blind? Since the clergy and people were "not in the Spirit" which
inspired the scriptures, "Christendom ...are ail on heaps about scriptures, and the private
interpretation thereof "9s Fox thus understood the contemporary proli feration of sects
and opinions to be the result of faulty human biblical interpretations that were
uninformed by the Spirit Since the clergy were numbered arnong the spirituaily
uninformed, Fox's theology challenged and subverted their role of interpreters of
scripture and presenten of divine W. The ability to interpret was king wrested from
the clencal elite and claimed for those less educated who were receptive to the Spirit's
9' George Fox, Warnine From the Lord 1654, F1980& p. 8.
92 George FO>SSomething in Answer to That Book Called the Church-Faith, 1660, Fi915, p. 5.
"Fox, Misterv. pp. 17, 104. %FOX,Newes .p. 5. Puritans also opposed "human invention'' and insisted that human reason was depraved They argued one must trust scripture rather than one's reason See Bozeman, pp. 5 1,6546. Quakers apparently took this concem a step Merby recognizing that scripture's words ordinarily are interpreted with human reason, and insisted upon direct revelation alone as the source of Truth.
'%eorge Fox, To A11 That Profess Chnstianity. 166 1, F 194 1A, p. 7. guidance in biblical interpretation? Only the Light couid reveal the meaning of scripture, not the carnal letter of the Bible interpreted with the camal rational min& however well educatd The Calvinist clergy whom Fox denowced would have agreed that the Spirit provided illumination for believers to understand scnpture, as stated in the
Westminster Confession. However, Quakers asserted a clear prionty of the Spirit over scnpture in providing divine guidance, while most Protestants stressed the scripture to the extent that little real trust was placed upon the imer guidance of the Spirit The clergy suspected the individuai 's claim of immediate divine guidance intensely, and chose to look to scnpture as an objective deposit of tmth by which such daims could be tested." Fox noted that his detractors cousidered the Light "a little spark of reason, subject to error and vanity.'* Certainly Fox's own faith, phrases, and metaphors were drawn fiom scripture. His writings indicate that his thought was '3aturated" with the
King James Bible and its irnage~-y.~~The very concept of Chnst being the Light and the
Word was derived fiom scnpture (John 1: 1-9). lm Fox's argument was not that the Bible was to be ignored, but that without the Light's assistance in interpretation the Bible was only incomprehensible letters.
%PlS. Firman, "Perceptions of the Quaker Movement in the 1650s" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of East Anglia, 1985), pp. 88, 10 1.
97 Firman, pp. 85-89.
%uth M. Lavare, "The Early Letters of George Fox: 1650-60" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, 1954), pp. cdi,clxii.
'Wistery, pp. 9-1 O. 42
Consistent with the Spirinialist emphasis upon immediate divine revelation was the Quaker practice of meeting in silence until those who felt led to speak a message that came directly from the Spirit would impiut it. Quaker worship rejected prepared sermons based on human rational study of the Bible and previously written hymns and prayers. Even psalms and prayers fiom scripture were regarded as inappropriate, since they reflected the spiritual "condition" of their authon, but were untrue in the mouths of worshipers whose spirituai situation they did not reflect Fox charged that false wonhipers "cannot endure silence; before they will be silent, they will sing a lie," by repeating biblical words of joy or repentance which they did not mean. True worshipers rvould sing and pray "as the Spirit gives utterance," when in silence they were prepared to receive and cornmunicate the divinely inspired words. Fox explained that in silence
"that of God" within worshipen is "manifested ...their min& are guided up unto God"
The false rninisters "are far from silence" and speak from the "flesh" of carnal reason.
Fox informed hem: "You be out of the life... and a waiting upon the Lord in silence to hear his still voice ...saying, this is the way, walk in it-" Fox did not consider the human mind to be operative in receiving, comprehending, or transrnitting the divine revelations fiom the Light He argued that setting one's own rational faculties aside was essential for the divine message to be perceived and conveyed correctly. He insisted that '30 be silent, you mut corne into a new world ... die fiom the.. .wisdom ...how1edge.-.reasonnnn understanding," and practise "a silent waiting upon God ...to receive the wisdom fiorn ab~ve."'~'He therefore admonished Fnends "who write or speak, let not your wills or
'O1 George Fox, Epistle to Al1 Peo~leon the Earth, 1657, FI 805, pp. 3, 15, 18,20. min& go before the Light of God in you, but let al1 your words be fiom that which is infallible, that ail your words may be words of life... write nothing but as you are moved by the Lord"'02
As the material scripttues and the carnal human mind were spirituaily ineffective without the immediate guidance of the Spirit, so the physical elements of the sacraments coufd not impart divine grace. Fox insisted: That which nourishes the immoxtai sou1 is not the mortal creatures... that which nourishes the sou1 is Christ the power of Gd"'"
Only the spiritual, immortal and divine could impart spiritual and immortal benefit
Physical water baptism was of no more use than the material elements of communion, for "bread, water and wine are things below," and as such have no part in conveying etemal life. Only the divine Christ who came from the heavenly realm could bring fdlen humanity alv vat ion.'^ True baptism had nothing to do with water. Genuine baptism was the making of Christian disciples who were baptized with the Spirit. God's people were brought to things spintual and away from physical 'things that were seen, and water is
~een.'"~~
The Spin tualist orientation of Quaker thought led Friends to de-emphasize the human incarnation of the etemal Chnst that occurred with the histoncal ksus. Although
I02 Fox in A Message From the Lord, by Richard Famsworth, James Nayler, George Fox, 1653, F491A, p. 48.
103 George Fox and Francis Howgill, The Pa?ist7sStren ,1658, F1 877, p. S. 44
Fox cleady identified Jesus of Naareth as Christ the his emphasis was not upon
the ministry of the physical, incarnate Christ of the pst but of the inner spiritual Christ
of the present.la7 FOXattempted to convince readers that one was not saved by believing
in the events conceming Christ that were recorded in scnpture. Saving faith entailed
responding with repentance and obedience to Chnst the Light within. Fox asserted that
believing in Christ "because the scriptures declare of him" is a second hand and
inadequate faith. One must "believe in the Light..that gave forth the scriptures," if one
is to have an experienced and intemal faith of one's own and thus become "a child of
Light and bom of God"'Og There was nothing unique to Fox about these Spiritualist
perceptions, as they were among the emphases that served to unite the mernbea of the
Quaker movement. They were certainly shared by Fox's colleagues James Nayler and
George Fox the Younger.
'06~o~Testimonv of Lieht, p. 41. Here Fox noted that many of Jesus' contemporaries did not recognize him as Son of God and Creator because they were "out of the Light," that is, not open to the Light's guidance.
1O7 Seppanen, p. 18.
'08Gwyn, ApocaI-ypse, pp. 93'97.
'%argaret Fe11 and George FOK Papx Concernine Such As Are Made Ministen, 1659, F634A, p.3. Fox would many his Fnend and colleague Margaret Fe11 in 1669. JAMES NAYLER
James Nayler was an intimate fnend and coiieague of Fox whose contribution to and influence within the Quaker movement vied with Fox's until conflict erupted between them in 1656. For years they cooperated in ministry and col laborated on severai writings. Nayler was a reasonably prosperous fmerbom near Wakefield, Yorkshire in that northem portion of the CO- where the movement first flourished He was committed to Parliament's caw in the Civil Wan, and rose to the rank of quartemaster in Lambert's cavalry forces. The radical political and religious views that were ofien held among those troop~"~accorded well with Nayler's later life as a Quaker leader.
While in the rnilitary, Nayler became known as a lay preacher with a message that elicited an effective response from his hearers. Mer eight or nine years of military service, health problems resulted in Nayler's king discharged to retum home to his fm and family in 165 1. He stated that soon after this he heard the voice of God calling him to go out on a divine mission.111When he resisted this call, he suffered ili heaith and attributed it to God's judgment upon him as a disobedient and reluctant prophet Mer meeting and hearing Fox, whose religious orientation he shared, Nayler abandoned the
Independent church of which he had been a member. He soon left his family to begin his mission. In 1655, Nayler became part of the Quaker mission to the south of England that had begun the previous year. He worked in London with two other prominent Quaker
"OSee McGregor and Reay, ed., Radical Religion, p. 2 1- rue Narrative of the Examination Trial. and SufEerinns of James Navler, 1657, T2789, pp. 1-2; Saul's Emd,p. 30. 46 leaders, Edward Bmough ( 1632- 1663) and Francis Howgill ( 16 18-69), and became a noted speaker, disputant, apologist, and pamphieteer. As a major spokesperson for the radical movement, he attracted much animosity hmthose outside the Quaker fol&
~cularlythe clergy whom he denounced and wiîh whom he debated publicly in
England's greatest population centre. ''' The conflict between Fox and Nayler and the events that brought Nayler into disrepute within and outside the Quaker movement will be discussed in Chapter Five below. Nayler's contribution to the defense of Quaker
Spiritualisrn will be observed here.
In Spiritualist fashion, Nayler denounced the religious employment of things that were outer and physical and, therefore, not spiritual. He charged that "'deceit and hypocrisy" were evident in "out~idechurches~outside-foms [of wonhip], outside- teachers ...carnal-teachen spealung the camal letter, for carnal money, to carnal and brutïsh peop~e.""~He asserted that one could know of God only in oneself, for al1 knowledge of the spiritual must be "~ithin.""~Since Christ's ascension into heaven one could know Christ only as he is revealed inwardy, for to know of an extemal Christ was
' 12william G. Bittie, James Navler 16 1 8- 1660: The Quaker Indicted bv Parliament (Richmond, Indiana: Friends United Press, l986), pp. 2-9,27,77-84.Fox, Cambridee Journal, pp. 100,220,229-30; John Deacon, The Grand lmposter Exarnined, 1656, D484; Ralph Famer, Satan Inthroned In His Chair of Pestilence, 1656, F444.
'131amesNayler, "To Ail the World's Professors and People," in A Word From the Lord to AI1 the World, George Fox and James Nayler, 1654, F1992, p. 1 1.
""James Nayler, Antichrist in Man, 1656, N263, p. 13. of no spintual value. Il5 Nayler asserted: "If 1 cmot witness Christ nearer than
Jedzm, I shail have no benefit by hm, but 1 own no other Christ but that which
witnessed a good confession before Pontius Pilate."'i6 Nayler was stating here that he
believed in the same historical Christ who was tried by Pilate and crucified outside
Jerusalem, but that this sarne Christ must be known inwardly in the present if his self
sacrificial death was to be of personai spiritual benefit. Without an inward expenence of
Chri* knowledge of the historical information about him meant nothing. Christ must be
hown and experienced in the Spirit, not merely acknowledged in the mind Nayler charged that those who could not daim that they experienced God's imer revelation knew of God only by "notion" and "hear say" fiom the experiences and wntings of others. ' l7
Nayler exhorted readen to "Lay aside al1 your wisdom which is natural, for the natural man receives not the spiritual things of Gd" One's naturai wisdom opposed the
"pure Light in you." Knowledge of Chna was to be found "'by keeping your eye within to the invisible, and giving diligent ear to that voice that speaks to the soul." One's huma% "earthlyy' wisdom must die, and "new wisdom must be aven you from above" to
ames es Nayler, Few Words Occasioned BY "ADiscoune Concemine the Ouakers, 97 1653, N279, p. 6.
' %ad's Errand ,p. 32.
"'James Nayler, Soiritual Wickedness In Heavenly Places 1654, N3 19, p. 8. howand please Gd' " MyChrist's Light could guide persans to salvation. Il9
Sharing Fox's Spirihialist ernphasis, Nayler's view of scripture and its
interpretation was also like that of his colleague. Nayler argued that spirituai revelation
is required to "open" the sniptures to a reader, for Christ's wisdom is 'kontrary" to
human reason which wodd lead one astray. '" While the scriptures "are a true
declaration of that word which was in them that gave or spoke theru," and were "given
forth by the Holy Ghost," it remained that "none can rightly understand the scriptures,
but they who read them with the same Spirit that gave them forth. For the natural man
receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are spiritually discemed""' Nayler
charged that his opponents "put the dead letter for the living word, and your own
meanings of it, arising fiom the brain ...and natural leaming-"'a This expressed Nayler7s
belief that the written words of scripture appearing in ink on the physical page were not
the Word, which was divine, and that the clergy distorted the biblical message through
their rational human interpretations. Echoing Fox's assertion on unity among believers
guided by the Spirit, Nayler argued that "al1 that are guided by the Spirit of God are the
spi am es Nayler, Discovery of the First and Second Wisdorn. 1653, N272, pp. 34,7,38.
"9Jarnes Nayler and John Audland, Answer to The Perfect Pharisee, 1654, N26 1, p. 12.
t20 James Nayler, Love to the Lus 1656, N294, pp. i, 9.
12 1James Nayler, Tmth Cleared From Scandais, 1654, N324, p. 2.
'%ayler, "To All the World's Professoa and People," in Word From the Lora p. 9. sons of God, and are one, and in one mind..but you who have no guide but the letter, how many rninds, how many forms, how many go& do you worship? And al1 pretend scriptme, one wresting it one way, another, another way."IU Opemess to the Spirit within would make believea of one minci, while attempts to interpret scriptirre with human reason had proven manifestly unsuccessful and divisive. Clearly, the era of proliferating sects and beliefs claiming biblicai authority for their varying positions had undennined trust in biblical interpretation as a secure source of buth. 12'' Such staternents by Fox and Nayler may indicate that at least some persons embraced Spiritualism when they came to despair of finding a reliable method of interpreting scripture. Nayler insisted that those who argued for the priority of scripture over the guidance of the imer
Spirit and sought to understand it with human wisdorn and education were doomed to fail and lead othen into error. Furthemore, they were guilty of idolatry. Nayler charged that those who claimed there were no Merrevelations since the writing of the Bible
"idolize a visible thing, and give it the name of God, and set it in his place, and Say there is no other way to know Goci, al1 which the letter denies and declares God is the Word and exhorts us to hear his voice and know it-"I2' Thus even scripture teaches God is the
W~rd,'~~and does not make any such daim for itself
IZ>Nayler,Answer to Perfect Pharisee, p. 16.
12%ill, World Tumed 1Ipside Dom p. 2 15.
'%unes Nayler, The Railer Rebuked, 1654, N306, p. 6.
'26Nayler shared Fox's typically Quaker rejection of the concept of distinct persons of the Trinity and so could speak of the Word and the Light as God or Christ interchangeably. Nayler insisted that the word "Trinity" was not fkom scripNe but 50
In what was perhaps an apologetic and conciliatory statement, Nayler offered th& scripture itself was not carnai, but was the word of God and the Quakers' de. The written letter of scriptme was camal, but the scripture itself preceded the letter and was necessary for its interpretation: "Where the scriptures are given by the inspiration of God it is God's word, but when the devil ... steak them out of a book, he gets but the letter, which he wresteth to his own destruction, in denying the Spirit therewith" ln His argument was that he recopnized that the revelations written in scripture were divinely inspireci, but thaf of course, they preexisted the vmitten letter. The message of scripture was the word of God, but the material book itself was not to be so elevated, neither was it to be distorted by those who interpreted it with their rational min& rather than with the guidance of the divine Spirit.
Nayler agreed with Fox that as the physical letter of scripture and the cmal human mind could not convey spiritual things, neither could the material elements of the sacraments. Nayler argued that spiritual baptisrn and spiritual eaa'ng and drinking of
Christ through faith were essential, rather than participation in the physical elements. 12'
True wonhip was not done through physical forms or "carna1 ~rdinances."'~Nayler rejected the ''camal" bread and wine of communion, saying Christ was the only tme
"frorn Rome," and that "God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Gho%.are one." See James Nayler, Public Discoverv, 1656, N305, p. 15.
In~arnesNayler, Weakness Above Wickedness, 1656, N327, pp. 13,20.
wayler, Love to the Lost, p. 10. 51 spiritual bread. Physical bread could not provide spirituai Iife, since physical things fed only the physicai body. Likewise, tme baptisrn was not "in camal water" but in the spirit? In coIlaboration with Fox and their muhial colleague Richard Fanisworth,
Nayler charged his Baptin opponents with practising only the ouîward and physical
*'imitationn of apostolic baptisrn while missing the Iife transforming spiritual power that baptism meant. Water baptism was an ouhuard thing, and Christ came to -&end"all outward signs. Indicating Quaker opposition to the use of script4 precedents for making unchangeable des, Nayler pointed out that dikethe biblical saints contemporary Chrisrians had no direct comrnand fiom God to baptize and so should practice no such outward forms without specific and immediate divine instructions. '"
The biblical commands that had been given to early Christians did not necessarily apply to contemporary saints, for Nayler stated that believers were to act oniy according to
God's ""particularcommands" given directly to his people. '" Thus, neither the Old nor the New Testament contained the final decrees for believers of later ages.
Nayler encapsulated his cornmitment to a Spiritudia faith by informing his opponents that they were spiritually dead "with a carnai Christ, carnai word, carnai faith. ..carna1 baptism.. .which are dl without [outside] thee." 13' To his Friends Nayler
'Wayler, Spi ritual Wickedness, pp. 9- 10.
131James Nayler, in To You That Are Called By the Narne of Baptis~,by Richard Farnsworth, James Nayler, George Fox, 1654, F1967, pp. 3-5.
'3%ayler, Answer to Perfect Pharisee, p. 2 1.
'"Nayler, Spiritual Wickedness, p. 12. wrote, "Silence ail flesh, and cease fiom your own wisdom, and give over your
imaginations about the things of Gd..anse out of a11 visible things, and prepare to meet
the ~orû."'~
GEORGE FOX THE YOUNGER
George Fox the Younger, who was no relation to the more prominent Fox, was active as a Quaker writer front 1659 until his death in 166 1. He is most noted for his strident and confrontational missives to the Interregnum denand to Charles II upon his
Restorarion to the throne. Early Friends remembered him as a prophet whose predictions of divine judgment and severe persecution were soon proven me. IJ5 Very little is known of his persona1 life, including the year of his birth. Despite his sobriquet, he may not have been younger than the more notable Fox, since he was so designated because he joined the movement later and thus was young "in the truth," and not because he was young "in years."iM He was born near Charsfield, Suffolk, served in the
Parliamentary forces, and Ieft the Army in political discouragernent smn before he
lYJamesNayler, Two E~istles1654, N325, p. 6.
'"lohn Penneyman, "Epistle to AI1 True Friendly Readers," in Collectiob p. i.
lMwilliamPenn, "The Testimony of William Penn Conceming that Faithful Servant George FOX," in Journal of George Fox, ed by Henry J. Cadbury (New York: Capricorn Books, l963), p. 50. Fox the Younger dso occasionally designated himself as George Fox, "the Younger in the Truth." See George Fox the Younger, An Exhortation t~ Families, Broadsheet, 1659, F200 1. joined the Quaker movement in 1654. Like many outspoken Quakers, he was imprisoned severai des. The first occasion was in 1655 when he reproved a court for its perceived injustice against Quaker defendants. Fox the Younger went on a mission to the Orkney
Islands and the Scomsh mainland in 1657-58 until he was banished by the anti-Quaker military commander General Monck Back in England by 1659, he began writing the pamphlets by which he is remembered. Fox was impnsoned again fiom May 1660 until auhimn, and then again in January 166 1. He died in Hurstpierpoin~Sussex on July 7 after his release. Since he was an intensely politically aware and radical writer, it is possible that his death left the movement somewhat less politically radical and militant than it might have been had it possessed the benefit of his continuing contribution. '"
While Fox and Nayler certainly did write to the political authorities and dealt with political and social issues, the bulk of their work was addressed to clerical detractors and primarily mounted in defense of Quaker theological beliefs. A greater percentage of Fox the Younger's work was addressed to political leaders and issues. in part, this may be explained by the fact that his writings appeared during especially politically volatile years when Fox and Nayler were addressing political leaders fiequentiy as well, but it is also likely that Fox the Younger felt inspired to write in those yean due to his intense desire to express the political implications of his religious beliefs during that crucial time. However, despite his stridency when speaking to political leaders, he was less
'"~arryReay, "George Fox the Younger," in A Biom~hicaiDictionaq of British Radicds in the Seventeenth Cenw, Volume 1, Richard L. Greaves and R. Zdler (Brighton, England: Harvester Press, I982), pp. 302-3. 54 specific in addressing social problems and proposing solutions for them than the more prominent Fox Apparently Fox the Younger felt led to deciy sin and oppression and to urge persons to repent rather than to offer precise instructions for how that repentance might be expressed through social reform.
CertaïnlyFox the Younger shared with Fox and Nayler the typical Quaker cornmitment to a Spiritualkt theological orientation. He upheld the Light within al1 persons to be Christ sent to show one's sins and empower one to lave sin and find salvation. He charged that those who considered the Light to be a nadand even a misleading principle within persons were insulting Christ and cnicifjnng him anew.
Such persons would bring divine judgment on themselves if they did not repent, believe in the Light, and accept the Light's leadership.13* Fox stated that Christ the Light provided a way for al1 to respond to God and be saved by admonishing persons for sin, leading them to "see the vanity of this world" and to hate their sin. He promised that those who tumed to the Light within would experience Christ purging them, separating
%e cham dirty nature7' from hem so they could "own him in the Spirit of judgment and buming before" reconciliation with God could be found Fox blasted the clergy for denying the Light and so leading people "fiom the life and power and Spirit of God" in themselves. 'j9 Like the elder Fox, he said that the Light would teach and guide believers, letting them "discem the subtilty... which have oft beguiled you," and enabling them to
'38GeorgeFox the Younger, The Words of the Everlasting and True Lia1659, F202 1, pp. 3-5-8.
'"George Fox the Younger, A Message of Tender Love Unto Professors, 1660, F2006, pp. 4-6-20-2 1. "hear the still voice... saying, "Ris is my way...wdk in it. """
Like Fox and Nayler, Fox the Younger also believed that it was impossible to comprehend the biblical message without the Light's assistance. He stated that people were in error, "in jangling and strife about the scriptures, till Christ the LightJfrom which the scriptures were spoken) be known and owned to guide them." He also asserted that people wouid be "of one mind," united with one another and in agreement with scripture once they allowed the Spirit to guide their interpretation. ''" However, he recognized too that God was not "limited to the scriphire," nor to any "tirne, or place, or means outward" but would provide reve lation to those who would "watch in the Light for his Merappearance unto you."
It is evident that these three Quaker leaders dl used scripture extensively and based their arguments and theology upon a biblical foundation. However, their belief that the Spirit could still lead believers into new truth contested the usual Protestant doctrine that divine revelation had ended in the age of the Apostles and only the past revelation found in scripture was vdid. Their objections to the usual Protestant perception of scripture were that it was an idolizing of the book itself, that scripture was distorted by those who read it without the Spirit's inspiration, and that the memben of the clerical profession misused the Bible to maintain thernselves in an elevated social position while extnicting tithes fiom the unforninate laypersons whom they led into false
140George Fox the Younger, "A Strong and Temble Alarm," in Compassion to the 1662, FI 9984 p. 29, misnumbered 33.
'"George Fox the Younger, A Word to the Peopie of the World, 1660, F2020A, pp. 6-7. beliefs and spiritual destruction.
The Quakers were not alone in considering the established clergy greedy
oppresson who preached for money rather than at God's call,14*but were part of a
contemporary milieu of Spiritualist anticlericalism. Spirituaiin radicais such as the New
Mode1 Army chaplains William Del1 and John Saltmanh had also pointed out that
rational leaniing was not enough to prepare one for ministry and biblicd interpretation
without the Holy Spirit's guidance. The chaplain William Erbury and the Digger Gerrard
Winstanley were still more akin to the Quakers in their total opposition to the
universities as places of rninisterial preparation. '" Erbury wrote that the English clergy
were "defiled through the Spirit's absence," and practised "heathenish exercises" without divine inspiration. Like Quakers, Erbury also asserted that these clergy did not minister according to the Light, "which is no other than Christ in them."Lu He too argued that believes must "lay down" their human reason, will, wisdom, and "natural
inclination^."'"^ Winstanley blasted the clergy for attempting to carry out ministry without a divine calling while e~chingthemselves on tithes taken from the poor. He stated that a clergyman would buy his knowledge at a University to "deliver it outy7for
'" Richard Hubberthorn and James Nayler, A Short Answer to a Book Called the Fanatick Histop, 1660, H3232, pp. 5-6.
'"~eoF. Solt, Saints in hs:Puritanism and Democracy in Cromwell's Armv (London: Oxford University Press, 1959), pp. 93-94.
'UWilliarn Erbury, "The Great Earthquake," in The Testimonv of William Erbury, 1658, E3239, pp. 274,284.
145Erbury,The Honest Heretic," 1652 in Testimony, p. 3 19. 57 monetary gain. '" Going even Merthan the Quakers who practised and called for tithe resistance in opposition to the clergy, Winstanley recommended that in the ideal state which should be established one who "makes a trade" of preaching and prayer to enrich himself wodd "be put to death for a witch and a chester."'" With other sectarians,
Friends separated from the established church and its clergy, since they perceived themselves to comprise the tnie church which God was restoring through the Spirit.
The Friends' anticlericalism, egditarîanisrn, and emphasis on the divine immanence moved them to make no distinction between clergy and Iaity, and to meet in silence until
Chna the Light within wodd lead any believer of either sex to deliver a divinely inspired message. Idg
Fox the Younger pointed out that those who did not wait in the Light for divine guidance adopted erring outward forms. Fox mentioned that some "began to imagine another form of worship which is called Presbitry7' and chose that rather than king
146GermrdWinstanley, "'An Appede to Al1 Englishmen, 1650," and "New Law of Righteousness," 1648, in Works of Winstanlev, pp. 2 14,409.
'"~instanley, 'nie Law of Freedom in a Platform," 1651 in 1ed by Candstopher Hill (Cambridge: Cam bridge University Press, 1973), p. 3 85.
'%auman, Let Your Words Be Few, pp. 121-25; Phyllis Mack, Visionaq Women; Ecstatic Pro~hecvin Seventeenth Century England (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), p. 170. As wili be discussed in the seventh chapter on Quaker egalitarianism, Mack has argued that Quaker women were kept subordinate to men, but like men were allowed to speak as "instments" through whom God's word could corne. See Mack pp. 177,204. 58
"subject to the drawings of the pure life of Gd" Others "were drawn a littie Mer" by
God but then "settied in hdependency," while others moved still fürther in tmth but then
"settled in Anabapisrn." mers finally recognized "the emptiness of outward baptism"
and saw "the inward baptism (with the Holy Spirit and wiîh fire) which saves."lm
Perhaps in this story of the believen' progress fiom Purïtanism to Spiritualism by way of
Anabaptism we see the experience of many Quakers who wandered in search of a
spiritual solution before finding it in the movement, and possibly we giimpse something
of the spiritual joumey of Fox the Younger himself We aiso observe how the influence
of Puritanisrn and the Baptist sects would have acwmpanied newly convinced perrons
into the Quaker movement. Fox's point, however, was that those who settled for the
outward foms of these false churches believed oniy the "'words" of scripture and did not
accept the "living Word" which spoke from within thern~elves.'~'While the Bible was
"given forth by the Spirit of Th,"the Word of God was Christ, who was the Light
leading believes to salvation, empowering them to do Gd's will, and rendering the
scriptures comprehensible to their Iimited human minds. '" With typical Quaker
identification of the Spirit of Christ with the Holy Spirit, Fox the Younger informed readers that "Christ is ... the quickening Spirit" the Light within which enlightens and
leads believea frorn sin "into that which is good"153Christ the Light had informed Fox
'qoxthe Younger, Mes- pp. 1 1,13- 14.
Ls'~e~qgg7p. 16.
'52F0~the Younger, Word to the People, pp. 24,6-7.
g,p. 5. that God, Christ, "and the Spirit that proceeds fiom us [the Father and the Son] are one king and substance" and therefore not three distinct persons. lY While Fox the Younger wrote much less extensively, especially on theologicai questions, than the two major
Quaker leaders of the 1650s- that which he did write was in agreement with their
Spiritualist thought on the place of scripture, the uselessness of sacraments, and the contention that God did not work through outward things, but immediately within the believer.
Quaker Spiritualism was drawn from a variety of available antecedents.
Sixteenth century Continental Spirituaiists such as Caspar Schwenckfeld had regarded scripture and sacrament as outward material things and therefore not conducive to salvation. In 1624 Hans de Ries of the Netherlands had contrasteci the corruptible written word of scripture with the spirituai Word which was "an inward Light to blind souls." A
Spiritudist sect known as the Family of Love had aiso claimed the Bible was only ink and paper, while the true Word of God was Spirit The Seekers and Ranten of England had iwisted one must not look to the Christ of history but the Christ of imer experience at the time the Quaker movement was forming. Is5 Winstaniey stated that the Spirit within had priority over scripture for expressing the will of God for human conduct. '% It seems highly probable that Winstanley shared Quaker beliefs to the extent that he later
IYFox the Younger, Words of the Lieht, p. 3.
'''RA. Knox, Enthusiasm: A Chapter in the History of Relimon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1WO), pp. 170-75.
'" Gerrard Winstanley, "Tnith Lifting Up Its Head," 1648, in Works of Winstanlev, pp. 126-27. joined the Friends, although he abandoned his most radical econornic aspirations of cornmon ownership of the land and its produce before so doing. The Quaker Winstanley who died in 1676 was a grain merchant '" Del1 and Saltmarsh also disavowed the value of outward forms and sacraments, while the Baptist preacher Henry Denne believed in universal atonement and that God's Spirit draws al1 people to conversion. '" Spirinialkt ideas ciearly were widely available and were circulated through preaching, writings, and discussions among a population seeking new answers in an imovating and troubled tirne.
While many were developing and passing on similar ideas, there is not evidence of
"direct influence" from one thinker to another. '" Since both Nayler and Fox the
Younger served in the New Model Army, however, they may have experienced direct or fairly close hand influence from the radical chaplains discussed above. It has been suggested that Nayler rnay have ken more influenced by Salûnarsh while he was in the
Amy than he later was by Fox. '60 In the contemporary radical environment those who
'" James Alsop, "GerrardWinstanley's Later Life," Pst and Presenf 82 (1 979), 73- 81.
i58Solt,Saints in Arms, pp. 32,40; Ted L. Underwood, "The Baptist Henry Denne and the Quaker Doctrine of the Inner Light," Ouaker Historv, 56 (1967), 34-40. Underwood disagreed, however, with Rufus Jones and Wiiliam C. Braithwaite that Denne held a belief similar to the Quakers regarding the imer Light. '" Sabine, in Works of Winstanley, p. 11. 'qittle, pp. 5-27. Approximately a hundred men who later became Quakers had served in the Parliarnentary forces, and forty-two of them had ken officers. Only five Quakers had been in the Royalist forces. Participation in the New Model Amy brought them in contact with radical concepts. See Richard T. Vann, The Social Development of Endish Ouakerism 1655- 1755 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, I969), p. 14. This participation may also indicate a prior tendency to support a les traditional political position. 6 1 would become Quakers acquired, cultivateci, and tmnsmitted their thought and found
Iike-minded Friends.
Although the Quakers shedkey Spiritualid concepts vvithmany fellow radicals, many more of their contemporaries were honified at the Friends' Spiritualist convictions.
The Quakers' insistence that the Spirit of Christ existed even in the unregenerate, their stress upon the activity of the present inner spirihial Christ rather than on the crucifixion and murrection of the historical Christ, and their claim that the inward Light gave them infallible guidance superior to that of scriphire aroused strong opposition. 16' The eminent Puritan William Prynne senously argued that Quakers were reaf ly Jesuits and
Franciscan m'an in disguise sent fkorn Rome to subvert the English Church and state with their pretended divine revelations and attacks upon the ministers, sacnunents, tithes, and Presbyterian form of govemment of the national church. la The Quakers' anti-
Calvinist rejection of predestination and their refusa1 to take the oath abj wing papa1 authority fired the anti-Catholic suspicions of many. '63 Quakers were also accused of witchcraft, a suspicion that was aroused especially when leading Friends like Fox claimed to perform miracIes, and to know the thoughts and spirinial condition of others.'" It was charged that the Light within was really a satanic deception speaking
I6'Craig Horle, "Quakers and Baptists, 1647- 1660," Bôptist Quarterlv, 26 ( 19761, 35 1-53; Ralph Hall, The Quakers Princioles Quaking 1656, H423.
'62Wi11iamPrynne, The Ouakea Unmaska 1655, P4047, pp. 1-8.
163Reay,Quakers and the English Revoiution, pp. 59-60.
164 Reay, pp. 69-71. Fox's daim to be able to identify witches on sight would have intensified these suspicions. See Cambnd Journal, pp. 147, 15 1, 171-72. 62 through Quakers.165The quaking by which Friends gained their appellation was said to be a "diabolical delusion* or dernonic possession166rather than a visitation of the Spirit as Friends claimed,
The Friends' Spiritualkm clearly differentiated them from the dominant Stream of English Protestant thought It also affecteci their eschatological beliefs conceming the form of Christ's remand reign as it did their beliefs conceming scnpture, sacrament, and the significance of faith in the historical Christ. As this Spiritualist theology led
Friends to give less emphasis to the physical coming of the historical Christ, Fox and Fox the Younger believed that the present coming of Christ in Spirit removed al1 need for a physical return and personai reign of Chnst in the future. The Kingdom certainly wodd be established by Christ and he wodd reign, but this victory and rule wodd occur as
Christ worked through his people. Although Nayler shared Fox and Fox the Younger's
Spirihialist theology, he believed there would be a future, personal coming of Christ. It will be dernonstrated in Chapter Five how the issue of eschatology contributed to a conflict between Fox and Nayler in the crisis of 1656.
"'Hall, pp. 3,25027.
Thomas Weld, The Perfect Pharisee, 1653, W1268A, p. 42. CHAPTER FOUR
PERFECTION, INFALLIBILITY, AM> DMNE INHABITATION
The concepts of sidess perfection, intelled infallibility, and the divine
inhabitation of the saints were among the key Quaker beliefs which Friends were obiiged
to defend against hostile critics. These tenets sharply countered the contemporary
predominant Protestant beliefs which stressed human depravity and the dichotomy between the human and the divine natures. Udike the Spiritualist concepts which
Quakers shared with a significant minority of others, Quaker beliefs in the perfection,
infallibility and divinization of believers were held by very few outside the ranks of the
Friends. lm The Quakers maintained that the imer presence of Christ the Light was a divine inhabitation which enabied the believer to become perfectly transformed in moral character and infdlibly informeci and guided by the Spirit In Quaker thought, the gulf between the divine and the human could be bndged through a total spiritual and mord transformation in which the believer came to participate in the divine nature, receive full empowexment for overcoming sin, and attain complete enlightenment which imparted infallible howledge and understanding. The Friends' profoundly negative anthropology led them to be pessimistic about hurnan nature of itself However, they believed that with the aid of the divine imer presence the effects of the Fall could be reversed, and the divine nature in which humanhy had been created could be restored for those who
'67TheSpiritualist William Erbery had aiso taught that one who was "bom of God" did not sin. See Erbery, Testimonv. p. 13. Ah,see Appendix m. 64
cooperated with the life transfoming operation of the Light within In fact, redeemed
persons not only received restoration to the prelapsarian state, but to a state of perFection
like that of Christ fiom which one would not fdl- This new state was evidenced in the
life of transfonned individuals who exhibited the mord characteristics which Quakers
believed distinguished the redeemed fiom the sinful society around them. The marks of
perfection included the strict observance of New Testament teachings, and egalitarian
language and behaviour which challenged the cusioms of the contemporary hierarchical
society.
One who had ken convinceci by the Quaker message and himed to the
admonition and guidance of the Light within experienced '%onvincement," or conviction
of sin. la After convincement the believer was to expenence a gradua1 conversion into a
perfected and enlightened person. In conversion, one became obedient to God's will,
which meant living according to the expectations of the Quaker fellowship. This demand that believers conform to the distinctive practices of the Quaker circle marked the
Friends from the earliest days of the movemenf though the demands were made
increasingly more explicit in later decades. '"
There was no patience with those who professed the Quaker faith but fell into sin.
The adultery of the early Quaker preacher Chnstopher Atkinson infinateci Friends and continued to outrage Fox decades later. The prominent Quaker minister Richard
Hubberthom (1628-62) wrote to Margaret Fe11 that by his fdl into sin Atkinson had
'68Gwyn,Apocalvpse, p. 67.
'69Vann, Social Developnen$, pp. 39-45, 188. 65
"betrayed the innocent and crucified Christ afiesh and put him to open shame." He was a
beûayer Iike Judas, and "a stumbling in people's rnuids." Aithough Atkinson confessed
and condemned his actions, Hubberthom reportecl that, "he is exceedïngly hardened,"
and wodd be unable to "escape God's wrath" since he had made "the tnith to sufTer."
Through Atkinson, "Satan and his instruments" gained "a large opportunity to speak evil of the ways of Gd""* Those who discredited the Quaker community and the concept of sinless perfection so blaîantly would not fmd a place of grace among Quakers. Twenty years later Fox still felt the need to recall Atkinson's sin and execrated the unfaithfulness of %at dirty man" who "brought dishonour upon the Lord's tnrth and his name." "'
PERFECTION AND INFALLIBILITY
FOX THE YOUNGER
With other Quakers, Fox the Younger insisted that believers rnust repent fully from sin and live in perfect obedience to God's will. It was not enough to confess one's sin. One had to "forsake" one's sins and cease siming. He contended that Christ the
Light led one to abandon al1 siming, and gave the believer power to overcome ail
'70SwarthmoreMSS, 1:30, Richard Hubberthom to Margaret Fell, Iuly 12, 1655.
171~arnbrid~e Journal, p. 2 15.
'qox the Younger, Mess- p. 19. 66 temptation. IT3 Those who were unable to stop sinning were manifestly of the devil.
Believers wodd obey the Light and find that God transformed %eir nature which was subject to sin," and rendered them "partaken of his divine nature" and entirely sinless.
Fox the Younger warned that if one were to find heaven in the next life one must first become fke from sin in this world. '74 He asserted that God's anger was directed against al1 who shed, and that they could not k in relationship with God or receive any message from him. Only if persons wodd "give up," themselves 30 be guided by him" could they be led "out of ail sin" and their sinful nature be destroyed Then God wodd
"beget you again into the nature of himself, the Light," and "consume" everything contrary to the divine nature. '" He called readers to "submit to every appearance of
God7sPower," which wodd destroy one's sinful, 'fleshly" nature that opposed God.
Thus he depicted complete human transformation occurring as one cooperated with
God7sinner presence, and chose submission to the divine will each time God prompteci an action or decision. He exhorted people to %ait to feel this inward work, that so you may know Christ formed in you, his Mind, his Spirit, his disposition, his nature," and become "new ~reatures."'~
'"FOX the Younger, Word to the People, pp. 2-3.
'"FOX the Younger, "AFew Queries to Professors," in (2ompassion, pp. 66-67, rnisnurnbered pp. 70-71.
17S~o~the Younger, Words of the Li& p. 4.
176G~rgeFox the Younger, Eneland's Sad Estate, 166 1, F2000, p. 1 1.
InFox the Younger, Messas p. 2 1. Fox the Younger levelled the typical Quaker accusation that those who denied the
possibility of the believer's perfection in this life "Pleadto uphold the devil's kingdom"
by telling people they could not cease sinning during their lifeîimes. He blamed those
"'blind guides," the clergy, for telling persons who were under divine conviction of sin
that it was the devil speaking within them and te~gtingthem to doubt their salvation. In
this way the clergy hardened persons against the Light's admonitions to true repentance
and the perfection Gdrequired and made p~ssibie."~He promised that those who
relied on the Light would "'corne to feel the pure image of the holy God restored..raised
up in yoy to have Dominion, and to deover ail the earth and to subdue it-"'79 This
statement on the individual's transformation and perfection included an eschatological
promise. As one was restored to the divine image and enabled to overcorne the world by
resisting sin, one would take a nghtful place arnong the conquerors and denof the
earth. The faithfuf and perfected people would "be the dread of nations" and the "glory
17'~oxthe Younger, Compassion, pp. 7,9.
179GeorgeFox the Younger, Visitation of Love I hto Al1 People, 1659, F20 18, p. 10. For al1 his stridency when addressing political rulers, Fox the Younger was more gentle and patient in his presentation of theological ideas than either Fox or Nayler. This may be attributed to a more sympathetic attitude toward those who did not yet share Quaker theological perspectives, or may be because Fox and Nayler's work ofien was written in reply to clerical detracton and so elicited a harsher tone than did Fox the Younger's theological writings which were addressed to the English public at large. Fox the Younger counselled his fellow Quakers to be patient with others in îhe realization that before their own convincement they too were "ignorant and foolish aod disobedient" They should therefore demonstrate "pity and patience7' when showing othen the truth. George Fox the Younger, A General E~istleand a Tender Greetine, 1660, F2004, p. 5. of nations"'80 in the new restored world in which the effects of the human Fall wodd be overcorne completely7and the divine image that had been Iost in the biblicd Eden wodd be recovered fully.
One of the important Quaker metaphors for the divine agency within was that of the "Seed" This metaphor indicated an imer agent that was planted and nourished by
God to grow in the believer's inward being and b~nggreater spiritual maturity as it developed. Through the Seed the power and life of God would be "raised up," and the believer would be "brought forth out of ~a~tivit~"'~'to evil. The concept of the Seed expressed faith that God took the initiative to place a potential for growth within al1 persons. Those who would be willing hosts to its Iife aansforming power would realize tremendous spintual and moral potential.
Fox the Younger informed readers that God7spower "working in you did beget a holy Seed, From whence pure desires and breathings fier God hath often arose (in you)."
Unfortunately, most people chose to resia this divine activity in themselves "with reasonings and thoughts" of their camal mincis, whereby the devil attempted to "murder the righteous Seed which God had begotten" in them. lm Those who continued to rebufT
God's efforts would find that "the tender Seed" within them would be destroyed. [" If
'"Fox the Younger, Words of the Lieht., pp. 7-8.
181 Fox the Younger, Compassion, p. 37, misnumbered 4 1.
I8*~oirthe Younger, "A Strong and Temble Alarm," in Compassion, pp. 23-24, misnurnbered 27-28.
'=Fox the Younger, "For You Who Are Called Commonwealthsmen," in Collection, p. 99, misnurnbered 90. one con~fantlyrejected God's couusel the divùiely planted yearning toward God would die as one became "hardened" against him and sank Merinto moral and spiritual deterioration. One's reprobation was not divinely appointed, but self determined
Fox the Younger aiso wmte of the blood of Christ as an agent of human redemption and tmnsfonnation. As it is frequently asserted in Christian thought, human sin was to be 'hashed away" in Christ's blod This is usually understood to mean that by his self-sacrificial death and the shedding of his blood Christ atoned for human sin by assuming its penalty. Fox the Younger identified Christ's blood as "the life he gave as a ransom, which Iife is manifesteci in your mortal bodies, that through faith in it ye may be
~aved."'~~By equating Christ's blood with his life within persons, Quakers like Fox the
Younger tumed attention away from the historical event of Christ's crucifixion. Instead of salvation king accomplished by Christ propitiating Gd's wrath on humankind's behalf in that pst event, Friends emphasized that one was saved through the regenerating work of Christ's Iife within believen in the present. Certainly Christ was the sacrifice and Yhe propitiation for the sins of the whole worlci,"'" but the saving work of Christ's blood, or life, occurred when persons chose to respond to the operation of
'"Fox the Younger, Compassion, p. 12.
185Fox the Younger, General E~ktle.p. 2.
luHoward Brintoc Friends for 300 Years (London: George Allen and Unwin Limited, 1953), pp. 4 1-43. While Fox the Younger did see Christ's death as a propitiation of divine wrath, Brinton is correct that the Friends primarily spoke of the blood of Christ as his imer living and transforming presence, rather than in reference to his deaîh.
'"Fox the Younger, M-, P. 3- 70
Christ's life within themselves. Salvation depended upon the individuai's response to
God's immediate initiative fkom within rather than upon my histoncal event.
Fox the Younger asserted that believen would find victory over sin through
Chria's blood, and "by the virtue and power of it sprinkied in their karts." This blood
seems to have been a spi~tualquality which believers felt in their "mortal fle~h."'~
Thus the Spirit's work within persons was experienced and sensed bodily as in the
physical trernbling which gave them the narne Quakers. This opens a new question
concerning the relationship between the spiritual and the physical in Quaker thought. On
the one hand Quakers seemed to reject dl things physical for mediating Gd's grace and
revelation, yet their experiences of things spiritual had decidedly physical effects on believers. They conceived of Christ's presence, the divine inhabitation, not only in their souls but also in their physical flesh where it couid be felt.
Fox the Younger rnaintained that those who were "bom fiom above," berne
"members of Christ's body, of his flesh, and of his bones."'" This reference to king of
Christ's body, even of the flesh and bones, seems to indicate that Fox the Younger was speaking of an intimate relationship and an identification with Christ. Was he metaphorically expressing that the intimacy between Christ and the believer was like that between spouses who are said to be of "one flesh?" Was he indicating a participation in
Christ's divine nature, or even that believers somehow shared the physical body of
Chnst? In this context Fox the Younger's statements refer to the believen'
laFox the Younger, Enoland's Sad Estates p. 12.
"?ox the Younger, Message. p. 2 1. 71
transformation and relationship with Christ, but to how radical a transformation and how
close a relationship did he refer? The elder Fox and Nayler employed this language of
king of Christ's Besh and bones as well, but it may be that Fox the Younger understood
and meant this language differently from them. Fox the Yomger wrote too little in this
vein to determine his meaning with certainty, but the thomy question of the believer
king of Christ's flesh and bones will be explored in the section concerning the nature of
divine inhabitation below.
FOX
Aithough Quakers rnaintained the concept of the believer's sinless perfection, the elder Fox and Nayler were the only Fiends who claimed to have reached that stage of perfection already. Ig0 As will be observed in the next chapter, Nayler later was obliged by circumstances to deny his own perfection and infallibility after he and some of his supporters outraged Parliament and English society by entering Bristol in imitation of
Christ's Palm Sunday ride into Jedem. Fox, however, penisted in his daim to perfection, and fieely continued to assert the absence of sin in his life. 19' He read
Christ's teaching to be "perfèct as your heavenly father is perfecty'(Matthew 5:48)
'-arbour and FroQ p. 63.
I9'George Fox, True Discovery of the &gnorance of the Mwtesof Carlislg., 1654, p. 10. literaily, and insisteci that he achieved full obedience to this cornmanci. Fox reported
undergoing a personal transformation so radical that he entered Whe paradise of GC and was "renewed up into the image of God by Christ Jesus, so that 1 say 1 was come up to the state of Adam which he was in before he fe11.
Fox insisted that dl believers must come to that prefdlen state, and "know the sin rooted and consumai out of your fiesh." He also taught that Christ came to bring believers still Mer"to Christ's state that shdl never fall." '" One must corne into the new Iife in which one "doth not commit sin," for the Seed within rendered believers untouched by the devil and unable to sin. 19' ui most persons the divine Seed, which Fox stated was Christ,'%was buried "under the clods," or confined to an inner "prison" where
"dragons" ûied to "devour" everything good and fought against the Light. '" Despite this horrific depiction of the unredeemed human's inner king, Fox was very optimistic about the divine capacity for human transformation to perfection. He stated that, "Al1 teaching which is given forth by Christ is to bring the saints to perfection." 19' The purpose of
193~ambridee Journal, p. 27.
'%George Fo- Euistle to be Read in A11 the Chridan Meetings, 1662, FI 808, p. 9.
L9SFo~Some Principles, pp. 26-27. This was based on I John 5: 18.
'96s- ore MSS, 2:27,"To Cromwell," 1656.
'"Fox, Word From the Lors pp. 4-5. conversion was not merely salvation fiom condemnation, or even relative improvement
of one's moral character, but a complete transformation to perfection itselE
Fox charged that those who denied the possibility of perfection made "the blood
of Jesus Christ of none effect" by repudiating its ability to remove al1 sin fkom the
believer's life,'" and insisted that the blood of Christ rendered believen perfectmOAs
with Fox the Younger, the elder Fox's references to Christ's blood did not focus on the
crucifixion so much as on the believer's present experience of the blood's operation
within Uniike Fox the Younger, the elder Fox implied that a sacrifice and blood
atonement to propitiate God had not been necessary. Replying to the question of whether
God could have saved humanity without Christ's death, Fox stated that, "God can do
what he ~ill."~~'He afirmed that the blood which Chnst offered did bring alv vat ion^^^
but in this he intended a new meaning. He asserted that while --al1 Christendom hath
talked long enough of Christ's flesh and blood," professors had not been eating his flesh
or drinking his blood, or they would have "had al1 life in the Son of God ... then they had
had al1 peace in l~irn."~O~Evidently Fox felt that this was not the case. Like Fox the
'vox, Teachen Unvailed, p. 1 1.
Some Princi~les,
"'Fox, Misterv, p. 250.
m2GeorgeFox, Declaration to the Jews, 166 1, F 1792, p. 10.
'03~eorgeFox, To Al1 People in Al1 Christendom, 1663, F1940, p. 8. Quakers did not explain what they meant by eating Christ, but neither is scripture itseif expiicit about the concept (John 653.58). As will be discussed, the context implies that "eating Christ's flesh" was the Fnends' way of expressing the experience of possessing the life transforming and divinizing presence of Christ within the self through faith in the Light 74
Younger, he asserted that this blood was "felt within" as it cleansed one, though no one could cornprehend this except by the LightW Like the Light and the Seed, the blood was for Fox the imer presence of Christ whose flesh and blood the saints must eat ard dnnk? Fox rejected the predominant theology which held that by sacrificing his blood
Christ made it possible for sinful people to have his righteousness imputed or attrîbuted to them through faith in him. Fox insisted that, "such as hath Christ in them, they have the righteousness itself, wi-thout imputation, the end of imputation, the righteousness of
God itselfho man knows the nconciIiation, and his reconciliation made with God, but by hearing and doing the word of Again, the emphasis was placed upon absolute obedience to the divine will, which God enabled one to perform through his imer presence.
Fox argued that the tnie church was composed of those who had ken redeemed fully from the fallen state, for Christ's church was "without spot or vvrinkle or blerni~h."~~'He stemly rejected the analogy that the Kingdom of Christ is a hospital compnsing his diseased subjects. Those who followed the Lamb were without sin, because God healed their diseases and converted them. Fox stated that, The diseased
and obedience to its ieading.
'"FOX, M~stery,p. 182.
ïû5~eorgeFox, A Few Oueries for Thomas Mwr, 1660, F 18 174 p. 2.
NDMisteryspp. 182-83.
'07Fox, Some Principles, p. 9. ones are in your kingdom," where "physicians of no value" held sway? He asserted that a minister's task was to rninister until the saints "kameto the perfect man, which these apostates' work is to den^."^'^ In this Fox hinted that the saints' perfection was a graduai development which occuned as one matureci spiritually, and was not instantly the possession of eveq believer. The Quaker rninister Thomas Taylor's stniggle toward perfection is evident in a letter he wrote to Fox. Taylor bemoaned that there was stili a
"great deal of mixture yet in me, and a stormy heathenish head in the wicked nature." He was waiting for Christ "?O rise in my soul daily for putting to flight the mies of the heathen" within him and bring km into full obedience. He expressed appreciation to
Fox for not flattering him but confionting him "faithfidly ... in that great business of my soul," and prayed that God would "rebuke this Satan in While Fox realized that perfection was not instantly achieved, he considered it an achievable goal toward which believers mut strive, and called people to repent fully and live perfectly as he believed
Christ would empower the faiffil to do.
Fox mocked those who denied perfection, demanding what Christian sanctification could be othenvise. He asked, What a sanctification is that when sin abideth in every part?'"" as the Calvinist faith which reflected the rnainstream of English religion asserted. Fox charged, "It îs the doctrine of devils that preacheth that men shdl
2m~o~Mistexy, p. 30. These worthless physicians were of course the clergy.
2%istery, p. 4 1.
210SwarthmoreMSS, 3:29, Thomas Taylor to George Fox, May 18, 1653.
211Fox,Somethine in Answer to the Church-Faith, p. 2 1. 76 have sin. and be in a warfare so long as they be on earth." He Uisisted that Christ %rings people to the faith ... wtiich gives them vi~to~."~'*His own self assessrnent seems to have been that he had passed through the struggle successfully. Taking issue with the
Protestant doctrine of salvation by faith alone, Fox insisted that penons "are not presented to God while they do evil, and afore they are sanctified and holy." In reply to the argument that one is justified by faith alone without doing good works, Fox stated,
"What, without the faith that works by love?77213There was no salvation for those who continued to sin, and no allowance for sanctification that was only partial.
Fox insisted that infallible divine guidance as well as sinless perfection was available to believers. He ordered that Christ's ministers must not alter their teachings, for changing them would prove either that the ministen were no longer faimto their earlier convictions and had "gone out of the truth, or else they were never in the trutti; and this confounds people ... they that minister" were to be "in that which never changes, this begets people into an established state.""" Apparently for Fox being filled with the infallible Spirit rneant that one must be infallibly correct in dl things and never have occasion to amend one's doctrine. for doing so would bring discredit upon one's past and present miniw. Fox would not admit erron on his own part, since that would have
2'3.~3pp. 44, 55.
2'J~eorgeFox, Works of George Fox, Vol. W ( Philadelphia: Gould, 183 1), 1659, pp. 16869. 77 undennined the infallibility he professed2" Fox the Younger's sense of his infallibility was evident when he spoke as God's mouthpiece while confidently mahg predictions of the fuwe under divine inspiration,216and speaking in first person for God as though the very words of the Light were spoken through him."7 Aware of the Friends' daim of infdlibility, the apostate Quaker Francis Bugg delighted in identifjang how Friends' teachings had changed over the decades to prove that they had not ken Ied by infallible revelation as they claimeci, or they would not have had to revise their beliefs. Bugg challenged Friends to confiess their inconstancy in accepting the monarchicd form of govement at the Restoration, and to admit that they had changed corn their earlier republicanism and anti-monarchist militancy. He slyly suggested that if Quakers persisted in their stubbom deniai that they had changed, they shouid be recognized as seditious and dangerous to the present monarchia govemment and not enjoy the toleration they had achieved by that tirne.'"
Larry Ingle, ggUnravellingGeorge Fox: The Real Person," in New Light on George Fox, ed. by Michael Mullen (York: The Ebor Press, 199 1), p. 38.
'I6Fox the Younger, Eneland's Sad Estate, pp. 12-1 3; "None Can Hinder the Determined Will of God," in Collection, p. 249. Here he predicted wone persecution of God's people in the fuhire, and divine judgments for simers.
217Fo~the Younger, Words of the Li&. In this pamphlet he speaks God's words, prornising, "1 will reign over you, and ye shdl reign over al1 the World.. .I will give you dominion over al1 your enernies." p. 8.
218FrancisBugg, The Picture of ûuakerism, 1714, B5381, pp. 57, 81,84. NAYLER
Nay ler clearly shared these convictions regarding the infallibility and perfectibility of believen, as well as a thomughly pessimistic anthropology. For Nayler, the fallen hurnan creanire had a totally compted nature which stood against Gud, and was beset by an "evil seea" that worked loensnare" the "soul Merinto wickedness" and increase one's separation from God Not only the Light inhabited al1 persons, for also "'that which seeks to devour your souls" was lurking within. Although the divinely implanted Seed was present, this Seed of God was "continually veiled and hid from the human creature 'Wl the head of this evil seed be bruised through believing in the Light-"
Faith in the Light redeemed the believer fiom the "power of darkness," and opened one to be led out of sin to God as a changed penon who loved the Light's guidance.
Evidently the first step toward salvation was acceptance of the Quakers' theology of the
Light within, and a willingness to be guided by the Light's leading. Before one's redemption, the seed2Igwithin was "in bondage under the prince of darkness," and one was 'blinded by the god of this world" The way out of this fallen condition was to repent by obeying the reproving message of the Light which convicted one of sin. The natural human inclination was to avoid this imer reprwf, and so reject the Light's ministiy. As was noted in Chapter Three above, tuming to the Light was initially painful for fa1 len humans. When the believer would be "pricked" by the reproof of "what is of
"Wayler employed the terrn "Seed" iargely as Fox the Younger did to si@@ the divine agent of spiritual growth graciously planted within dl persons. At times Nayler also used it to signifj Christ as Fox did See Nayler, Few Words Occasioned p. 9, or as a reference to God7speople. See Nayler, Vindication of Tnah, 1656, N326, p. 15. 79
God in yoq* the inward evil wodd struggie against the Light's admonitions. Most persons chose to "join with hirn that rises up in -th against the truth in your~elves."~~
When people continually rejected the Light's leading, the Spirit would "cease striving and reproving" as God abandoned inward efforts and the "creature" was "given up of the
Lord, and the Spirit of tnith... wholly departed." Apparently Nayler, like Fox the
Younger, believed in reprobation as a selfdetennined state. If one was to be saved the devil must be "cast out'' and one must "war daily against the prince of this world"
Those who continued to sin proved that the devil had not left them, for they were still
"led captive at bis ~ill."~'Possibly Nayler's awareness of the dangers of evil forces within intensified after his temporary "fall" in 1656, which he attributed to deceptive spiritual forces and his own "vvant of watchfulness and obedience.""
Nayler too insisted that those who responded to the Light must seek moral perfection He wamed that persons who thought they could "live in sin" throughout this life and then have heaven in the next were deceiveé No partial conversion to moral improvement would do, for one's righteousness had to become perfect Nayler insisted that: "If thou say thou canst wimess Christ manifest in thee, and yet commit sin, thou art a liar," since scripture taught that, "whosoever abideth in him sinneth not." One could
=%s practice of turning fiom reproof and angrily rejecting the divine message was constantly witnessed by Nayler and other Quaker prophets when their preaching met with a hostile response. The accounts of civil prosecutions and crowd violence against Quaker preachers are innumerable. See Cambridge Jod,passim.
am am es Nayler, Door Wned to the Imprisoned Seed. 1660, N276, pp. 1-9. =James Nayler, Glory to God Almi'eh&, 1659, N282, p. 2. 80 not have both one's sins and Gd A choice had to be made between them, for those who genuinely Ioved Christ kept his c~mmandrnents.~God gave spirinial power for believers to do his will, so they must not "cast the fault on God, as though he had given a
Christ that was not able to set free" fkom sin.a4 Nayler asserted that Christ came into the world precisely to enable humans to becorne perfect."
Nayler atiacked England's Protestants by suggesting that they did not need -70 go to the pope to find the man of sin... for he is nearer" in those who claimed that people could not be fked from sin during this iife? He identified his clencal opponents as
Antichrist's ministers who were sent out to preach deceptively in Chn'st's narne and distort scripture to prove that no one could be sidess. In this way the clergy supported
"their master" the devil, who knew that his evi1 kingdom wouid be destroyed when persons realized they did not need to remain in their fdlen state but codd achieve perfection through Christ The hurnan race was to be restored to the perfection in which
God had created it." Nayler charged that those who denied perfection "strengthen the
?lames Nayler, Sin Kept Out of the Kingdom, 1653, N3 17A, pp. 1-5.
'ZJNayIer,"A Word From the Lord Unto Al1 the Faithiess Generation," in Word From the pp. 3-4.
m~ayler,Few Words Occasioned, p. 13.
?Jmes Nayler and George Whitehead, Tnie Ministers Livin~of the Gosw 1, 1 660, W1968, p. 35.
'27Nayler, Railer Rebuked, pp. 9- 12. Nayler stated that "Antichrin is in every man until he be revealed by the Light of Christ within." Nayler, Antichrist in Man, p. 2. The battle between Christ and Antichrist therefore occurred in each person, as well as in society and at the cosmic level. 8 1 han& of the wicked, so that noue tums fiorn his ~ickedness."~Even the Puritan clergy were not suficiently rigorous in their condemation of sin to suit the Friends, but were considerd supporters of sinning for their refusal to endorse the possibility of perfection.
Pointing to their black robes, Nayler accwd the clergy of advertising their cornmitment to the devil by wearing "his dark livery" as they spoke against the Light and so taught people to disobey Christ's "voice within."*
Nayler conceded that salvation came by faith, but then insisted that "faith in
Christ Jesus" meant 'the faithfiil following of hm,and patient bearing his cross." nirough a struggle the "enmity" against God was "slain," and one was "set at liberty in the holy seed to serve the ~ather."~Clearly, there was nothing passive about the kind of faith by which persons were saved. Saving faith entaileci a life of rigorous faithfilness and struggle against sin. A person having true faiîh in Christ would be "condemning and killing sin till it al1 be done away," and the believer wouid be 'without sp~t."~'Nayler insisted one was not saved by faith only, for "faith is dead which is without works."
People were not 'Tustified in their sins," for Christ came to save people %om their sins and not in their sins." Nayler Iabelled belief in salvation by faith alone, "a fine easy way to salvation, and well pleasing to you that love your l~sts."~~He likened his
228James Nayler, Dis ute Between James Navler and the Teachers, 1655, N275, p. 2. . qayler, VindicatioIl, p. 21.
230James Nayler, How Sin 1s Strenpthened, 1657, N285, p. 2.
U'How Sin Is Strenethened, p. 3.
U2Vindication,p. 7. opponents' argument for justification by faith alone to the position of the libertine
Ranter~.~~He explaineci that those who claimeci to be justified while not purging their lives of dlsin were like the Ranters who 'cast off the yoke" of Christian obedience to
"get liberty for the beast that cannot endure the cross." Like 'Yhe rest of the Ranting crew," they "used the blood of Christ for an occasion to the flesh."- Nayler insisted that
Christ's blood did not cieanse one fiom sin while one continued to "act sin,"us He answered the Puritan leader Richard Baxter's accusation that Quakers "affirm self- perfection" by insistÏng that, "we own it [perfection] as Gd's comrnands and gifYu6
He clarifieci that while the believer must be perfect to have a full relationship with God, this could not be accomplished through human power alone, but only through God's
Power working within?' The ability to obey God was given to the beiiever by God through the "sanctification of the spirit and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus." In this way, God "wrought a11 their works in them to will and to do of his good pleasure, and without Christ they couid do nothing." The saints' obedience could corne only with the
?Vayler, Vindication, pp. 29-30. While many accused the Quakers of sharing the antinomianism of the Ranters, Nayler here accused those who insisted on salvation by faith alone and denied sinless perfection of king like Ranters. Quakers ofien regarded Ranter thought as the corollary of Calvinist predestination See J. F. McGregor, "Seekers and Ranters," in Radical Relieion, p. 13 1.
Answer to Perfect Pharisee
=~arnesNayler, Answer to the Ouakers Cate~hism~1655, N258, p. 1 1.
%nswerto Perfect Pharisee, pp. 9- 10. 83
help of Goci's spirit? Thus there was synergism, a cooperation of the human will with
divine grace to accomplish one's regeneration and pediectioa As the quotation cited
above indicates, Nayler denied that Quakers claimed that Christ's blood '4avails not," for
it was the blood which fked believers from siming
Nayler clarified that he did not believe perfection came instantly at the outset of
the believer's spiritual development, instead there was "a time of quickening, a time of
growth, and a time of perfecti~n."~~While Fox hinted that perfection came gradually to
the believer, Nayler was more explicit that there were stages to perfection and a gradual
maturation toward siniessness. Nayler's belief in perfection and the high esteem in
which he was held by many Quakers were evident in an instance reported by John
Deacon his antagonist. Deacon related that he encountered a Quaker who did not believe
in sinless perfection, but when he showed the Friend a passage arguing for perfection in
one of Nayler's writings, he quickly rejoined: "Doth James Say so?... nay, then it is mth.-24i
Regarding the issue of the believer's infallibility, Nayler argued that die Light of
='Nayler, Weakness Above Wickedness, p. 7.
UgJamesNayler, Lieht of Christ, 1656, N293, p. 1. Christ's physical presence working in believers will be explored in the segment on divine inhabitation below.
'"''James Nayler, The Boaster Bared, 1655, N266, p. 9.
241JohnDeacon, Exact Historv of the Life of James Naylor, 1657, D482, p. 19. That not every Quaker believed in perfection when it was such an important issue for the three leaders under study indicates that there was not theologicd uniformity among early Friends. 84
Christ within was divine and infallible. He reasoned that if believers followed the
infallible Light's guidance, their perceptions would be infallibly led: "It is tme, the Light
is but manifest in the creature by degrees, but the least degree is perfect in its measure,
and king obeyed, will lead to the perfect day, and is perfect in itself, and leads up to
perfection al1 that perfectly follow it.77'J' When opponents denied that anyone could have
an infallible Spirit to lead them infallibly, Nayler countered by statuig, "he that hath not
an infallible spirit hath a lying spirit, as you have suficiently rnanife~ted."*~~The
unconverted were limited by their imperfect "naturd faculties," which were "carnalmand
"fleshly" and therefore b'fâllible,'72ubut the redeemed had infiallible guidance through
"the irnmediate manifestation of Christ Jesus, his light and Spirit."ZJ5This infallibility
depended upon the believer's unemng comprehension of and obedience to the infallible
guide. So long as the divine inspiration "be not erred from" one was inf'libly guided2&
but at times Quakers, such as Nayler hirnself, proved they were fallîble. Then they were
'%ayler, Few Words Occasioned, p. 8. Quakers rnaintained that not dl believers had the divine presence within them to the sarne "'degree" or "measure." This concept of measure allowed for gradations among Friends, since those having the Spirit to a greater degree would have gifts for prophecy and leadership superior to those of most believers. Nayler stated that saints wodd receive divine revelations as they grew "in their measures." Few Words Occasione4 p. 5.
"'~ayler, Public Discovec, p. 43.
'+'JamesNayler, Discovery of the Beast, 1655, N27 1, pp. 16, 18- 19.
245.JmesNayler and Richard Hubberthom, Account From the Children of Li&, 1660, N256, p. 34.
2a~ayler,Answer to Ouakers Catechisrn, p. 22. 85 said to have ^nm out" as Fox wrote of Nayler and his supporters," or to have "lost rny guide" as Nayler wrote of hirnself 2a In such an event the fallible betiever was blamed for having failed to heed divine prompting through negligence, attention to human mon, or ride.^^^ There was little place for honest mistakes among those who were to follow the infallible guidance of Christ's Spirit-
The Quakers' insistence on sidess perfection and infallibility betokens their tendency to intensifL and extend the beliefs and ideals that they shared with other contemporary Christians. Their perfionist theology led Friends to make into absolute requirements what othen usually saw as desirable goals and principles for believen.
Others certainly taught that the believer was morally improved by conversion and sanctification, but Friends insisted that improvement must extend to perfection and the stniggle against sin must end in victory over every temptation ültimateiy, there was even to be a perfect victory and the end of al1 stmggies. However, Friends evidently were obliged to recognize that perfection was a goal achieved by only a few of their spirituai elite, since they saw that the perfection they upheld in arguments with others developed only gradualty and with much struggle arnong people of their own circle. Ai1
Spiritualists believed that God guided them through the Holy Spirit, but the Friends demonstrated their bent to extend a widely held principle by insisting that they were infallibly guided, despite some admitted breaches in following infallible guidance
- 247~o~Cambridge Journal, p. 289.
248JamesNayler, To the Life of God in AI!, 1659, N32 1, p. 3.
24%Jayler,To the Life, pp. 2-5; Fox, Cambridge Journal, p. 147. 86 unerringly. Similarly, while Christian faith has generaily recognized that God7sSpirit lives within believers, who thereby share something of Christ's nature, Fnends offered a more extensive comprehension of the divine inhabitation and its consequences than most Christians considered orthodox,
THE NATURE OF DIVINE INH.AE5iTATION
It is unquestionable that the early Quakers believed that the presence of Chnst within themselves was a divine Light that rendered them morally sinless and irfallibly guided and informed their beliefs and decisions. Nevertheless, there are questions conceming the extent to which this divine inhabitation made them partaken of Christ's divinity, and whether the divine indwelling had a material as well as a spiritual component. The statements of sorne Quakers that believers undenvent a transformation in which they becarne "of Christ's flesh and bone," one with Christ and equal with Go4 as well as the trials of Fox, Nayler, and some other leading Friends for blasphemy, along with the messianic language with which some Quakers addressed Fox and Nayler have led Richard Bailey to propose a concept which he has called "Fox's doctrine of celestial inhabitati~n.''~~Bailey argued that most of the earliest Quakersz1 believed that the
Wailey, New Lieht on George Fox, p. 19. Evidently Bailey credited Fox with developing this concept and conveying it to other Quakers. It is difficult to detemine whether Fox generated the various Quaker beliefs himself or developed them in 87 spiritual and immortal body of Christ was resident in the physicai bodies of believers.
This body of Christ "was an Unmaterial substance that could inhabit, divinize7and resurrect the believer even while the believer retainedn his or her physical body. Since
"the celestial body of Christ inbabited them... the restoration of the image of God was absolute" in the saints. This divine inhabitation was not that of "a disembodied Christ within." Christ's inner presence was "almost corporeal," since for the earliest Friends
Christ's spirihial body within them "had a very tangible substance or quality." Thus, in the believen' new birth, Christ was formed within them. As Christ's giorified body literally inhabited the saints, they became "flesh of his flesh," and one with him. With the "celestial body7' of Chnst inhabiting their mortal bodies, believen participated in the unity and equality which the Father and the Son shared The saint's imer "body of sin" to which fallen hurnans were heir was "displaced and replaced by celestiai flesk" and so the saint became divine according to his or her inward king. It was not the material body of ksus of Nazareth that formed within believers, but the heaveniy body of the etemal Christ who was first incarnated in Jesus. As the believer continually assumed or
"fed on" the celestial flesh of the imer Christ, the saint would continually be made perfect and rendered divine. Although the outward flesh or person remained the me, inwardly the saint received the celestial body of Christ within that outward human
consultation with other Fnends in the movement's earliest years.
='Baily suggested tbat most Quakers believed in the literal inner presence of Christ until the 1670s when this theology was dtered by some of the more educated and less literally minded Friends such as William Penn and Robert Barclay. Bailey, p. 82. 88
"ves~el."~~Each believer thus was rendered an incarnation of the etemal Christ and was
Christ -'in some sense." hdeed, since Quaken did not make the orthodox Trinitarian distinctions among the three persons, when Chria was in the believer so was the entire
Godhead Such a divinel y inhabited person could perform miracles, possess God's
"majesty" within, and be exaited as Christ Since the flesh and bone of Christ "literally inhabited the saint, the saint's "inward body" was altered so %at the believer was transformed into the very flesh and bone of the glorified Christ..equal and identical with
Christ him~elE"~~-'Bailey further argued that Quakers Iike Fox and Nayler were %r more than...' spintualists,'" for they exhibited "a radical extension of spiritualistic notions
- more radical than any previous interpreters of early Quakerkm have implied-"2"
Friends rnaintained that "Christ's glorified body was an immaterial heavenly body (but nonetheless a real entity) that was not limited to heaven but instead filled heaven and
32~owever,as noted in Chapter Three above, Fox asserted that at his conversion his "countenance and person were new moulded or changed." Cambrid~Journal, p. 20. Perhaps he believed that his physical body had been miraculously dtered through Christ's imer presence. While Quakers held that Christ the Light was present in ail persons, it is evident that it was only when persons responded to the Light with faith and repentance that the divine inhabitation occurred. As Nay ler cl arified for his adversaries, "Christ is not come in your flesh, for you deny him ... you are separated fiom God-..many will not be led to the redeemer with the Light, but deny the Light within as you do; to these the Light is condemnation, not salvation." Nayler, Vindication, pp. 17- 1 8.
253Bailey, pp. 19,3940,44, 73,78-95, 103, 108, 1 14, 126-30.
'"Bailey, p. 93, n. 44. Since their emphasis was constantly on the priority of the inward and immaterial and the ineffdveness of the outward and material in spirihial matters, however, it seems reasonable still to locate Quakers within the Spiritualist mi lie-u. earth* and thus "could inhabit and dei@ believer~."~~Bailey noticed that Melvin Endy
also recognized that Fox's concept of the "heavenly fïesh" differed fiom that of later
Quaker thinkers such as Penn who viewed it metaphoricallyu6 Endy stated that Fox
viewed the inward spiritual flesh of Christ as "a spiritual substance or body" which
altered both the believer's sou1 and body "toward incomptibi Iity." As the heavenly flesh
was "Dfted into" believers, they were rendered "more pir ri hi al."^'
Among the early Quaker statements that Bailey cited in support of his argument
was Fox's assertion that, "Scripture saith God wil1 dwell in men ...doth not the apostle
~ay,~'the saints were made partaken of the divine nature? and that God dwells in the
saints, and Christ is in them ...And do not the saints corne to eat the flesh of Christ? and if they eat his flesh, is it not within them?"w Fox also stated, "He that hath the same spirit
spi aile^, pp. 92-93. Bailey seerned to think of things spiritual as being somehow metaphorical rather than literal, as he wrote of earlier Quakers having a more literal understanding of Christ's inner presence, and later Quakers having a more metaphorical understanding of it See Bailey, p. 82. In Christian belief God is "a real entity" but is spiritual rather than physical. This does not mean that God exists only rnetaphorically. Quakers codd have beiieved that Christ was literally wïthinthernselves as an entirely spiritual presence.
"'~nd~,Earlv Ouakerism, p. 89.
'S8~hisreference to apostolic authority indicates that the Quakers believed their teachings were biblically based, and a rediscovery of the apostolic faith that had been neglected for centuries. Fox insisted that the believers eating Christ's flesh and having it within them "is not a new gospel." See Fox, Mistery, p. 206.
2-'%ailey,p. 77, citing Great Mvstery of the Great Whore, Volume 3 of Works, pp. 18 1-82. Bailey used a different edition of this work than the one cited in this dissertation. The quotation ais0 appears in Misterv, p. 100. that raised up Jesus Chna is equd with Gdmrnand that scripture commanded
(Philippians 2: 6,7) believers to have the sarne mind as Chnkt, "'who thought it no robbery to be equal with ~oû."~~'FOX declared that Chrikt must %il1 the body of sin" and live in the saints as their "hope of gi~ry."~~~He explained that one's "natural body of flesh, blood and bone was not the body of sin." The "body of sin," or "the old man" was tbat sinful body within each person that must "be put off" as one became a new creature in whom Christ d~elled.'~Thus it would seem that as Bailey argued, Quakers did believe that an inner compt body within the believer's physical body was replaced by the presence of Christ It seems that there was an almost physical element to this presence as Bailey argued, since Fox stated that believers know Christ's "bodily presence, they know his fiesh, and are of his flesh and of his bone, and his spirit, and min4 and power. ..and this is known by the Light within."26J
It was not unusual for Fox to speak as though God were issuing a message in first person through him. Fox offered pronouncements such as: "You have not my power nor
'%dey, p. 110, citing Saul's EmB,p. 592. Page 8 in the document used for this dissertation.
"'George Fox and Richard Hubberthom, Truth's Defense, 1653, F1970, p. 66. It is of course a matter of interpretation whether the Fnends explicated this passage according to its intended meaning. 91 my spirit... saith the Lord the Creator."z65 Certainiy biblical prophets also spoke the divine message in first person at times, but Fox went so far as to *te, "1 am the light of the world, him by whom the world was made, and doth enlighten every man that cometh into the world. .who of the Lord was moved this to wite ... whose name of the world is called gf" [George ~0x1.'~~Here the chrktological titles and Fox's own identity seemed to become incorporateci, and Fox seemed to speak of himself as Fox only insofar as the world's observen could discern his nature. Commenting on his ignorance of the original biblical languages, Fox declareci, "Al1 languages are to me no more than dust, who was before languages were... and am redeemed out of languages... that which makes divine is the word, which was before ianguages and tongues ~ere."~~~In an obvious reference to
Christ's words claiming preexistence and divinity (John 8:58), Fox asserted that:
"Accordingto the spirit 1 am the son of God before Abraham was, before Jerusalem was.77268Here Fox seemed to share Christ's eternity as well as his divinity, at Ieast
"according to the spirit"
The Quakers' opponents recognized that the Friends' profession of divine inhabitation would lead to daims of equality wi-th God and "deification" that are usually
Z65GeorgeFox, Warninp to Al1 Teachers of Children, 1657, F 1984, p. 7.
266~o~Teachers Unvailed, p. 27.
f67GeorgeFox, Benjamin Furley, and John Stubbs, Battle-Door for Teache- 1660, F1751, p. A3. 92 considered blasphemous among ~hristians? Fox explained that his claims of equality with God did not periain to his creaturely self, for when he made such assertions he was speaking "beyond al1 creatures, and out of dl creatures, and he did not say George Fox" was equal with ~od.~'"Christ is but one in dl his saints, and he speaks in them; but he doth not say that George Fox is Christ..Christ is the Light, and ye are the Light, and
Christ Iiveth in yoa..and it's the spirit of the Father that speaketh in you, and spoke in
Christ" Fox went on to state that, '&thenew man...which is Christy7may speak through the believer, identifjmg himself as the way, tmth, and Iife?' When Fox was asked by opponents if he were the way, tnith, and Iife, Fox replied: "Liar. That is a desperate lie."m Evidently Fox's speakmg for Christ in the first person had been misunderstood.
'Thrist in the male and female, if he speak he was Chnst the Seed, and the Seed was
Christ, but he did not speak it as a creature."" Here Fox claimed that Chnst had spoken in and through him, but this did not mean that the human Fox was Christ Fox was the channel through whom the inner new man Christ, who had replaced Fox's old imer body of sin, woufd speak. Bailey noted Nayler's explication that while Fox the believer was
2720uestionsProoounded to Georee Whitehead and Georee Fox at Cambndee, 1659, QI 84, p. 7. 93
ody "dut," nevertheless %e spirit that spoke in hùn is equal with When an
accuser stated that Fox had made messianic daims in saying he was the way, tnith, and
life, Nayler replied: "1 say so also, for where Christ speaks in male or female, he is what
he testifies himself to be."n5 Li ke Fox, Nayler was arguing that Chnst spoke his own
words in and through believers. Nayler answered opponents that Fox did not say that he
was equal with Goci, for Fox was only a creature? Therefore, the outward, physical
George Fox and James Nayler were not quai with God, but the inner Christ who
inhabited them and spoke through them was. Fox argued that Ch& was not absent fiom
his people in heaven, but was within them, for they were Wesh of his Besh, and bone of
his bone," and he was "formed in" his saints? This would be consonant with Bailey's
argument that Quakers believed they had become Christ in that their i~erking of sin
had been replaced by Christ's interior formation, while the outward and creaturely aspect
of themselves could not claim Christ's attnbutes or equality with him.
Bailey noted that when Nayler was questioned whether Thrist was in hirn as a
man," Nayler answered that "Christ is not divided, for if he be7he is no more Christ; but
1witness that Chnst is in me in mesure, who is God and man." Nayler Merdeclared that 'Christ fills heaven and earth and is not cd,but spiritual," and was not coofined
274Bailey,p. 89, citing Nayler, Answer to Perfect Pharisa p. 4.
n%ayler, Weakness Above Wickedness, p. 12.
n6Answer to Perfect Pharisee, p. 4.
mFox, Mistery. pp. 1 1-12. 94 to heaven in a camal body since his ascension as Nayler's cntics arguedn8 nius Nayler asserted that the presence of Christ in believen had both a spiritual and a more substantial element which could not be separated- Bailey argued, therefore, that the body of Christ was "a substance," an "immaterially fleshed spirinial body of Christ that litemlly inhabited the saints." It was "a spiritual, heavenly substance, but still a substance, a spiritual 'S~X~X'"The Chna within "was not the disembodied Spirit but
Chnst the very God-man in dl his glorified and ceiestial ple end or."^^^ Bailey contended that Fox not only identified the Spirit as Christ as others have obsewed, but that the
Spirit was the "celestial flesh of Christ." The use of the phrase "flesh and borie" implied that "something more palpable" than a merely spiritual presence was indi~ated-~"in support of this Bailey pointed to Nayler's statement that “Christ formed in the creature" was "a substance. "28'
Bailey noted that detractors accused Quakers of believing that the "carnal" body of Christ inhabited believers. However, Fox, Nayler, and other prominent Quakers replied that Christ's body "was not human or carnaln but spiritual. Nayler insisted that
278Bailey,p. 92, citing Besse7sSufferine, 2, and Memoirs of the Life. Ministry. Trial md Sufferines of ... James Nailor (London, l719), pp. 1-16. This concept may also be located in Saul's Ensuid, p. 32, where Nayler contended that "Chnst fills ail places, and is not divided; separate God and man and he is no more Christ"
27gBaiiey,pp. 94-95.
='Nayler, Public Discoveq, p. 48. cf Bailey, p. 94. Chnst had corne oniy "in the likeness of sinful flesh.*= He asserted that Christ's flesh was not "camal" since he was not bom through "cad generation" but by the
The temi "carnal" of course was applied to things that were physical and, therefore, spintuaily ineffective. Fox asked rhetorically: "Where doth the apodes speak of two natures in Christ, or of his humane nature? 1s not humane fiom the gromd, earthly, and was not he fiom above, the Second Man, and his flesh from above, which came down from heaven, and was not the fint man of the earth earthly? and was not the nature of
Christ divine?"2w Thus even Christ's flesh was of a divine nature, and not earthiy and
Adamic. Fox regarded human nature too negatively to allow that the divine Christ artd agent of salvation had a human nature, and contended that "Christ's nature is not human, which is earthly.""
Since Christ was formed in them, believers had a new identity. In their writings, some Quakers would refer to the new narne they possessed, while recogmzing that according to the world they were known by their human names. Nayler stated that, ''the saints... have a new name, which none knows but he that hath if" while othen know only
2*James NayIer, Second Answer to Thomas Moore. 1656, N3 14, p. 14.
2MFo~Somethine in Answer to the Church-Fais p. 8.
285Fo~Mistex p. 71. Melvin Endy argued that Fox must have derived this fiorn sixteenth century Continental Spiritualists who taught that Christ's flesh was "heavenl y" or "celestial" and not human, or he could not have ken an agent of salvation. Endy, Earlv Ouakerism, p. 277. It is also possible that Fox drew this nom seventeenth century Engiish Spirihialists who had been intluenced by Continental Spiritualists. 96 the "wnal name."= It was appropriate to cal1 their physicai bodies Fox or Nayler, but since saints had "shed their imer, 'carnal' body of sin...and assumed Christ's glorified flesh" they had a new name which identified them as sons or daughters of Godm
When Nayler was suspected of blasphemy, he insisted that he had not "lifted up myself equal with the Person of Christ," and did not daim to have the fullness of the
Godhead in himself. He clarified thaî it was not of his own capabilities, %ut of Christ 1 receive of the same fÙlne~s.**~In this Nayler indicated that through Christ's gifi of redemption he partook of the divine nature, but could not through his own efforts. When he was charged with blasphemy for receiving honour as Christ during his entrance into
Bristol, Nayler attempted to explain that his supporters had not called him Jesus "'as unto the ~isible,~but as Jesus, the Christ that is in me." He did not own the title "King of
Israel" that he had ken given, ''as a creature," but "if they speak of the spirit in me, I own it only as God is manifested in the flesh, according as God dwelleth in me."m
Nayler was clear in distinguishing between his outward self who was merely James
Nayler and his imer self who was Christ and therefore had ken adored appropriately: "1
L86~ayler,Weakness Above Wickednesa p. 16.
'"~ailey, pp. 86,88.
288Nayler,Vindication, pp. 22-23.
289By this Nayler meant he was not called Jesus according to his visible, physical self It will be remembered that Quakers constantly distinguished between things phy sical, visible and outward and things spirihial, invisible, and inward which alone were of spiritual significance.
qeacon, Grand ïmnostor, p. 12. 97 do abhor that any of that honour which is due to God should be aven to me as 1 am a creature-" He denied divine attnbutes for himself as "a creature that hath beginning and ending, that 1 utterIy deny ... but if they speak to that begotten of the Father in me, then I dare not deny it." He also clarified that though he was the son of God and that "God was manifesteci in the flesh in him," he also had "many brethren" who shedthat statu^.^^'
Nayler did dl he could to distinguish between the Christ witbin himself and his outward, creaturely person.
Fox asserted that: "He that is in Christ is a new crame, and is not distinct fiom km." Believers had 'witnessed the body of sin and death put off, while they were upon the earth; and suc h as was in Christ was new ~reatures.~"*The replacing of the imer sinful body with Christ made believers into new beings. When opponents argued that the saints' bodies were not Christ's body, Fox countered: "How are they Chnst's [people]? how dwells he in hem? and how are they of his flesh and of his bone then?"293 When he was accused of making the Holy Spirit and the saints into one person, Fox replied, '?he saints are in the Spirit; and who are joined to the Lord, are one Spirit."L94While the outward person was not equal with Christ, the inner person was. Thus "George Fox was not one with God but his re-created, resurrected, and transfonned inner body was none
---
Sg'TrueNarrative pp. 15- 18,20,28.
mFo~Mistery* pp. 1 17,12 1.
"Mistery. p. 249.
"Mistexy, p. 307. other than the exact celestid flesh of Christ and that body was one with GO^""^
It is apparent that the men George Fox and James Nayler still existed. The
Quaker believer remained mponsible for continuing to follow and obey the guidance of
Christ within, and could fa11 into sin, as Nayler would confess he did, unless she or he resisted evil consistently. The creaturely person remained, one might suggest, the
"executive" of the person, making the decisions, choosing to respond to the inward divine presence, and king responsible for obeying the imer Christ's leading. It was the comipting spiritual body of sin within that had been removeci, and not the human person.
By having the body of sin replaced with Christ's presence, the believer was made capable of perfèction and infallibility by constantly following the leading of the imer Christ.
Bailey recognùed that Fox and Nayler were identified by some of their supporters as penons with distinctive divine anointings greater than those of other believers. For his part, Fox clairned a greater status as the Son of God than that of other saints. He saw himself as ifully divinized," as "a new and final revelation of the pre-existent Christ."
Bailey acknowledged that Fox viewed fellow believers as Sons of God as but perceived himself to be the "first among equal~."~As will become evident in the next chapter. some of Nayler's supporters made even more exalted daims for him. Here the
'%Fox asserted that al1 who 'become a child of Light7' receive power to become "the Son of Gd." See Fox, Testirno- of Liap. 19. Being 'Wie Son" of God suggests a stronger identification with Chnst than does receivuig power to become sons or children of God according to John 1: 1 2.
2wBailey,pp. 27, 1 14- 17. concept of one's "measure" of the divine presence was of vital importance. Those having a greater measure of Chnst within were identified more closely with Christ
Nayler admonished believers to "corne to know your own measures7everyone in particular to improve it, and not to boast above it."= He clarified that this mesure was
"a measure of ...Christ."299
in one of the statements in which he claimed to be the Son of God "according to the Spirit," Fox point4 out that scripture asserted, "as many as received the word, I say unto you, ye are gods." He advised readen, "Now wait ail to have these things Mfilled in you if it be never so little a measure wait in it, that you rnay grow up to a perfect man in Chnst Jesus." A postscript advised that ody Margaret Fell and "'other fiiends that are raised to a disceming7' were to read this letter?' Evidently not al1 Quakers were fùlly pnvy to Fox's theology when it came to such daims. This raises the question of whether most Quakers were aware of the concept of the believers' divinization through Christ's indwelling, or whether it was an esoteric teaching for the few special initiates. Since not dlearly Fnends were aware of the teaching of sinless perfection, it may be that this less orthodox and more cornplex concept was not widely discussed or undentood within
Quaker circles. As there is linle textual evidence that even so prominent a Quaker pamphleteer as Fox the Younger was aware of it, this seems entirely possible. It is also
ames es Nayler in Several Letiers Written to the Saints, 1654, D 1272, p. 9. 299~amesNayler, Satan's Design Discovered, 1655, N3 13, p. 46, misnumbered 56. 300s- ore MSS, 255, 1653. This is ofien hcorrectly catalogued as Swarthmore MSS, 256, 100 possible that he was wwtof the teaching, but that after Nayler's ride into Bristol in
1656 public allusions to celestid inhabitation were il1 advised Still, Fox the Younger did mention being of Christ's "flesh and bone," and wrote of feeling Christ's blood in one's flesh. He also would speak for God in the first person. These statements may be echoes of the inhabitation concept that Fox the Younger did not fully understand or chose not to speak about at the of the decade.
The elder Fox was addressed by some Friends as, "thouthat killest and makest alive... thou that art joined to the Lord and art made one with hirn Eternai G~d-"~l
Margaret Fell addressed Fox as '%ou bread of life," and "fountain of etemal life.. .for in thee alone is our life and peace ... thou father of etemal feli~ity."~~'Fox's stepson-in-law
Thomas Lower referred to hirn as "the second appearance of him who is blessed for ever.""' The Quaker prophet Richard Sale reported to Fox how he had been enabled to perform a prophetic sign, writing, -'by thy power and strength was 1 preserved. ..O thy power, thy power was exceeding great At was my meat and drink to do thy wiil ...g lory glory to thy name for evermore... who was and is to corne, who is godJO>over ail, blessed
30 1 Swarthmore MSS, 458, &MaryPrince to George Fox in Oliver's Days."
'02~penceManuscripts, 325, Margaret Fe11 to George Fox, 1652. The title .'bread of life7' is applied to Christ in scripture, while the other phrases which are cited identi@ Fox as the source of saivation. As Bailey stated, this would have been addressed to the celestial flesh of Christ believed to be present within Fox. Bailey, p. 128.
M3Spence MSS, 3: 174, 1675. Such language indicates that at least some Friends believed Fox was the second incarnation of the eternal Christ.
3ai~ikeQuaker spelling, Quaker capitalization was inconsistent, and the use of capital or lower case initial letters did not convey any significance. forever-" This letter was later altered to read: "by his power and strength was 1
preserved.. .O his power, his power was exceeding great .. it was rny meat and drink to do
the will of God...gl ory glory to god""' The reorientation of the language fiom Fox to
God is evident Similarly, a missive to Fox from the Quaker rninister Thomas Holme
included the phrase, 30thee shall ail nations bow," which was later amended to, '30 the
power shall al1 nations bow." A title ascribed to Fox, ''thou mighty man of war," was
altered to, '?hou mighty man of the heavenly ~ar."'~
Evidently it was later considered necessary to amend exalted language that had
ken addressed to Fox Bailey identified a "retreat" from the theology and language of
celestial inhabitation to prevent a public backlash against Quakers after the Bristol
incident attracted so much unfavourable attention and intensified suspicions of Quaker
blasphemy. Fox himself, Fell, and other prominent Friends altered much of this language
in the 1670s and derto deflect hostility fiom Friends and prevent or mitigate their
pene~ution.'~'It Îs significant that Thomas Lower's letter cited on the previous page was addressed to Fox in 1675, as it indicates that he continueci to be exalted in private correspondence by some Friends decades after the Bristol incident, despite growing caution about the public use of such language. Since it is possible that the theology which this language reflected was not widely held or known among Friends, it may have
m5SwarthmoreMSS, 4:2 1 1, Richard Sale to George Fox, October 28, 16%.
=Swarthmore MSS, 4:244, Thomas Holme to George Fox, August 6, 1654. This amendment indicates a later concem that Quaken not be perceived as violent insurrectionists, but as merely spiritual warrion.
M7Bailey,pp. 1 87-88,200- 1. 102 been altered to avoid giving offence or causing confusion within Quaker circles as well.
Fox's fuNe wife, his stepson-in-law, and several other Quakers addressed messianic language to Fox, but there were a great many correspondents who indicated no such conception of hirn. Perhaps this was because the theology of celestid inhabitation was shared only among a few of the especially "discerning7' Friends, as suggested by Fox's letter of 1653. Certainly the life transfoming, perfecting, and infallibly guiding divine inner presence was centrai to early Quaker thought Was the exact nature of that indwelling and the ascriphon of a speciaf measure of divinization to certain leaders central to the faith of most early Friends? The textual evidence for this does not seem sufficiently widespread in the correspondence and published works of these Quaken to be conclusive.
Other historians besides Bailey have noted the rnessianic language which was addressed to Fox by some Friends, but they have not chosen to interpret it so literally.
The usual explanation for the exalted ternis has been that Fox's followers were writing in biblical metaphors and in their motion and enthusiasm "lost a due sense of the value of the words ~sed.''~'It was only "hyperbolic language used by those whose min& were filled with biblical irnagery," which would not have been "misunderstood" within
308WilliamC. Braithwaite, The Beeinnings of Quakerism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959, p. 106. Although Braithwaite offered excuse for the exalted language, this prominent Quaker historian did recognize that the eariy Friends' "sense of persona1 union" wïth Christ and their understanding of Christ's dwelling in them "betrayed hem, during the first exhilaration of the experience, into extremes of identification with the Divine." Braithwaite, p. 109. Quaker circles as it was by those outside." However, one of the most striking facts about the early Quakers was how very seriously they used words. They rejected dl flattering tities, and would not offer the typical contemporary salutations if they did not consider them to be literaily tr~e."~The fact that several Fnends addressed Fox in tenns usually applied oniy to Christ cannot be dismisseci easily. That Nayler was addressed in messianic tems by at least a few supporters in that one notorious instance at Bristol has been widely recognized, but Bailey bas demonstrated that, in view of the language addressed to Fox and the language of early Quaker theology, that was less of an aberration than has often been perceived."'
Bailey identified eschatological implications of the concept of celestial inhabitation. He argueci that the boldness and "bravado" of the Fnends in confbnting their society arose fiom their belief that they had become divinized children of God and
"Gd's nobility, the gentry of heaven." Their contempt for human authority and their
'OgGeofiey Nuttall, Studies in Christian Enthusiasm : Illustrated fiom Early Ouakensm ( Wallingford, Pennsylvania: Pende Hill, 1W8), pp. 50-52.
3 1"This Quaker Iiteralness was exhibited on one occasion when Fox was in prison and was offered the conventional contemporary greeting by his captor who said: "How do you, Mr. Fox? Your servant sir." Fox replie& "Take heed of hypocrisy and a rotten hart, for when came 1 to be thy master and thee my servant? Do servants use to cast their rnasters into prison?" Cambridge Journal, p. 250. This was typical of Quaker responses to flattering or conventional greetings and did not indicate a mere pique on Fox's part. Fox explained that Quakers couid not honestly greet those outside their circle with "gd-morrow," since for the sinner no &y was good, but "their moming and evening is evil." Neither could they offer dishonest and "hypocritical salutations." See George Fox, Concemine Gd-Momw and Good-Even, 1657, FI 766, pp. 2,14. Of coune, this sentiment also indicated an unwillingness to hternize with people of "'the world" 1O4
audacity in wnfiontiing the earthiy powers resdted from their belief that they were
transformexi into "go& and goddesses" and set above the old and fallen human order.
Since the Kingdom of God was established within themselves, they believed that soon
there would be an ovemiming and a reordering of society in which they, the saints,
wodd de. in this way the celestid Besh theology served as a "social compensation" for
the "dispossessed of uiis world" who saw themselves "liberated. ..and ennobled" through
the presence of Christ's body within them.'12 The concept of celestial flesh also helps to
explain the Friends' outraged attacks against the various rival churches and their teachings. Quakers believed that these churches deceived the world into thinking that a
gulf would always remain between God and the believer, and that no recovery of the pre-
fdlen state was possible. Furthemore, by opposing the Spirit's continuing revelation and power and insistïng that these belonged only to the former age of the apostles, the churches prevented humanity fiom welcoming the restoration of al1 things and the transformation of society that would occur when persons tumed fiom external religions to the etemal Christ withh3" However, it seems reasonable to suggest that for penons to oppose the contemporary churches and society and believe themselves to be part of
God's new spiritual elite who would won rule the earh, they would not have had to believe themselves divine or inhabited by Christ in spiritual substance. For Quakers to have considered themselves inhabited by God's Spirit, perfectly tninsfonned, infallibly guide4 agents through whom Christ spoke and acted and prophets comrnissioned by God
"%ailey, pp. v-vi, 22,44-45.
3'3~ailey,pp. 27-30,35-38. 105 to initiate a new world order would have been sufficiently exhilarating and edivening to account for Quaker attitudes and behaviour.
Quaker statements upholding the believer's oneness and equality with God, their messianic language, their assertions that the imer "body of sin" was replaced by Christ who inhabited believers in such a way that the body and spirit of Christ were 'hot divided," and Nayler's insisteme on defining whether he had been addressed as Christ according to his visible or inward self al1 serve to indicate that Bailey's thesis of celestid inhabitation offers insight toward a fuller comprehension of the earliest Quakers' beliefs.
Bailey dealt forthnghtly and carefiilly with the theological statements and messianic language which many have dismissed too lightly. At lest some of the earliest Quakers, their major leaders arnong them, appear to have believed that the divine inhabitation would render those who possessed it in sufficient "measure" divine and one with Chnst according to their imer being.
Questions remain concerning exactiy how early Friends perceived the nature of
Christ's inhabitation. As one reviewer of Bailey's work noted, the concept of a spiritual body that was "almost corporeal," "an immaterial substance" and "a spintual 'stufT"' which inhabited penons' bodies and upon which believers "feâ" is problematic. The
"mechanics" of how believers were to eat the celestid flesh of Christ is lefi une~plained.~'~As noted above, however, neither scripture nor the early Quakers described that operation clearly either. It is therefore difficult to assess the precise degree to which Bailey's concept of the "celestial flesh" and the spintual eating of it
"'~ichael L. Birkel, "Review," Quaker History, 82 ( 1993), 1 1 1- 12. 106 expressed how early Quakers would have understood the divine inhabitation. Still, by taking the early Friends at their words instead of assuming that they were speaking only metaphorically, Bailey has pointed in an important direction that others have explained away or have preferred to leave unexplored Bailey's thesis is consonant wïth the contention of this dissertation that the earliest Friends had a consistent tendency to take widely held Christian beliefs to an extreme position. Christian faith teaches that the converted are rnorally improved, while early Quakers taught one must saive afler perfection. Scriptwe states that believers are "pariaken of the divine nature" (Li Peter
I :4) and that Chnst lives within his people (Galatians 2:2Q),"* while at least some
Friends asserted that the most prominent among them could be exalted as Christ,
"according to the spirit" within them.
"'~n stating "It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me," (Revised Standard Version) St Paul sounds arnazingly like a Quaker expressing Bailey's concept of celestid inhabitation. Many mid-seventeenth century English radicals were claiming that Christ was
about to come on earth in physical fom to establish his Kingdom and dethe world with
his saints. Although Quakers differed from this belief by insisting that Christ had come aiready spiritually, was present within themselves. and was working through believers to establish his miliennial reign, the Friends' eschatology was not unique, but was built
upon concepts which had ken developed earlier by thinkers such as William ~rb~ry.316
Quaker eschatology also manifested the influence of the sixteenth century apocalyptic writer John BaIe ( 1495- 1563)' who had taught that God would raise up his prophets from the oppressed common people, and the pamphlets of the 1640s which ppularized
Thomas Brighîman's ( 1562- 1607) teaching that the thousand year reign of Christ and his saints would be upon earth as a physical reality. These positions encouraged radical new millenarian visions of social and politicai transformation that were held by various
316T.L. Underwood, "Early Quaker Eschatology," in Punetans.the Millemium and the Future of Israel: Puritan Eschatolow 1600 to 1660 ,ed by Peter Tom (Cambridge: James Clarke and Company Lirnited, 1970), pp. 96-98. The Spintualist preacher William Erbury had taught that Christ's promise to remto his disciples had meant that he would come again to them in spirit. He asserted that Christ's coming would not be "as Christians cdlyconceive Christ to come in the clouds," but "the appearing of Ckst is the appearuig of the great God and saviour in the saints..." Christ would corne "when he appears in glory in us." Erbury also maintaineci that God would rule through the saints, and promised: "When God is manifest in the saints. and God in the saints shall judge andgovem the world, then the world shall rejoice and sing." See Erbury, Testimonv. pp. 9,23,40. groups and individuais by the time of the Civil Wars and ~evolution."'
Brighhi~anadvanceci eschatological ideas that bad been spdor "marginal" earlier."' He stressed the importance of the saints' role in helping Christ usher in the rnillenniurn through their faithful struggie agiunst the forces of Antichnst, and so awakened interest in participation in the political sphere.)19 BrÏghtman taught that fiom about the year 1650, the Kingdom would come gradudly to earth as God's "new light" began shining in the darkness and became increasingly bright until al1 were subject to
Christ320Then God's elect would be kings, and the church would be "rnuch more excellent.. .than e~er."~~'Thus, the millennium would arrive on earth as the consumination of divinely ordered history, and the wodd would be transformed from its enmity with God into a universe mled by him." The millennium wodd come through preaching that was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and Christ would remvisibly to judge the world at the millenniwn's end.323
"'Christianson, Reformers and Babvlon, pp. 18- 19, 106, 124, 127-30, 176-77.
3'8Bozeman,pp. 206-7.
3'g~vihuZakai, Exile and Kinedorn: Histov and A al-ypse in the Puritan Mimtion $0 America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, l992), p. 46.
'Tt seems possible that Brightman was directly or indirectly one of the sources from whom Quakers denved their concept of Christ coming as the Light to transform persons and the world.
321ThomasBrightman, 'A Revelation of the Apocalypse," pp. 13- 15; "A Cornmentary on the Canticles," pp. 1051-52 in The Works of Thomas Briehtman, 1644,84679.
3PZakai, pp. 4344-
)%mn, pp. 3 1-36-38. To Brightrnan's expectation of a hmire corning of Christ's "brigbtness,"
Quaken added their conviction that the Light of Christ was present already, and the
activity that wodd brïng the millennium was in progress. Mead of awaiting Christ's
corning, Quakers believed that Chnst had corne and was in the process of establishing his
reign through the words and actions of the believers he inspired Just as the Quakers did
not emphasize the activity of the historical and physical Christ of the past but of the
spiritual and etemal Christ who was present within al1 persans, so many Friends did not
look for a funire bodily return of Christ but regarded Christ as present dready as the
inward Light Al1 those who would respond to the guidance and inspiration of the imer
Christ would become transformeci, and join the prophetic community through whom
Christ would transfomi the world and establish his Kingdom.
Explaining that Friends did not believe in a physical retum of Christ, Fox the
Younger asserted: "We never expect to how Christ after the flesh to reign, but he shall
reign over a11 the earth, whose Kingdom is an evertasting Kingdom, and al1 powers shall
serve and obey him."32J He stated that the deceiving Serpent had "filleci some of you
with many strange imaginations, and expectations conceming God and Christ, and his
appearance without yoy and so ail dong he hath strove to keep you fiom minding God's
appearance within y~u-'"~The elder Fox addressed opponents "that speaks so much of
Christ reigning." He informai them that Christ was reigning already "in man that is
324George Fox the Younger, A Noble Salutationanda FaiW Greetin~r unto Thee Charles Stuart, 1660, F2008, p. 20.
"Fox the Younger, Visitation, p. 7. 110 restoredAnswer this you that talks of a personai reign.n326He asserted that: "now
Christ is come to reign," in believers, and promiseci that the reign of Christ which had begun in God's people would soon bring Christ's final victorym Fox and Fox the
Younger clearly shedthe belief that there wodd be no physical appearance of Christ, for Christ had retwned aiready as an indwelling spirit
Nayler, however, believed that there would be a physical retum of Christ as judge of the world Certaïniy, Nayler condemned those who denied that Christ was already present in persons and thus upheld an eschatology that "would put him a far off, to another He insisted that Christ came not ody in the ancient pst but was al-
"manifest in mortal flesh" of believen in the presen~~~~Still, while celebrating "the brightness of his coming in his saints" spiritudly in the pre~ent,'~Nayler also believed that there would be another coming of Christ at the "end of the world.""' Nayler wamed that the &y would come when Christ would descend fiom heaven, the dead would rise,
326GeorgeFox, John James. 1 Hearine That Thou Doest Make a Noise. 1658, F1853B, pp 3-4.
j2%ayler, Spiritual Wickedness .p. 2. 3F)Nayler, Lieht of Christ, p. 22.
330James Nayler, Churches Gathered A@nst Christ, 1653, N267, p. 18. Brightman had earlier written of the increasing "brightness" at the millennium's approach. See Brightman, p. 105 1.
331~ayIer,Boaster Bar& p. 9. and the living and dead would be j~dged.~~~He asserted, "The Lord is at hand..yea he is coming with ten thousands of his angels, to be avenged on the heathen," and wouid uappear as a consurning fire."333 Nayler anticipated the &y "when the Lord shall appear to the joy of such who tremble at his ~ord''~~He retained this hope to the last year of his life, when he wrote that God's people mut remain faithfid "till righteowness &se to reign and judge for the meek of the earth, who are found faithfiii to his corning""'
Nayler stated that Christ's Kingdom would udold if persons ailowed Chria to dein themselves. He informeci the govemon that, Zhe Kingdom of Gdis within you, the Pnnciple of God is within you," seeking to end oppression and establish justice for the poor in the courts of the realm so that Chnst's Kingdom would corne on earth. He admonished readers not to seek an external Kingdom while rejecting the establishment of
Christ's Kingdom within themselves that would allow the earthly Kingdom to emerge.
Nayler asserted that when people were not led by Christ, "The Kingdom of God [is] put ahoff." Chnst could not mie in persons' hem, in law courts, or in other seats of governrnent if penons chose to obey their sinfid nature rather than Chnst 336 As Christ
'-'2Nayler, Love to the Lost, p. 6 1.
333 Nayler, Discoverv of Wisdom, p. 30. Unlike Brightman, Nayler did not seem to believe that this event was more than six centuries in the future. See p. 1 14 below.
3NNayler,Antichrist in Man, p. 15.
335NayIerand Whitehead, Tnie Ministea p. 10.
'=Nayler, What the Possession of the Living Faith Is, 1676, N330, pp. 3 1-36. Il2
"chosen vessels give up their bodies that he may speak and act..in his vessels," so that
fdlible humans wodd not nile. "but the Spirit of your Father that speaks in yoa ""
Christ did not entrust judgment to sinfid magistrates, "but hath reserved it to himself. and
them in whom he is."7338Nayler believed that Christ's Kingdom wodd come as Christ
worked through his people, and maintained that there would be a sudden physical
appearance of Christ to judge the world in the future.
The elder Fox also had originally warned people of the day when Christ would
come to judge them for their sins. Fox demanded: "What will ye say, when the Son of
Man shall come in his glory, and al1 the holy angels with him, and shall sit upon the
throne of his glory, and ail nations shall be gathered before him?"33g However, by 1657
Fox announced that already, 'nie mighty day of the Lord is come. Christ Jesus is come
to reign,"YOand that "the Lord is come and coming" to judge the e~il.~'He thus had
both a realised and a fùture component in his eschatology. In a revealing statement, Fox
asserted that the "kingdom of the world is becorne Christ's and coming to be Christ's ...
Christ shall rei p...and he doth reign and he is come and is manifested who will nile the
nation with a rod of iron ... his govemment is setting up and truth and righteousness and
337Nayler, Door *ne& pp. 58-59.
338 Nayler, Churches Gathered, p. 9.
33Tox,Saul's Errand, p. iv. This is fiom the segment of the document that was written entirely by Fox.
Yox, To the Protector, p. 6 1. 113 mercy shail reigCY2 With this mimeof present and future tenses, Fox sought to express his belief that the Kingdom was already establisheà, yet Merprogress toward the Kingdom was essential for it to anive in its fullness. Its establishment did not require a physical return of Christ, for Chnst was already present and reigning in believers. Still, his Kingdom lacked the full extension it would have in the fii~irewhen Christ and the saints wouid mie the earth. Thus Fox could amounce with confidence that: "The Lord
Jesus Chnst is corne to reign, and his everlasting Kingdom and scepter is set up?' Fox oflen spoke of a "Day of the Lord" that was to come without speciwg that this Day was the tirne of Christ's retrrm? He may have expected a future Day of divine judgement that was not accompanied by Christ's appearance, such as a time of national disaster or misfortune for individual siruters.
The time of Christ's appearance and of the Kingdom's arriva1 were distinct for
Quakers, as they had been in Brightman7steaching conceming "The Middle Advent."
Brightman argued that there wouid be an intermediate corning of Chnst in the future that would precede by centuries the final appearance of Christ at the world's end. in the
"'Middle Advent" Christ would not come in a persona1 appearance, but rather in an outtlow of his "brightness" which would fil1 the world with his transforming divine
Y2~eorgeFox, 1657, The Friends Libmry, London, Box A2236
Y3~eorgeFox, The Lambs Officer, 1659, FI 855, p. 1.
Y4GeorgeFox, Vials of the Wrath of God 1655, F1976, p. 4; Voice of the Lord to the Heathen, 1656, F1979, p. 7. po~er.~~Brightman promised: "Such shall be the beginning of this new light; the
progress sMl equai the beauty of the rnoon, most clearty enlightening the mighty
darkness, with a swift increase after the first appearing shining-..like the full moon."
The unfolding of the Kingdom would be a gradual development, as it would not corne al1
"in one &y." Soon, the light of Christ's appearaace would increase and '%rive with the
sun, in giory, light, and clearness, the exceeding brightness shall be such that it cannot be
looked upon, yea, it shall be at length temMe to the enernie~."~Christ would empower
human instruments to defeat those enemies. Hundreds ofyears after this, Chnst would
remin person to conduct the las? judgrnent, and the physical world wodd end-
Bnghtrnan expected that in this "rnillemium," which he shortened to six hundred years,
people would have face to face encounters with GaY7immediate knowledge of God,
and everything for their happines~.~~Even death would not be feared, for death wodd
be merely "a means to translate men to everlasting life."M9 The similariûes between this
eschatology and the Quakers' are miking, as are the parallels between Brightman's expectations and the Quakers' daims of what they enjoyed already. It seems that due to
is reminded of Fox's daim to have seen God's face already in this Me, and Nayler's affirmation that he had seen Christ through "spiritual" eyes. See Fox, Tme Discoverv of the Magistrates, p. 5; Nayler, Satan's Design, p. 7. Fox drew on the biblical precedents of Moses' and Job's seeing God's face to defend his own claim.
U8Bozeman, pp. 207-9.
Y%nghtman, p. 853. their insistence that Christ had come, Quakers clairned the present realization of popularly anticipated futirre millemial blessings. Brightman's description of a graddually unfolding millennium coming through Christ's spiritual agency and the assistance of his people before his physical appearance was consonant with Nay ler's esc hatology. Fox and Fox the Younger, on the other hand, came to apply the Spirituaiist perspective to their eschatology in such a way that they concluded that a future physical appearance of
Chnst was not to be anticipated They consequently focused exclusively upon his present spiritual and interior appearance through which the Kingdom would come.
THE LAMB'S WAR
Many penons who becarne Quakers in the 1650s had imbibed radical ideas conceming freedorn of conscience and liberation from oppression during their seMce in the New Model Amy. Substantial numbers of New Model soldiers had believed they were fighting the forces of Antichnst and helping to bring the rnille~ialreign through their divinely assisted victorie~.~~~The Spiritualist chaplain Erbury had been among those who in the 1640s believed that the saints of the Army would usher in the
Kingd01-n.'~ When this hope was disappointed, Quakers adapted this concept to teach that they were the spiritual "Army7' of God whose prophetic message would transform
- - 35~llsworth,p. 46.
35 1 Erbury, p. 25. the world and bring the "new eanrhn they dl1 hoped for. Some Quakers were involveci in
resistance to tithes before joining the Friends, who made tithe resistance a cardinal
principle of their religious and social protest hstead of becoming Quakers to retreat
from social stniggie or find personal religious solace after political disappointment, some joined the Quaker movement to carry on the battle.352Many radicals felt that the defeat
and execution of Charles I had paved the way for the deof King Jesus and the establishment of his Kingdom on earth.353The defeat of the Levellers and the failure of
successive Pariiarnents and Cromwell to bring Christ's Kingdom any nearer through social reform disappointed the 'tising expectations"'" that the Civil Wars and
Revolution had fomented. Many believed that God must intervene to accornplish the agenda which they identified as divine goals. This intervention would corne through
God's operations withîn his redeemed and divinely informed and empowered people.
It will be recalled that the Quakers' central contention was that the inward Light or Spirit of Christ was resident within al1 penons to lead them f'rorn their fallen hurnan
'"~arryReay, "Quakerism and Society," in Radical Relieion, pp. 141, 144; Quaken and Revolution, pp. 18-1 9. As a former soldier in the New Mode1 hy,Fox the Younger came to cal1 himself a "soldier in the Army of the Lamb (which must get the victory)." George Fox the Younger, A Few Queries to the Teache- 1660, F2002A.
353Hili,Expenence of Defeak p. 54.
"Stephen A. Kent, "Mysticism, Quakerism, and Relative Deprivation: A Sociological Reply to R. A. Naulty," Reli eion, 19 ( 1989)' 16 1. Nayler expressed the Quaker sentiment in so many words: "O England, how is thy expectation failed now after al1 thy travails?" He insisted that there had been no deliverance, reforrnation, or equity established, and that humans had proven mtrustworthy. James Nayler and George Fox, A Lamentation Over the Ruines of This Oporessed Nation, 1653, N292, pp. 34. This statement appears in the section of the piece that is attributed to Nayler. 117 condition and enable their retum to the pre-fdlen state of perfdon. Such transformed persons would then build a perfected world as they acted according to the Light's guidance. Since Christ's Light was present in al1 penons, there was the possibility that dl, or at least a sufficientnurnber, would join in the divinely inspired task of re-foming society as God intended Fox the Younger called his countrymen to "corne to the Light of the Lord Jesus Christ ... who enlighteneth you, that with the Light you may come to see what is contrary," to the divine will, "in your laws, and govemments... and in your ministry ... so happily God may stay the mighty judgment (which otherwise must come) which is right at the door, which shall sweep away the ungodly." If people would respond to the Light's guidance, calamitous judgrnents would be unnecessary for the
Kingdom's establishment, and God would direct good ders in goveming according to his will. God would give the nation just laws through those guided by his Spirit, so that
"judgment shall nin dom as waters," and God's will would be executed. Until this was accomplished: "God7scontroversy shall not case, but there will be breaking' and overtuming...Babyl~n~~' must fa11 and perish-.. the &y of the Lord draweth Ngh. "'~6 Fox the Younger affinned: "The Kingdom of God [is] within me,"3s7and called believers to:
3S5"~abylon'7was a biblical allusion to Antichristian earthly powen in conflict with Gd See Christianson, Reformers and Babvlon, p. 9.
3M~eorgeFox the Younger, The Testimonv of God, 1660, F2010, pp. 4-8. As the title indicates, Fox the Younger did not regard this tract as his testimony, but derGod's statement which was cornmunicated through him.
'"FOX the Younger, Word to the People, p. 8. ...bear the image of the Lamb,'58 and wimess his Kingdom set up in you..until he anse to plead the cause of his people, and to avenge himself on his and their enemies, and to make the Kingdom of this worid his, and the people subject to his goverment-..and the day draweth
Although the Kingdom of God began within persons, those in whom the Kingdom had been established wodd then join in building the outward Kingdom as well.
Nayler describeci the StruggIe to establish Christ's Kingdom as "The Lamb's
War," in which Christ the Lamb of God fought through his people against the satanic
"god of rhis world" by urging God's rebellious hurnan subjects to remto him in obedience. Chnst gave his Light so people codd perceive the divine will and war against human evil, "both in themselves and wherever they see it." While warring against inward sin, believen also struggled nonviolently against al1 the devil's "laws" and "customs" in order "?O restore al1 things, and make al1 things new as they were in the beginning, that God alone may de." In the Lamb's War believers did not fight with
"camal" weapons that destroyed human bodies, but overthrew the satanic kingdom with the "spiritual weapons" of faith, patience, and love, and by suffering persecution from those who responded negatively to the message Christ delivered through his saints.
'"The Lamb was an appellation for Chria taken fiom the biblical Book of Revelation This title indicates Christ as the sacrificial Lamb, but the Lamb is also depicted as a conqueror, and the one who sets divine history's events and judgments into motion. See Revelation 5-6. Fox the Younger assured the Interregnum military denthat Christ the Lamb would "arise like a lion upon his enemies.. .he will tear and tread down and consume and destroy them." Fox the Younger, "Unto You the Officen and Soddiers of the Amies," in Collection, p. 18.
"Tex the Younger, Message p. 23.
3%tmesNayler, The Larnbs War Aeainst the Man of Sin, 1658, N29 1, pp. 1-5, 17. Nayler sounded a militant urgency that believen go out with:
... the Lamb in them. ..in judgment and righteousness to make war with his enemies, conquering and to conquer. Not as the prince of this world in his subjects, with whips and prisons, tortures and torments on the bodies of creatures, to kill and destroy men's lives...but he goes forth in the power of the Spirit with the Word of Truth to pass judgment upon the head of the Serpent which does deceive and bewitch the ~orld..~~'
Here Nayler offered a powefil image of Christ's wnquest of the world through the saints as they verbally confionted evil and disturbed people's "peace and rest in sin."32
It was the "iast times of Antichri*" for the Lamb had "appeared against the oppression and deceit of al1 sorts of people."'63 Quaker preachers bro ke into the regular 1ives of penons with a message that challenged conternporary assumptions and demanded a life altering response." They spoke to elicit a repentance that was made possible by the presence of the Light of Christ in each peson. Fox fiequently informed prsons that he spoke to the Light of God who was within tl~ern.~~'Since al1 had this imer Light that would test@ to the validity of the Quaker prophet's message, al1 who did not reject the
36 1 Nayler, Lamb's War, p. 4.
362~amb's War, p. 4.
363Nayler,Answer to Ouakers Catechism, Title Page, p. 3. This present appearance of Chnst was, of course, "in his saints," who acted under the inspiration of his Spirit. Nayler, Answer to Pefiect Pharisee p. 3.
3a~ouglasGwyn, '"Into That Which Carnot Be Shaken:' The Apocalyptic Gospel Preached By George Foq" in The Dav of the Lord: Eschatolow in Ouaker Perspective, ed by Dean Freiday (Newberg: The Barclay Press, 198 1 ), p. 6 1.
"'FOX, Messaee to the Parliarneng p. 3. 120
inward witness of the Light would be drawn to repentance and reliance on the Light's
guidance and empowement. As more and more persow would respond to the Light and join the ranks of the transfomed, the inner Chkt wouid lead them as a spiritual but
confrontational force to effiect change in the political and social order.
The Kingdom of Christ would not be established by violent insurrection but
through the spirihial weapons God provided and the patient suffering of God's people
until al1 injustice would be removedM6Fox the Younger asserted that "God wiI1
ove- and ovemim" the present order and give the Kingdom to his people who would
''de the earth in mercy, justice and ûue judgments. ..and do good to a11 .n'67 However,
the Quaker vision âid not nile out the participation of the forceful am of the govenunent
in accomplishing divine purposes The Interregmm Quakers' expectation that the state
would be transformed and that God would dethe world through his saints kept the
Fnends concemed with political developments, constant in their prophetic witness to the
govemment, and willing to hold govemrnent positions when the opportunity to do so
appeared? The elder Fox invited the Members of Parliament to become saints,
infonning them that since the Light was in al1 penons they could have the spiritual guidance necessary to govem properly if oniy they chose to respond to it? He informed them that if they would allow themselves to be guided by the Light, England's
M~nderwooû,in Taon., pp. 99-100,103.
367~o~the Younger, E~y&nd's Sad Esta@ pp. 7-8.
-Endy, Earlv Quakerism, pp. 88-89.
%eorge Fox, This For Each Parliament-Man, 1656, FI 933, pp. 8, 17. govemment would becorne "a dread and terror to dl the world-higher than the powen of darkne~s."~~He also wamed them that if they did not follow the Light of Christ within themselves, God's sword would "hew you domas it hath done them before you'"' instead of retreating from political involvement and passively waiting for God to break into history and reform the world as sorne have argued the miIlennial movements
Quakers believed that God was working through themselves to establish Christ's reign. The Friends' trust in divine activity did not lessen their own efforts, neither did
Interregnurn Quakers distinguish themselves fiom society to withdraw fiom it, but rather to assail and conquer it.373
One contemporary observed that the Friends were so assured of Gd's imminent victory through themselves that they infonned opponents that they too would be of one mind with the Quaken in a few year~.'~'The rapid rise of the Quaker movement in which the nurnber of Friends grew fiom approximately five hundred persons in 1652 to
370George Fox, This To Al1 Officers and Soldiers and Mamstrates, 1657, F1834, p. 4. Quakers tended to share the assumption of rnany English people that they inhabited God's elect nation which had special oppomuiities and responsibilities. See Zakai, pp. 27, 58.
373Reay, Quakers and Revulution, p. 44.
374 Braithwaite, p. 230. The millenarian concept gave Quakers and its other adherents confidence that they would be among God's victorious people at the end of the cosmic struggle, and made unfavourable events and conditions comprehensible and endurable in light of the tnumph that was to corne. See Richard W. Cogley, "Seventeenth-Century EngIish Millenarianisrn," Religion 17 (1987), 392-93. twenty thousand by 1657 encuufaged them to believe that the world was about to convert
to their faith and be remade into the Kingdom of GO^? Quakers believed themselves to be the fdfillment of the biblical prophecy of a people who wouid descend ftom the north
against a si& nation and overthrow it (Jeremiah 6122-26). The Quaker William
Dewsbury ( 162 1-88) wrote:
Now is the Lord appearing in this day of his mighty power, to gather His elect together... to Iead his Army he hath raised up in the North of England, and is marched towards the South, in the mighty power of the living Word of God, which is sharp as a two edged swoa to cut dom the high and low, nch and poor, priests and people ... So shdl this Nation, and dlthe nations of the world be conquered; and the victory witnessed, neither by sword nor spear, but by the Spint of the Lord ...This is the day that the God of Heaven will set up his own Kingdom. .. to al1 oppressors, hi@ and low, who grind the faces of the poor, and cause them to groan under your cruelty and oppression, hear the word of the Lord. .Howl and weep for the misery which is coming upon you, for the cry of the oppressed hath entered into the ean of the Lord, and he is coming to render vengeance upon you, and set the oppressed free.'"
This vision of imminent world conquest and vindication of the oppressed hardly betokened a withdrawal or retreat fiom revolutionary goals.
As Dewsbury mentioned in his prophecy, the Quaker movement arose in
England's north, in those poorer counties that traditionally had been scenes of tenant
375Barbour,Quakers in Puritan England, pp. 18 1-82.
376~illiamDewsbury, "A Tnie Prophecy of the Mighty Day of the Lorc 1655, in Earlv Quaker Writin~s1650-1 700, ed by Hugh Barbour and Arthur O. Roberts (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdrnans Publishing Company, 1973), pp. 93-94,97. Fox also wrote that God's amy was "coming up out of the north against you tem%le ones ...which was prophesied of, but now it is Mfilled." Fox, Newes, Title Page. revolt, tithe resistance, anticlericalism, and opposition to the wealthy. When the
movement spread throughout England, it promoted defiant resistance to the elite? The
north was dso a region that had been significantiy neglected by the estabiished church,
where the ministry had been largely inept, and where there was popular resentment
toward the clergy.3n The millennium which Quakers and many Levellers, Baptists, and
Fiftb Monarchi~ts~~~envisioned offercd a world without tithes to support preachers of a
national church that misled people and robbed them of freedom of conscience,'" or an
oppressive system of land tenure. In the Quaker milleonium imprisonment for debt and
the death penalty for mere theft would be abolished. There would be effêctive assistance
J"Barbour, pp. 74-84. There is evidence that the Quaker movement was successful in areas of substantial tenant protest and opposition to tithes. See Bruce Gordon Blackwood, "Agmian Unrest and Early Lancashire Quakers," Journal of the Friends' Historical Societv, 5 1 ( l966), 72-76.
37aHughBarbour, "From the Lamb's War to the Quaker Magistrate," Ouaker Histori~, 55 (1966), 7; Cmig Horle, Quakers and the Enelish Lead Svstem 1660-1688 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, l988), pp. 2-3.
379SeeAppendix IV.
'80Fox argued that lay impropriators should not have tithes either, for the Mosaic Law with its demand for tithes had been abrogated by Christ, and contemporary tithes were rooted in Catholicism. Therefore, they had ken "set up in the world by the beast, the dragon's jmwer, and the great whore, the false church." See George Fox, Answer t~ Doctor Bureess his Book, 1659, F1743, pp. 17'20. By the mid-seventeenth century approximately a third of the tithes were held by lay impropnaton instead of clergy. See Punshon, p. 65. Since many clergy lived on a scanty portion of the tithe that was paid to them by the impropriators or supported themselves by fming small giebe holdings, they did not al1 seem to warrant Quaker reproaches for profiting from the tithe system. See Cecil W. Sharman, George Fox and the Ouake~(London: Quaker Home SeMce, 199 l), pp. 125,246. Quakers did not choose to recognize this in their castigation of the clergy. No doubt calling attention to the hated tithe helped gain support for the Fnends in their opposition to the clergy and their theology. to the pr,and a refomed legal system that was sufficiently simplified so that al1 could
understand it without recoune to lawyers and judges who routinely deprived the poor of justice.381Fox stated that the lawyen' very robes were "like unto a black pif" as if to
advertise that their wearers were outside the law and j ustice of He advocated that
persons be allowed to represent themselves in court without recourse to lawyen and their
oppressive fee~.~~Courts should be places where the poor wodd "not be &id to
appear in a good cause against the greatest oppressor in the nation," and magistrates
would judge "without respect to pers on^."^"
In 164 1, the independent minister Jererniah Burroughs had offered a more elitist
description of the millennium. He preached that God was beginning to work through
Parliament to overthrow Babylon and establish his Kingdom with human assistance. The
comrnon people would be usefid for preaching, but since the comrnon multitude could
act only with disorder and confusion, God would move the "noble" and "learned" to
establish Christ's Kingdom. When Christ wodd deon earth with his saints the church
381JosephFrank, The Levellers (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1959, pp. 1 1, 47,61, 1 14, 129,207-208; Bernard S. Capp, The Fifth Monarchv Men: A Studv in Seventeenth-Centwy English Miilenarianism (London: Faber and Faber, l972), pp. 147, 157-69, 177; J.F. McGregor, "The Baptists: Fount of All Heresy," and Bnan Manning, "The Levellers and Religion," in Radical Relim'on, pp. 53,6748.
3"George Fox, The Law of God the Rule for Law-makers, 1658, F1856, p. 4.
3m"GeorgeFox to Richard Cromwell," in Edward Burrough and George Fox, Gd ounsel and Advice, 1659, B6006, p. 48.
ad v am es Nayler, "A Cal1 to Magistrates, Ministers, Lawyen, and People to Repentance," 1653, in Collection of Sundry Books. Epistles and Papers Written bv James NavIer3 ed by George Whitehead, 17 16, pp. 133-37. Hereafter listed as Worb. would be persecuted no longer but would "treaà" on Satan's people. There would be a pure church corn which ail sinnen and h-tes would be ejected God would explain theological mysteries and pour out his Spirit to provide the saints with revelations, while
Christ wodd be present to teach hû people. The saints who had been poor and penecuted wodd govern and enjoy the entire world Burroughs called people to involve themselves in the work God was beginning, to stniggie against Antichn'st even in the face of suffering, and to recognize that Gad preferred and would best work through the system
The Quakers of the next decade would have agreed in part with this conception of the millennium. The need to face sufTering now for the victory that was to corne certainly was recognized and experienced by Quakers. Friends would have concurred gladly with Burroughs' clah that the saints would dethe earth with Christ, though
Friends wodd have beIieved that Christ would rule fiom within themselves rather thm in an extemal physical fom. Chnst was inwardly present already as the Light to teach them and provide revelations. Aspects of the Quaker millemium seem to have developed from the types of ideas that Burroughs offiered However, Quakers would have taken great exception to his comments on the respective roles of the great and the common people. For the Friends it was not the learned with their fallacious human education, nor
''?fererniah Burroughs, A Glim~seof Sions Glory, 164 1, G IMSA, pp. 2,508, 13- 1 5, 2 1-22,27-29,33. Aithough John F. Wilson considered Thomas Goodwin a more likely author of this sermon than Bmoughs, Paul Chrktianson has plausibly argued that since its style and content is dissimilar to that of Goodwin but consonant with that of Burroughs the latter is the more likely preacher. See Christianson, Reformers and Babvlon, pp. 25 1-52.
127
The Quaker' social goals were typical of the "middling sort7'of people who
tended to enter the sects and support radical political movements. These ranks of artisans, yeomen, and tradesmen were economically independent and literate people who had historically "stood on the fkinges of social and political power," and had achieved sufficient status in society to aspire to a still greater voice and share in hJ9'Thus they were people high enough in the social hierarchy to hope for advancement, and prosperous enough to have learned to read and produce liteniîure that informed one another of their rights and called one another to work for social and political reform.
There has kenmuch debate concernùig the social origins of the first Quakers.
Alan Cole's contention that the Quaker movement appealed most to "the more hard- presseci" elements in sociepwas challenged by Richard T. Vann's conclusion that the
Quaker movement's social composition reflected that of contemporary English society, and that there was a wide range of social ranks arnong the Friends excepting the most and the least prosperous. Thus, most Quakers were not so economically troubled as had ken tho~ght.~~~Drawing upon information fond in Friends' wills and accounts of their civil prosecutions, Alan Anderson more recently suggested that Quakers were primkly of the middle ranks of society, and that Vann was correct in stating they were not Iargely among the economically disadvantaged. Anderson's sNdy indicates that the middle ranks were
3g2~lanCole, "The Social Ongins of the Early Friends," The Journal of the Friends' Historical Society, 48 (1957), 1 18.
3g3~ichardT. Vann, "Quakensm and the Social Structure in the Interregnum," Past and Resent, 43 ( 1969), 71 -9 1. 128 heavily represented among Quakers in cornparison to English society as a wh~le.'~It seems appropriate then to locate the earliest Friends within the milieu of the "middling sort."
While the Friends believed that Christ's reign meant the end of injustice, oppression, and the suffering of the innocent, they were not averse to the suffiering of the guilty or to controlling the behaviour of the sim. As Fox the Younger observe& if freedorn were given to the wicked, the just would s~fEer-~~'The elder Fox was concemed that the wicked be punished and restrained as well as that the innocent be protected.'%
Those who would govem according to What of God in your consciences" would use the sword effectively against the violent and de~eitful.'~Fox contended that one who would be a magistrate for Christ must "subject al1 under the power of Chnst... efse he is not a faithfid magistrate." The Christian magistrate was to be "a terror to the evil doers," who
"discems the precious and the just fkom the vile, and this is a praise to them that do
~elI."~~*The saints were to dethe reprobates. Of course, since the Quaken hoped to see the conversion and transformation of rnany, there was the possibility that rnost people
'%AianAnderson, "The Social Ongins of the EarIy Quakers," Quaker Historv, 68 ( 1979), 36-39.
"'George Fox the Younger, Honest. Uprkht Faithful. and Plain Dedine With Thee O Anne 1659, F2005A, pp. 13-14.
3% George Fox, For the King and Both Houses of Parliament, 166 1, FI82 1, p. 2.
3*~~~This To Al1 Offices, p. 2.
398 FO~Mistety, p. 170. The concept of the magistrate king a terror to the evil doer is taken fiom Romans 13:3. 129
would volmtarily choose to be converted and live as the inward Light directeci. Then
there would be less need to impose appropriate behaviour during the rnillenniurn.
Nevertheless, the Quakers considered it fitting for the saints to do so to assist the
emerging millenniurn's arri~al.'~~One might wonder how literal a meaning Fox intended
when he infomed the authorities that those who wodd not accept the rule of Christ
"must be slain," and whether this was to be accomplished through hurnan agency?
T6e Quakers' anticipation of the Kingdom led them to desire a theocratic
govemment in whch Chna would reign through the people he transformed and guided
not a democratic government controlled by the sinN majority. Although the inward
Light was in ail persons, Fox the Younger for one was not sanguine about the likelihood
that most people wouid respond to the Light to live out their divine potential. In 1659, he
noted that God's people comprised "a iittle flock" in a sea of the umighteous. He also observed the woeful inadequacy of England's Parliament that was composed of and
selected by those who were "the nchest people outwardly," and so would be unlikely to make laws to remove oppression. He observed that though a minorïty in Parliarnent
might want to do right, the majority would be liable to defeat their efforts. Parliarnents had broken their promises and proven untnistworthy. Fox the Younger felt that perhaps the Amy could still be used by God if it wouid seek the nation's good instead of its own self interest as it had been doing. ln any event, God would "break, shatter, confound and
'%ndy, EarIv Ouakerisn, pp. 3 10- 13.
JOOSwarthm~reMSS, 2:66, George Fox, "Word of the Lord to Al1 Soldiers, Govemors," 1653; This To AI1 Officers, p. 1. 130 ove- di''his will was accomplished? By the year of the Restoration, Fox the
Younger despaired of the possibility that society would choose God's will, and prophesied that "violence and oppression shall come to the Ml, and then shall the Lord roar out of his habitation, and he shdl saike the inhabitants of the earth ... in his mighty power to take the Kingdom, and to relieve the oppressed, and to help the needy, and they shall be strong in him.'* He was not specific about the events through which God would accomplish this, but was sure that God's judgrnent would fall on simers, "killing many," and then God wouid make believen the mien of the earth- He stated: They shall nile the earth in mercy, justice, and true judgements, and they shdl forgive and love their enemies (as they do at this &y. )'*3 in 166 1, the last year of his 1i fe, he maintained that God wouid accomplish al1 this in his own tirne and through his "own Power" alone? Fox the Younger predicted divinely sent plagues and a "fiery trial" that wouid come soon, insisting that "the time draweth nigh (Yea, I say, the tirne is come) that these sayings must be fulfilled?" Through such judgments God would prepare the way for
alGeorge Fox the Younger, A Few Plain Words to Be Considered Bv Those of the m,1659, F2002, pp. 1-6.
m~o~the Younger, Testimonv, 1660, pp. 4-5.
m3~erhapswhen Fox the Younger stressed the believers' forgiveness of enemies he was attempting to dispel popular fears of Quaker violence. Vengeance was to come frorn God alone. He admonished Fnends to love their enemia and so "bear the image of the Lamb." Fox the Younger, Mes- 1660, p. 23.
504 Fox the Younger, Eneland's Sad Estate* 1661, pp. 7-8.
405George Fox the Younger, O People! Mv Bowels Yeam 1670, F2009A. It is likely that this was printed posthumously when the plague of 1665 and the Great Fire of 1666 had rendered it a convincing prophecy. the Kingdom's emergence in an unrepentant world
THE ANTI-QUAKER REACTION
Dunng the 1650s people of al1 ranks of society increasingly perceived Quakers to
be a serious religious, social and political threat, Tbey were known to de@their social
superion, reject wmrnonly accepted religious beliefs, and stndently criticize the elite
and govermnent.lM Quakers frequently were brought before the law courts for dishirbing
church seMces while the vagrancy law that ordered vagabonds whipped and returned to
thei r home paris hesm Often was applied against itinerant Quaker preachers. Quaken
would incur Mercharges in court by refushg to remove their hats before the justices,
or prophetically reproving the court. Although CromweII's Council was at first disposed
to be tolerant toward Quakers, local govemors often found various means to prosecute
thern?'' Many feared that the Quakers7defiant and anti-hierarchical pnnciples and
actions would result in social anarchy. It was believed that Quakers sought to arouse the
people against authonty, and would encourage resistance to the payment of rents as well
M~arbourand Roberts, Earlv OderWriting~, n. p. 160.
-In 165 7, ho wever, Cromwell's Protectorate made church attendance compulsory and did not deem attending Quaker meetings acceptable compliance with this law. See Barbour, Quakers in Puritan Eneland, p. 56. 132 as of tithes? Some accused Quakers of promoting a srstem of common property. Here the Quakers were charged with being more radid than they were, since many Quakers were prosperous fmers, artisans, and retailen who had no intention of extending generosity and compassion toward the needy into cornmunism. Nayler ailowed that God might inspire some individuals to distribute their goods voluntarily, but that this was not to be demanded or f~rced~'~Nevertheless, the Quakers were sufficiently radical that
Fear of social upheavai resulted in physical attacks upon Quakers,4L1and many Friends were imprisoned Cromwell becarne concemed about the Quaker challenge to the elite upon whom he leaned for support. Legislation directed against the Quakers began to appear, and Quakers were driven nom positions in the Amy and local govern~nent.~'~in
March 1657, Cromwell spoke against the Friends in a speech at Whitehall, "saying that there was a good law made against the Quakers and they did well to put it in execution."
Cromwell accused Friends of king "'ajpinst both magistry and ministry." Quaken saw this as his govemment7sbecoming "'hardened against the tmth and al1 their pretences of setting Friends at liberty.As now ceased..they only plotting how to exalt themselves in the earth?I3 Fear of the Quaker movement as a dangerous force was growing. Nayler's
'OgReay, pp. 52-59.
410James Nayler, True Discovery of Faith, 1655, N323, p. 14.
412~ole,"Quakers and the English Revolution," 45-46.
'"3s- ore MSS, 4: 13, Richard Hubberthom to George Fox, March 16, 1657. Ln November of th year, Cromwell and his Council ordered that Quakers not be treated as maiicious offenders, but were '?O be pitied and dealt with as persons under a strong waming to the clergy that God was "coming with ten thousand of his saints to be avenged of you" would have offered no rea~surance:~' and Fox would have seemed anarchistic when he insisted that the law was intended to limit evildoers and was not established for righteous people who had Christ's law written in their hearts to direct them.'"'
Although the Quaken verbaily stmck at the aristocracy and gentry for oppressing the poor and enriching themselves on the labour of others, the Friends suffered violence fiom many of the common people. While the propaganda of the lay elite and clergy helped to convince them that Quakers were evil and a threat to most of the common people aiso found the Quakers' egalitarïan views threatening to traditionai beliefs and disruptive to community and farnily order. The Quaken' contentious and unneighbourly speech and habits alone alienated many of their countrymen. As the
Interregnum governments failed to hlfill the radicals' hopes of refonn, Quakers continued the Lamb's War in their effort to gather the "Amy" through which Christ would conquer the world by the sword of his message. Since the Quaker community
delusion," since "a tendemess towards such poor deluded persons" should be extended. See Norman Penney ,d, Extracts From State Papers Relatine to Friends 1654 to 1672 (London: Headley Brothers, 19 l3), Nov. 10,1657, p. 34. Of corne, it would have ben entirely unacceptable to Friends to be regarded as pitiable fools rather than as God's prop hets.
'"'Nayler, Answer to Perfect Pharisee, p. 19.
"'George Fox, The Second Covenant, 1657, F 1898, pp. 13, 16.
4 16 Reay, pp. 39,6446.
'"7David Underdown, Revel. Riot and Rebeliion: Popdar Politics and Culture in Eneland 1603-1660 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), p. 252. grew rapidly, the Friends faced increasingly antagonistic opposition Irooically, the
Lamb's War that was to overthrow the contemprary order and establish Christ's miIlennial reign instead helped to foment a conservative reaction that contributed to the
Restoratï~n.~'~
Although Quaken are knom for practising silence that they might hear the voice of God within themselves, early Quakers were notorious for their speaking. As Nayler indicated, Friends believed that God would speak through them to disturb those who were in rebellion against hm, and so lead them to repentance and redemption. When
Gd's word came through Quakers to magistrates, clergy, and people, it was filled ofien with reproofs, wamings, denunciations, and insults that shocked and offended society.
When some Quakers rebuked the spirihial nakedness of the unregenerate through the visible sign of public nudity, they were viewed in an even more odious light?[9 The violence and intensity of Quaker language caused many to consider Friends dangerous to the social ~rder.''~The contem porary observer Francis Higginson corn plained that
Quakers were:
...as homble railers as ever any age brought forth, a generation whose mouths are MI of bittemess, whose throats are open sepulchers... The Billingsgate oyster-
418Reay, pp. 4, 1 1.
''%auman, pp. 65-66.78,84,89-93. The closest any of the three Friends under study came to this was on the occasion when Fox walked barefôot in winter, perkps as a modest variant of the practice. Fox did approve of Friends going naked as a sign if they felt divinely led to do so. Cambridge Journal, pp. 71-72,503.
42"NigelSmith, Perfection Roclaimed: Lanwe and Literature in Enelish Radical Relieion 1640-1660 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1WB), p. 9. women are not comparable to them. It is ordinary with them in the letters they write to other men to cal1 them fools, sots, hypocrites, vain men, beasts, blasphemers, murderers of the just..and none more notonous this way than Fox, their prime oracle."2'
Quaker speech was such that the Quaker woman preacher was viewed as %e dtimate ~colci,~*whi le Quaker men were considered "rai ling, reviling7' people who used uncharitable la~~~uage.'~Evidently, the Quakers believed that love for othen was best expressed by infomiuig them forthrightly of their sir~fhhess."~~Quakers considered those who had not yet responded to the inward Light to be rebels ag'nst God and the devil's offspring? Fnends were not singuiar among seventeenth century polemicists in employing hanh terms against their theological opponents, but the Quakers' repuîation for invective would suggest that they typically exceeded the usual limits of controversial speech. The speech of one Quaker to the local minister of the established church indicates just how deeply the apocalyptic awareness and confrontational style was embedded in the Quaker environment:
Lampitt, the plagues of God shail faIl upon thee and the seven vials shall be poured upon thee and the millstone shall fa11 upon thee and cwhthee as dust under the Lords7 feet. How can thou escape the damnation of hell?
"'Francis Higginson, "A Brief Relation of the Irreligion of the Northem Quakers," 1653, in p. 75.
Mack, p. 250.
423 Hall, p. 25.
"' Barbour, "From Lamb's War," 6. "Barbour, Quakers in Puritan En- p. 240. This speech is remarkable considering the fact that the prophet was Margaret Fe117seight year old daughter, ~ary.'"~The Quaker movement empowered men, women and children alike with a prophetic message. The language of Quakers was so militant and their metaphon concerning the sword so numerous that it is understandable that the
English public and ders believed the Quakers intended physical violence against their theological opponents, who comprised the ovewhelrning majonty of English society.
Recognizing that their militancy was directeci especially toward society's mlers, one magisirate asserted that Fox and other Quakers wouid massacre the elite of the land if they were able?
Quakers also dramatically enacted their spiritual isolation from society.
Higginson noted their antisocial lack of neighbourliness:
None of the Quaken wiI1 gwe the common respects to magistrates, or to any fnends or old acquaintances. if they meet them by the way, or any stranger, they will go or ride by them as if they were dumb, or as though they were beasts rather than men, not firding a salutation, or resal uting though themselves be ~aluted.''~~
The Quakers were not simply self expressive radcals who enjoyed defjmg social superion and snubbing society. As J-C. Davis aptly observeci, religious radicals wanted fieedom from the authority of human govemors in order to obey the divine Ruler who
426 Swarthmore MSS, 724; Bonnelyn Young Kunze, Margaret Fell and the Rise of Ouakerism (London: The Macmillan Press Limited, 1994), p. 195.
428 Higginson, in Earlv OderWritin~s, p. 77. 137 commanded their consciences through the Spint Those who sought the millennium were not cmcemed mereiy for their personal reiigious &dom, but for the opporhinity to act under God's direction without hindrance so they might advance Christ's
~ingdom."~As Edward Burrough informed Parliament, those who denied fixedom of conscience "have assumed unjustiy the seat and Throne of Christ Jesus, and have ruied over our consciences, and have oppressed our inward man ... we give the govemment over us to christdm Those who attempted to limit others in following their consciences were usurping Christ's role of directing his people through the conscience, and were preventing them fiom acting to accomplish divine purposes. Bl~~oughwarned
Parliament that its sumival depended upon its pieasing God by grmting freedom of conscience.*' Davis' insight helps one understand the Quakers' demand for the freedom to interrupt others at worship so they could deliver an opposing message. Fox warned the
Members of Parliament that they wouid be brought "dom to the dust" like the royalist oppressors before them if they prevented those who spoke for God fiom carrying out their divine prophetic commission."32 He maintained that Quakers were justified in disturbing worthiess ministers who should be silent when the Spirit prompted another to
429~.C.Davis, "Religion and the StnrggIe for Freedom in the Engiish Revolution," Historical Journal, 35 (1992), 5 15-30.
"OEdward Burrough, To the Parliament of the Common-wealth of Enelan& 1659, 86039, pp. 5-6.
432Fo~This For Each Parliament-Man, pp. 1, 16- 17. deliver a tme message of prophe~y.~~~Nayler demanded that the govemment allow people who were "moved of God" to disnipt church services to "show your teachers their error," and that God's Spint have "liberty to be Lord in every conscience." He accused
Cromwell of not only rejecting the counsel fkom the Light that was within his own conscience, but also of rejecting those who were sent by God with a prophetic wordaY
He asserted that the Word of God must be fieed, and that God must not be prevented fiom speaking through his people.'"' The Interregnum Quaken did not want mere toleration for al1 penons, but &dom to act in obedience to God's prompting so others would corne to the tme faith and contribute to the establishment of Christ's Kingdom.
By 1655 the Quakers were king thoroughly attacked in princu and were facing greater legal sanctions as well. The Oath of Abjuration of the papacy was introduced in
April 1654 to identifL the politicaily suspect Catholics. This created a means of prosecuting Quakers, who shedthe typically English anti-Catholic sentiments of their
&y, but were opposed to taking any oath on the basis of New Testament teachings. "'
The govemment became concemed about Quaker disruptions amid fears of royaiist or
433GeorgeFox, To Both Houses of Parliament. 1660, F1952.
4YNayler,"Some Considerations Neecüùi," in JKPCICS, pp. 750,754,756. This piece is not dated, but since it was addressed to Oliver Cromwell it would have ken Wntten no later than 1658, which was the year of his deah.
"%Jayler, "A Waming to the Rulers in the Year 1659," in Works, p. 764.
4MMoore,pp. 4748.
'"7~oore,pp. 4748'76-77- Quakers followed the specific instructions of the New Testament on the issue of oaths. Fifth Monarchist subversion in response to increasing prosecution, Quakers appealed to
Cromwell and other govemment and Army leaders."' However, Quakers also believed that God's people must face suffering to achieve the victory that was to corne when the saints would dethe earth with Christ-
Fox the Younger especially tirnied his attention to the encouragement of Friends who were suffenng due to the escalaihg penecution. He invited the faithfid: "Rejoice ye saints... for the Lord is risen~ojudge the earth in righteousness." The saints wodd soon "Veignwith him etemally above the world, and our enemies are to be plagued and tormented in our presence, and we shall rejoice over the smoke of their tonnent," after following "the Lamb through great tribulation.''439 Fox the Younger identi fied himself as one willing both to suffer and reign with Christ? God's promise was: "1 will reign over you, and ye shall reign over al1 the world, in my Light, and Iife, and power ... 1 will give you dominion over all your enemies, within and without yoy" and 1 will make them al1 bow before you?" Quaker eschatolo~thus followed the usual apocalyptic mode1 of encouraging suffering believers to remain faithful in anticipation of an imminent victov
"'Moore, p. 153.
439Fo~the Younger, "A Strong and Terrible Alarm," 1659, in Collection, pp. 2 1-22. Although this anticipation was extremely wcharitable, it did reflect apocalyptic biblical promises to persecuted believers. See Revelation 14: 1 1.
Toxthe Younger, Compassion, p. 100, misnumbered p. 104.
"%is would have ken a reference to the believer's stniggle against evil within the self, and within society and the world
u2Fo~the Younger, p. 8. that included a transformed society, the punishment of the wicked, and their own vindication by GO^?^ The suffiering of God's people was both a sign of the Kingdom's approa~h,~and as Nayler wote in The Lamb's War, a means of establishing it. Fox dso promised that patience in suffenng was a spirihial weapon that wouid assist the
Kingdom's a~ival.~'
While Fox the Younger and Nayler seemed to accept persecution as part of God's plan, the elder Fox worked diligently to change the govemment's policy toward Quakers and save Friends from suffering. In the spring and summer of 1656, while Fox was imprisoned at Launceston, he mounted a campaign in conjunction with several other leading Friends to inform the interregnum rulers of Quaker sufferings in the hope of gaining syrnpathy that would lead to toleration. They presented the Friends as people who were not a danger to the Commonwealth and did not deserve or require repressionu6 During that effort, a conflict emerged between Fox and his entwhile colleague Nayler that spilled out into English society in a public manner that aroused even more hostility against Quakers and threatened the unity of Friends. This conflict between the two major leaders, in which Fox the Younger had no part, culminated in
u3Bemard McGinn, Apocalyptic Spintuality (New York: Paulist Press, 1979), p. 14.
U5~o~Some Principles, p. 18.
~6Maryann Feola Castelucci, "'Wamnge With ye Worlde': Fox's Relationship With Nayler," Ouaker Historv, 8 1 ( 1992), 63-70. Feola Castelucci noted that the Quakers' desire to present themselves favourably to English society and the authorities to avoid persecution did not begin aeer the Bristol entry, but had begun even before it. October when Nayler and some of his most enthusiastic supporters performed a prophetic sign at Bristol.
THE BRISTOL INCIDENT
Nayler had become a highly respected preacher and apologist among Friends in
London during 1655 and 1656" and a hated adversary among the Quakers' antagonists.
Many outside Quaker circles considered hirn the major Quaker leader? Nayler's ski11 in writing and debating was superior to Fox's, which made hirn the more appealing leader in sophisticated London where Fox seldom visitedu9 Mien the Quaker preacher
Martha Sùnmonds was criticized by Nayler's colleague Francis Howgill after she spoke at a meeting, Simrnonds appealed to the more prominent Nayler for support. Nayler became uncertain whether to support her, and found this uncertainty extremely confusing and painfLL4" As a Quaker prophet, he would have felt that he should have had the
Spirit's infallible direction in the matter. fis uncertainty would have made him unsure of his own prophetic calling and relationship with God, and he fell into a serious
W7TheQuaker preacher Aiexander Parker (1628-89) reported that Nayler was weli "fitted for this great place, and a great love is begotten in many towards him." Caton MSS, 3:298, Alexander Parker, September 3, 1655.
M91ngle,First Amone Friends, pp. 129-30.
450CatonMSS, 3:364-65. Richard Hubberthom to Margaret Fell, August 26, 1656. depression. After a few days he came to believe that Simmonds had been in the nght, and began to rely on her for support and guidance. Other Quakers attempted to separate
Nayler fiom Simmonds' influence, but to no avaiL4" His wlleagues reported that
Simmonds and her cornpanions had:
.. .run out into imaginations and lying wonders... [they] held him mayler] and he would not go [with other Friends]. .. he resisted us.. .the women ..oppose us publicly .. . pray for us, for our distress is great..when the sons ofthe rnorning fall, who will not fear.... 452
Other Quakers noted the division that waç developing among London Fnends between those who supported Nayler and those who favoured Howgill and ~urrough.''~~
Friends hoped that a meeting between Nayler and Fox would be helpful, and with their
'51~anner,pp. 10-1 1. Simmonds later volunteered the information to the magistrates of Bristol that the Friends judged her to be "too forward to nin before 1 was sent." This meant that she was thought to speak her own words before she was given divine inspiration to speak. Simmonds also infonned the magistrates that the Quakers had corne to accuse her of king a witch for "bewitching" Nayler and bringing him under her influence. Quakers had also called ber a whore, in that she was said to be "whoring" spiritually by not being faithful to God Famier, pp. 10-1 1. Simmonds came from a prominent farnily among Friends, since her husband Thomas and her brother, Giles Cdvert, were major pnnters of the early Friends' writings. See Kenneth L. Carroll, "Martha Simmonds, A Quaker Enigma," Journal of the Friends' Historical Society, 53 (1972), 31.
"52CatonMSS, 3: 1 34-36, Francis Howgill and Edward Burrough to Margaret Fell, August 13, 1656. Clearly, they felt that Nayler had fallen from his former greatness and was under the control of miscreant women It is impossible to discover what theological issues were involved in the confiict The contention seems to have been dnven by personality conflicts, and the question of who was speaking the truth and who was spiritually deceived and deceiving.
""~warthmoreMSS, 3: 13 1, Richard Roper to Margaret Fell, October 20, 1656. Fox was aot part of this cornpetition since he was seldom in London at that time. encouragement he went to see Fox in Launceston prison.Jy Nayler was arrested at Exeter as travelling Quakers ofien were, however, and so was unable to reach FOX.^^' At that point, Simmonds visited Fox in his prison ce11 to accuse him of spiritual corruption and to inform him that Nayler and not he was the rightfbl leader of God7speople.'%
Simmonds' conflict with Burrough and Howgill had corne to extend to Fox as well. Fox
had attempted to avoid a confrontation with ~ayler;'" but came to realize that this was impossible. He wrongly a~swned,~~or perhaps was led by Simmonds to believe, that
Nayler had sent her to him the taunting message. Therefore, a contlict developed between the two former partriers that was never successfully resolved. When Fox was released in SeptembeSS9and visited Nayler in Exeter prison, a struggle between them erupted. At one point Nayler would not corne to speak with FOX."^^ Another time Fox felt that Nayler was holding his prayers in contempt when he refused to uncover his head according to custorn while Fox prayed On one occasion Nayler seemed to accuse Fox
""A.R. Barclav Manuscn'p&, 1 14, Francis Howgill, Edward Burrough, and John Audland, August 2, 1656.
JssSwarthrnoreMSS, 1 :8 1, Henry Fe11 to Margaret Fell, August 1 1, 1656.
JS6Fo~'sprestige and influence among Quakers, at lest by the mid-1650s, is evident in the report that "if George be in the Company al1 the rest are for the most part silent." Caton MSS, 3:269, Alexander Parker, May 10, 1655.
"S7~mngManuscripts, 30, Francis Howgill to Margaret Fell, October 2 1, 1656.
'"Emilia Fogelklou Norlind, The Atonement of George Fox, ed. by Eleanore Pnce Mather (Lebanon, Pennsylvania: Sowers Pnnting Company, 1969)- p. 1 1.
-Gibson Manuscripts, 5:93, Richard Hubberthorn to Margaret Fell, Oct 4, 1656. 144
loudly and publicly of king deceptive, *ch Nayler later denied that he had meanta'
Fox attempted unsuccessfidly to have Nayler acknowledge his own authority. In their
worst altercation Nayler tried to draw Fox down to him to kiss him, but Fox wodd not be
drawn dom to Nayler and offered his hand to kiss while he remained standing upright
When Nayler would not acquiesce to that act of submission, Fox bnisquely proposed a
more servile one by offe~gNayler his foot to kiss insteadm Clearly, contlict regarding status within their relationship and among Friends was central to their contention. It appeared that Nayler wanted to be reconciled with Fox, but refbsed to recognize that
Christ and Christ's authority were present in Fox to a pater degree than in himself 463
Perhaps Nayler was arguing the reverse and had corne to see himself as the one worthy of preeminen~e.~Fox would not accept this possibility, but insisted on his own spiritual
"'~aylersaid, 'Take heed of Iying and fdse accusing." He later explained to Hubberthorn that he had meant that Fox should not believe the false accusations spoken by othen, and had not meant to accuse Fox of deceit. Gibson MSS, 5:93.
a2Gibson MSS, 5:93. The obsewation that such scenes indicated the "personal limitations" of these professedy perfected and ùifallibly guided men seems reasonable. See Fogelklou Norlind, Atonement of Fox, p. 13. Fox later justified his behaviou. toward Nayler by stating that he had "slighted" Fox's admonitions and "had turned against the power of Gd" Therefore, %e Lord moved me to slight him and to set the power of God over him." Fox celebrated his victory over Nayler by stating. "...but he came to see it and to condemn it and ail his outgoings, and after some time he retumed to truth again as in the printed relations of his repentance, condemnation, and recovery may be more fully seen." Cambridge Journal, pp. 26869. superionty. Fox's supremacy was not a new development in their relation~hip,~'but
Nayler had becorne uncornfortable with his subordinate relatiomhip to Fox It may be
that Nayler's primacy among Quakers in the capital had predisposed hirn to see his statu
among Friends and before God differently. Fox later wrote to Nayler conceming their conflict at Exeter, and accused him of making fdse accusations and encouraging division
among Friends by gathering a faction around hirnself Fox recounted:
Ah James, 1 forbore judging thee openly... until 1 came to Exeter... and when 1 was come thither... thou wouldst not come to me ...whereby prejudice and jealousy might have been stopped in thee... thou king stubborn wouid not own me when 1 was moved to pray but stood in the high nature rebellious... thee was growing to a mountain that would have betrayed the just and thou thyself would have doue the same in the street...- darkness entered into thy disciples also.. .so now do thy disciples come... against the tmth in impudency and boldness cause the tnah, the right way, to be evil spoken of..but James, the power of the Lord God of Iight, life and truth is owned though thou and al1 the world should deny it, so come to that of God in thee, the Lord let you see your condition and forgive you..all your poison and railing reproaches doth not touch meJ67..James, thou separated thysel f from Friends.. .would.. .make a party in the false separatim crying against the faith..?*
Since Quakers taught that unity was a mark of the true Christian comrnunity, Fox
J65~warthmoreMSS, 3:63, James Nayler to George Fox, 1652. Here Nayler had written to Fox: "My father, my father, the glory of Israel my heart is ravished with thy love... let me live in thy bosom as a seal set upon thy heart forever." Perhaps by 1656 Nayler felt that he had spuitually outgrown this earlier subordinate relatiomhip to Fox
%s betrayal was likely Nayler's seeming public accusation that Fox was deceidul.
*7~o~'sresponse to Nayler's actions would indicate othenvise.
Tortfolio 2436, George Fox, September, 1656. concluded that Nayler was sinning by acting in a way which promoted discordm Fox also wrote to Nayier regarding Simmonds' attack on him in Launceston prison:
James, thou must bear thy own burden and thy company with thee whose iniquity doth increase and by thee is not cned against. Thou hast satisfied the world, yea their desires which they looked fof 70...MarthaSimmonds which is called your mother she bid me bow down and said I was lord and king and that my heart was rotten-..she came singing in rny face, inventing words ...Many did not expect thou wouldst have ken an encourager of such as do ciy against the power of life and tnith, but wouldst have been a nourisher of tnith and not trained up a company against it ...the light of God in you al1 I own, but this Ijudge ...47 1
Upon hearing of the encounter at Exeter, their mutual fiend Margaret Fe11 wrote to
Nayler
1 have heard that thou would not submit to him to whom ail nations shall bow, it hath @eved my spirit, thou hath oeended hm...thy fatherJR... thou would not bend.. .nor join with him ... how will thou answer this to hirn [God] who hath given hirn [Fox, or the presence of Christ in Fox] a name better than every name to which every knee must bow ... thou saith George is hurting thy narne that he may
47T0xstated here that Nayler was damaging the reputation of the Quaker movement and so was gratifjmg its enemies.
J71~warthmoreMSS, 3: 193, George Fox to James Nayler, 1656. This letter was written before the Bristol entry, for it was fond in Nayler's possession when he was arrested there. When the magistrates questioned Nayler why Simmonds was called his mother, Nayler replied that she was not so named, but that "George Fox is a liar and a firebrand of hell," for saying so. See Deacon, p. 19. Apparently Fox was refemng to the Quakers' belief that Nayler was king submissive to Simmonds and following her leadership. This insinuation obviously infunated Nayler.
'"~ell seems to have wanted Nayler to retum to his earlier perspective that Fox was his spirihial father. mise his own but it was thy name that stood against him then.. .thy dear sister in eternd love?
This letter did not reach Nayler, since the prominent Bristol Quaker George Bishop discreetly kept it474Had it been seen by the authorities, Fell likely would have been suspected of attributing blasphemous honours to Fox Howgill wrote to Margaret Fell that Nayler and his supporters were:
.. .working and piotting al1 the mischief they cm... they went from house to house to draw disciples derthem ...but they got none ...they met with G[eorge] F[ox] and judged b...and boasted what J[ames] N[ayler] would do.. .mily my dear J[ames] N[ayler] is bad, and he hath written private letters to some in the city who were in deceit and told them G[eorge] F[ox] tempted him but he had withstood him... there is such filthy things acted there.. .and such madness among them... there is about ten of them ...and they cal1 hirn I Am and the Lamb...they have made tmth stink ... tdymy dear G[eorge] F[ox] bore it so long. ..that its become a mountain; and he sees he suffered it too long now ...1 saw thy Ietter which James sent thee; I saw it full of cunning subtlety and repented I had sent it thee... so do not write to J[ames] N[ayler] till thou hear Merlest his deceit grow stronger."'
"Spmce MSS, 3:38, Margaret Fe11 to James Nayler, Oct. 15, 1656. Nayler's cornplaint about Fox indicates that he felt Fox was seeking to raise his own status among Friends at Nayler's expense. There is no question which leader Fell believed merited preeminence.
"'Firman, p. 18 1.
475~mne' MSS, 30, Francis Howgill to Margaret Fell, October 2 1, 1656. According to Howgill's report, Nayler and his supporters were attempthg to alienate Friends from Fox through deception. Since Howgill was central to the conflict in London and a major antagonist of Simmonds, he may have depicted Nayler and his supporters' actions as king more belligerent and dishonest than a less biased reporter would have. Perhaps Nayler identified Fox's attempt to gain submission from hirn as the temptation of which he wrote. Evidently Fox had entered into the conflict with Nayler unwillingly, and had preferred to avoid it so long as he could. Perhaps the letter to which Howgill referred 148
Upon Nayler's release from prison, he accompanied Simmonds and six othen to
Bristol and its neighbouring towns, where they reenacted Christ's triumphai entry into
Jedemwith Nayler playing the principal de. The othea led his hone, spread their coats before hirn, or sang "holy, holy, holy, hosanna.'""6 When they entered Bristol on
October 24, the group was arrested for what seemed acts of blasphemy. The Bristol authorities' anxiety rnay have been awakened also by the fact that 1656 was a year of expectation for some, who believed that the messiah and his Kingdom were about to appear."" When the Quakers were exarnined by the Bristol magistrates, Nayler7s testimony indicated that he had intended something quite different fiom his cornpanions by the manner of their entrance into the city. Nayler insisted that his cornpanions had not called him Jesus "as unto the visible, but as Jesus, the Christ that is in me." He did not daim the titles of king and judge of Israel, "as a creature, but if they give it to Christ within 1 own it ... if they speak of the spirit in me, I own it only as God is manifest in the contained Nayler's cornplaint to Fe11 that Fox was trying to "bury" his name. That may have been the false statement to which Howgill referred, although it was not false according to Nayler's perspective. Clearly, Nayler's followea were not numerous, however enthusiastic and strident they were in his support. There is no indication that many Quakers considered Nayler a possible rival to Fox, for events suggest that Fox was by this time wideiy regarded as preeminent arnong Friends. Otherwise, Nayler's supporters would not have perceived the need to challenge his status to promote Nayler's. Perhaps Howgill felt that only Fox deserved the messianic titles that he reported were king ascribed to Nayler, that he did not believe the ascnption of such titles arnong Friends was appropriate, or that he was upset by their public proclamation. The messianic titles given to Nayler were like those ascribed to Fox by some Friends and by Fox to hirnseif, but it seems that Nayler's supporters were public in their adoration of him, and so were more Iikeiy to discredit the Quaker movement-
476swarthmore MSS, 1188,George Bishop to Margaret Fell, October 27, 1656.
'"~ogelkiou Norlind, Atonement, pp. 15-1 6. flesh, according as Gddwelleth in me, and judgeth there himself 7'478 Nayler thus
disthguished carefùily between his outward physicai self and the divine presence within
him. Sirnmonds, on the other hand, claimed that Nayler was Jesus, saying, "1 know not
James Nayler. ..He was but now is past to a more pure estate." She explained that Nayler
was in the process of becoming ke incarnate Jesus, stating that "when the new life sbail
be bom in James Nayler, then he will be Jesus." Nayler's companion Dorcas Erbirry, the daughter or wife of the noted SpinhLalist, testified that Nayler "hath laid down his camai
body," and that he had "new flesh and new bones." She aiso affirmeci that Nayler was the only begotten son of God and that she knew "no other Saviour but km." Thus, some
of Nayler's cornpanions were stating that he was in a metamorphosis toward becoming the physical Jesus. His companion John Stm~ger~'~had written a note found in Nayler's
possession which stated that Nayler was no longer "to be called James but Jesus." The style of Nayler's beard and hair seemed to conforni to the popular stereotype of Jesus'
'78Deacon, Grand Imposter, 12.
'"% would be a mistake to view the actions of Nayler and his supporten as pertaining primarily to gender issues as some have. See Christine Trevetf 'The Women Around James Nayler, Quaker: A Matter of Ernphasis," Relieion, 20 (1990)- 249-73; Rosemary Kegl, "Women's Preaching, Absolute Property, and the Cruel Sufferings (For the Truths Sake) of Katherine Evans and Sarah Chevers," Women's Studies, 24 (1995), 5 1-83. Nayler was accompanied and supporied by aimost as many men as women. They were not defending women's rights to minister, for there were rnany women preachen among the Quakers whose ministry was fully accepted Fox, not Nayler, was the champion of women's ministry among Friends, and he had numbered women among his colleagues from the movement's earliest days. This will be explored Merin Chapter Seven below. Although some saw it as a discredit to Nayler that he seemed to follow the leading of women and used the issue of their gender to depreciate their actions, this does not mean that gender was the issue for Nayler or his supporters. See Thomas Burton, The Diay of Thomas Burton, Vol. 1, ed. by John Towill Rutî (London: Henry Colbum 1828), p. 155; Deacon, Exact Histoq pp. 51,55. 150 appearance, and when a document describing the historical Jesus was found on the pemn of one of his wmpanions, it was assumed that Nayler had ben aîtempting to simulate Jesus' countenance and mamer. Erbury also asserted that Nayler had raised her from the dea~i,'~which would have ken a greater miracle than any of those which Fox could have claimeda'
Simmonds, Nayler, and Haonah Stranger had collaboiated on a tract in which
Simmonds firmed that a second incarnation of the etemal Christ was occurring.
Without mentioning Nayler's name, Simmonds asserted that God was bnnging "'dom that body which was crucifieci at Jenisalem." God "hath.. .now fitted a body for himself Ais vesse1 is as precious to me as that which was tortured at Jerusalem, seeing the Father hath prepared them both ... though he was brought up with you despise him not as your fathers did.'"" Nayler wrote that Gd"sent me to the nations. A sign and a
Tanner, pp. 8, 10-19-25-27. While Nunall is correct that Fox was fortmate that the authorities did not find some of the correspondence which addressed messianic language to hm,there is no evidence that Fox had ever been called or had been considered the physical Jesus or in process toward becoming him. See Nuttail, Christian Enthusiami, p. 49.
'"~his was not necessarily evidence of a messianic statu, since major prophets and apostles were also credited with raising people from death.
'*MWSimmonds, Hannah Stmnger, James Nayler, O Eneland Thv Time Is Corne, S3793, p. 5. Simmonds was warning persons not to fail to recognize Christ's incamation in Nayler as ancient people had failed to see the incarnation in Jesus. Although Bailey's suggestion that Simmonds' conflict with Fox, Howgill and Burrough focused upon her eschatological beliefs about how Christ was appearing seems reasonable, there is no clear evidence that this was the content of the message for which she was cnticized See Bailey, pp. 141-42. wonder thou hast made me, and a stranger to them who had well known mem ...how
often hast thou changed me, so that 1 have not been known to my ~elf?"~Here Nayler
affirmai Uiat he was a sign appointed by God and that he had been undergoing a
transformation, but did not clah to be the one king trmsformed into Jesus of whom
Simmonds wrote. It is evident that Nayler's eschatology which anticipated Christ's
dement fiom heaven did not fit his companions' belief that he was becoming the
retuming Jesu through a gradual bodily transformation Not dl of Nayler's wmpanions at Bristol exhibited the same beliefs about hïm, either. Samuel Cater told the Bristol magistrates that Nayler was not Chnst die hceof Peace, but that the Prince of Peace
ruled in l~irn.'''~ This seems more consonant with Nayler's own distinction between himself and the inner Christ It seerns that Simmonds, Erbury, and Stranger had perceived the sign entirely differentiy fiom Nayler, and nom at least one of their companions.
The statements made by Simmonds and Dorcas Erbury at Bristol indicate that they had formdated a unique eschatology. Like other Quakers, Simmonds asserted that
Christ had corne to live and reign in the bodies of betievers, but she also argued that this was "to minister unto you, until his second coming." Nayler also believed in a future
is possible that Nayler referred here to Fox and other Friends.
a5~eorgeBishop, The Throne of Tmth Exalted . 1657, B3008, p. 3 1. Bishop pointed out that Fmer had omitted this fact fiom his piece. Bishop took a very dim view of the entrance of Nayler and his companions into his city, but insisted that Nayler had been misled by Sùnmonds and her companions. Bishop, pp. 3-5. 152
coming of Christ as well as in his present spirituai appearance. For Sirnmonds and
Dorcas Erbury, however, the second coming was occurring already as the physical Jesus
was rehiming From heaven through the graduai physical transformaiion of Nayler, the
one believer they considered worthy of this special forrn of incarnation? While
Quakers recognized that certain believen had the Spirit of Christ in them to a greater
"measure" than others di4 Simmonds and Erbury extended that concept to assert one
believer's transformation into the physical Jesus. This was akin to the concept of
"celestid inhabitation" which Bailey suggested, that the 'almost corporeai" body of the
eternai Christ was within believen ?O effect their spiritual and moral transformation and
render them 'Tiesh of his flesh.'"'" Sirnmonds and Erbury took this idea merto argue
for Nayler's incarnation of not oniy the spiritual Christ, but of the earthly Jesus. Bailey
seems correct that this was to promote Nayler as a Fuller incarnation of Christ than Fox
by claiming that Nayler was experiencing a physical transformation into the body of
Jesus? It is very unlikely that Nayler bel ieved this about himself, for he offered no such
statement,
The Bristol authonties sent Nayler tu Parliament for trial in an effort to exhibit the dangers of the Quaker movement, and of toleration of radical religion in generai.
Many felt that if the degree of toleration that Cromwell was al lowing had resulted in
J86~imrnonds,O Enelana pp. 3,5.
"See pp. 86-93 above.
JwBailey, pp. 14 1, 165, 175-76. 153 behaviour such as Nayler's, it had been extended much too far.= Although Cromwell would challenge the Members on Parliament's legal right to try a person and on their proceeding without his involvement in the matter, he said nothing until Parliament's triai and sentencing of Nayler had ken completed, and was clear that he did not want to be associated with Nayler's defense. Parliament discussed Cromwell's challenge, but could not decide upon a reply."" Nayler's case became a tool in the stniggle between
Cromwell and Parliament over religious t~leratioa.~'
Nayler informai the Parliamentary cornmittee which tned him that he had been enacting a sign of Christ's coming, and that his cornpanions had ody acted as God had directed them. Nayler defended the sign by claiming that "honow that belongeth to
Chnst Jesus ... may be given to him, as when on earth at Jenisalem, according to the measure" of Chnst within, This was a clear statement of the klief that one who possessed a substantial measure of Christ's spirit within, such as Nayler considered himself to have, could legitimately be exaited as Christ. He clarified that his cornpanions had not called him Jesus "as unto the visible, but as Jesus, the Christ that is in
Thus, while he attested the presence of Christ within hirnself, he did not claim to be the unique incarnation of Christ, or that he was king physically transfonned into the
48%ilI,World Turned mide Down, p. 20 1. At Nayler's trial before Parliament. Member Colonel Cox stated, "1 am as much for liberty of conscience as any man, but when one nins into these extravagancies I think he exceeds that liberty." Burton, p. 38.
'william Grigge, The Ouaken' Ses= 1658, G2023, p. 18.
"'Bittle, Navler3 pp. 16 1-64. historical Sesus as sorne of his cornpanions attesteci This was entirely in keeping with the statements that he and Fox had made regarding divine inhabitation which were discdin Chapter Four above, though it was not consonant with traditional orthodov.
Nayler testified before the Parliamentary cornmittee:
1 do abhor that any honour due to God should be given to me, as 1 am a aeatue. But it pleased the Lord to set me up as a sign of the coming of the righteous one, and what has ken done as 1 passed through these tom, 1was commanded by the Lord to sdersuch things to be done by me, as to the outward, as a sigh not as 1 am a
Nayler also told the cornmittee that: "God set up this vessel as a sign of his coming, but not lirnited to this vessel." Nayler here again denied that he claimed to be the unique incarnation of Christ. Regarding his entnuice into Bristol, he asserted: "There was never anyihing since I was bom so much against my will and mind as this thing, to be set up as a sign in my going into these towns; for I knew that 1 should lay dom rny life for it?%
It had been God's will '20 give it unto me to saersuch things to be done in me; and 1 durst not resist it" Gd's plan had ken that persons would repent and tum to Christ through the performance of this sign, and in that act of repentance Christ would "corne to them.'49s Nayler spoke with prophetic boldness to the comrnitîee about the sign's
494 This statement may have saved Nayler's life. Member Robinson suggested that they vote against the death penalty for Nayler to "make him a false prophet as to the foretelling his death.. .let us make him a liar. Burton, p. 1 19. nie death penalty was rejected only by a rnargin of 96 to 82 votes. Since Burton was among the Members who voted for the death penalty, his account of the proceedings may have ken biased against Nayler. Burton, p. 152. 1 am set up as a sign to this nation, to bear witness of his coming. You have been a long time under dark forms, neglecting the power of godliness..At was the desire of my soul, al1 dong, and the longing expectation of many gdy men engaged with you, that this nation should be redeemed ...God hath doue it for yoy and hath put his word into the han& of those fiom whom it carmot be wrested That sword cannot be broken, uniess you break it yourselves, by disobeying the voice, the dl, and rejecting the sign set up amongst you to convince them that Christ is comeAs again corne in the flesh, and he is daily manifestai in the flesh4?..I was set up as a sign to summon this nation, and to convince them of Christ's coming. The MLness of Christ's coming is not yet, but he is come ~OW..'~
Here Nayler reproved Parliament for not carrying out the task of national transformation for which God had entrusted it with the civil sword, and asserted that Christ's coming in penons such as himself was a divine cal1 for the nations' repentance.
Nayler's politics homfied some of the Mernbers. Mr. Downing exclaimed: "You saw how he behaved himself at the bar. Not a cap to you..yet he will take cap, knee, kisses, and al1 reverence... God manifested and come in the fiesh, at Exeter, in James
Nayler!'%* Mr. Church observeci that Quakers were becoming "not only nurnerous but dangerous, and the sooner we put a stop, the more glory we shdl do to God, and safety to this commonwealth... they are full of bittemess and reviling the ministers and
"96Nayler wodd have meant the presence of Christ in the bodies of his followers.
'%urton, pp. 47-48.
'98Burt~n,pp. 60-6 1. 156
magi~trates.""~~The idea that Chnst had corne in the socially levelling and prophetically
confiontationd commoner Nayler to instruct Parliament and speak through such as hirn was too serious a political threat to countenance. The political and social threat the
Quakers presented was to be resolved through the prosecuti-on of Nayler. His statements before the Parliarnentq cornmittee indicated that for him the Bristol entrance was a prophetic sign that Christ had corne to dernand repentance, and was not the claim of a unique messianic status. Nevertheles, Nayler believed that since he was one in whom
Christ's Spirit especially resided, he was fit to be cailed upon by God to be the focus of this sign. Nayler's supporters seemed to see the Bristol entry as a theological statement and a challenge to Fox's authonty. Nayler's words indicate that he saw it as a theological and a political statement, as well as a challenge to the government of the entire nation.
Members were divided about the theological meaning of the sign. Colonel
Briscoe expressed the sentiments of many of them by saying: "It is very clear that he does assume the pecuiiar attributes of Christ, though he does it with a distinction of visible and invisible; an evasioo obvious to every sophister."loo Observingthe difference between Nayler and his supporters regarding the sign's meaning, MajorGenerd
Desborough asserted that: "Other pesons are more guilty of blasphemy.. .than he. They gave hirn the honour." With striking comprehension of the situation, Lord Sûickland cornrnented: "1 do not believe... that he did say he was Jesus or Christ, though I think the 157
women do believe him to be Christ..He does not blaspheme Gd..he has no evil spirit or
malice in him against God, but he is under a sad delusion... he believes that more of
Chnst is in him than in any other creature; but he showed no malice to Christ."so' Noting
that Nayler's theology was not as radically dissimilar to traditional orthodoxy as many
assume& Lord President Lawrence stated: "If you hang every man that says, 'Christ is in
you the hope of giory' you will hang a good many..-1 do not believe that James Nayler
thinks himself to be the only Christ; but that Christ is in him in the highest measure.
This, 1 confess, is sa&" but not blasphernous. Sir Gilbert Pickering noted that Nayler
admonished his followers 30take heed what they di4 and to do nothing but what God
cornmanded them." They were the more ~ulpable?~While Memben such as Mr. Bond
hoped to destroy the Quaker movement by executing Nayler, others felt that this wodd
only create a martyr to help the Quaker movement thn~e.~~'
It has often been argued that Nayler was misled into perfoming the sign by
Sirnmonds and the others during a time in which his judgment was clouded by emotional stress and debilitation. Their intention was to promote Nayler as a greater leader than
Fox by demonstrating that he incamated Chst more fully. This seems to have been the intention of Sirnmonds at le- for she had confionted Fox in his cell, and had complained to the Bristol magistrates that Fox had a "lordy spirit."501 Naylerrs own
%'~urton,pp. 55-56.
502Burton,pp. 62,6465.
m3Burton,p. 98.
-Famer, p. 12. statements to the authorities do nothing to indicate that this was his intention. Nor do his
statements dernomte, as many historians have incorrectiy concludeci, that he had been
passive, confuse4 "misleci by some unbalanced wome~"or had been without a clear
purpose in performing the signSoSAt least one prominent Quaker, Anthony Pearson, was
overjoyed at Nay ler' s defense before the Parliamentary committee. He wrote happi 1y
that Nayier had testified to the tnith of Christ's appearance within his people, and that
Nay ler answered the committee:
...with so much wisdom, meekness and cleamess to the understanding of al1 indifferent persons that the whole assembly (except some violent men) were strangely astonished and satisfied with his answers ...mayler testified that]. ..a rneasure of him [Christ] is revealed in him, that he is a lamb of God and hath many brethren, and for any wonhip or honour he denied that any was due to J[ames] Nlayler], but if any were moved to give such things, to the appearance of God in him as a sign of Christ's second corning and being revealed in his saints... he did not judge them for it ...
Pearson was delighted that:
... now is testified before the highest court in the nation, that God himself is corne down, to dwell with the sons of men ...great is the wisdom of the Lord, who can turn al1 things to his own praise.. .'O6
It is apparent that in his own bias for Nayler, Pearson seriously misinterpreted the
MsSeeBittle, Navler, p. 106; Knox, Enthusiasm, p. 163; Nuttall, Christian Enthusiasm, p. 78; Fogelklou Norlind, Atonement of Fox, pp. 11, 14; Carroll, "Martha Simmonds," 40-52.
SO~~~b ore MSS, 3:78, Anthony Pearson, Novernber 18, 1656. Pearson had been a justice of the peace who had been converted by Nayler yean earlier when Nayler was brought to trial before him. Swarthmore MSS, 3:29. 159
cornmittee's response to him. Pearson seemed unaware that Nayler's words would bring
discredit to the Quaker movemenf or that the sign was carried out in the context of a
conflict between Fox and Nayler. Possibly for Nayler, too, the sign was not a result of
that conflict but was only coincidental wethit, even if the Bristol entrance was part of his
supporten' campaign to exalt him. Nayler seemed to have been clear about another
purpose. As Bailey asserted: "Nayier knew what he was doing and consented to be used
as a sign in this manner to achieve his own goals."M7 The performance of a prophetic
sign to cal1 society to respond to Christ's coming within humble persons such as himself
and effect the social transformation which God desired"' was certainiy one of his goals.
Perhaps, furthering his power struggie with Fox was another. If Nayler and Fox had not
been in conflict at the time, perhaps Nayler's Bristol entrance would have been perceived
more as Pearson understood it, as a well explained prophetic sign. However, the
contention at Exeter, Nayler's campaign for supporters which Howgill describeci, and the
sense of cornpetition with Fox to which Fell alluded indicate that self promotion was
likely one of Nay1erysgoals at Bristol, even if his self perception differed substantially
from his supporters' beliefs conceming him. It is also significant that Nayler later confessed that he had been led astray by "envy against the people of GO^,''^^ which
suggested that he had been vy-ng for status among Friends. Nayler and his supporters
507 Bailey, p. 162, n. 89.
508 Douglas Gwyn, The Covenant Crucifieci: Ouakers and the Rise of Capitalkm (Wallingford, Pennsylvania: Pendle Hill Publications, 1995), pp. 176.78.
*?lames Nayler, To A11 the Peo~leof the Lord Gathered and Scattered 1659, N320, p. 2. This was written in 1658, but was not printed until the foilowing year. were already perceived by Fnends to be divisive and to be making an illegitimate challenge to Fox's leadership even before the sign was enacted The sign itself had not crzated the problem be~eenNayler and other Friends, for the conflict had begun several weeks before. The sign did scandalize English society, however, and perhaps offended many Quakers as well. As suggested in Chapter Four above, the concept of divine inhabitation may not have been well or widely understwd even among Quakers. Its corollary, that certain believers who possessed a special "measure" of Christ's Spirit could be exalted as Christ, was certainly not for public proclamation at a time when Fox and other Quaken were attempting to foster a more positive public image of Friends to allay penecution. Nayler and his Company had proven themsefves to be a senous threat to that effort, and thus a threat to Friends' safety?'
It seems that the conflict between Fox and Nayler was part of a power struggle for preeminence in which Nayler refused to recognize Fox's spiritual authority. The issue between them was not theologicai, since Fox and Nayler shared belief in divine inhabitation, were both addressed in messianic terms by some, and Nayier had not claimed to be the incarnation of the physical Jesus as sorne of his supporters declareci him to be. Neither had Nayler himself espoused a theology contrary to Fox's, although his supporters' claim that he was being remade into the physical Jesus certainly was nove 1.
Parliament found Nayler guilty of blasphemy, and after much debate sentenced him on December 17 to stand in the pillory two hom and then be flogged through the
S'~eola-Castelucci,"Warrhge With ye Worlde," 69-70. 161 streets. A few days later he was to be placed in the pillory again, have his tongue bored through with a hot iron, and be branded on the forehead. He was then to be sent back to
Bristol to ride through the city facing backward, be flogged again, and then be impnsoned in Bridewell indefinitely at hard labour without visiton or writing mate rial^.^" The extremity of this sentence indicated Parliament's desire to strike at the
Quaker movement through one of its major leaders, and to make an emphatic statement against the degree of religious toleration that was king permittecl. Upon hearing the sentence, Nayler replied in keeping with the Quaker acceptance of suffering: "Goci has given me a body, God will, I hop, give me a spirit to endure it. The Lord lay not these things to your charge. 1 shall pray heartily that he may net."*" Membea who saw the sentence carried out reporteci, "'Nayler behaved himsel f very handsome 1y and patient1y.""' He also remained assertive and tirm in his convictions, for he argued with the clergy who were sent to his cell to convince him of his errors. Just six days after his first flogging he defended the theology of divine inhabitation and rebuked the clergy for being persecuton like the bishops before thern.'l4 Since the authorities seemed to reenact the persecution of ksus in their punishment of Nayler, the adoration of the three
S'2~urton,p. 167. Nayler had long anticipated that some expenence of suffering would befall him. See Swarthrnore MSS, 3: 1 2, Thomas Rawlinson to Margaret Fell, August 23,1656. He later seemed to feel that the Bristol entrance and its consequences was that sufTenng which God required of him.
51"TmeNarrative, p. 63, misnumbered 59. 162
Mary's at the cross was reenacted by Simmonds, Hannah Stranger, and Dorcas Erbury as they knelt by Nayler's pillory. In case anyone missed the point, Nayler's supporter
Robert Rich placed a sign stating, This is the King of the Jews," over the pilloried
~ayler."'
Nayler's sufferings gained for him the sympathy of many Quakers, including
Bristol Friends who had ignored his not very triumphal enq into their city in October. '''
This renewed attention to Nayler could hardly have pleased Fox or made him feel secure about his own position among Fnends. After several rnonths of imprisonment, Nayler indicated a wish to be reconciled to the Friends he had offended. As the bibliography of this dissertation indicates, he was soon again writing insightfùl and confrontational works which proved that his prophetic fervour and witness to the authorities had not been diminished by the punishrnents Parliament had imposed Nayler's greatest problem seems to have been Fox's disinterest in king reconciled with him. It is distressing to realize that instead of offenng a word in Nayler's support to the authorities as hundreds of sympathizen were doin$"' Fox wrote to Parliament only to defend Quaker beliefs regarding divine inhabitation, while implying that severity toward Nayler was not amiss."' Fox had been hurt by Nayler's challenge to his authority, by the division arnong
''SDeacon,Exact Historu, pp. 43-44.
5 16 Grigge, p. 2 1.
"7~nieNarrative, p. 58, misnumbered p. 54.
S18Afterdefending Quaker beliefs, Fox wrote: "If the seed speak...the seed is Christ Jes us... but if any man, creature made by him, say that he is Christ, that is false... if the seed of the serpent speaks and says he is Christ, that is the liar and the blasphemy and the F~endsthat had been fostered by that challenge, and by the hami Nayler had done to his
strenuous efforts to improve the Friends' public image and aileviate their persecution It
will be recalled that Nayler had also denounced Fox to the authorities as a "liar" and "a
firebrand of hell." Irnmediately &er the Bristol incident, the antiQuaker polemicists
Farmer and Deacon had charged that Fox really shared Nayler's self identification with
Christ but hid this fact from the public, and that soon Fox and Nayler would be seen to be
in accord with one another agai~~~'~It is possible that Fox was carefùi not to become
reconciled with Nayler at le& in part to disprove such accusations. Extending
forgiveness was difficult for a person like Fox who considered himself perfect, and
believed that siniess perfection and infallible divine guidance were available to sincere
believers. Fox may have mistrusted the sincerity of Nayler's repentance, and the
disruption which Nayler7ssupporters continued to cause in Quaker meetings would not
have elicited Fox's trust in him. Hubberthorn related that Sirnmonds and about ten of her
cornpanions noisily disturbed Quaker meetings and intempted other speakers. ground of ail blasphemy ... the head of the serpent to be bruised ..." See Swarthrnore MSS, 2:23, George Fox to Parliament, 1656. Bittle noted that Fox did not defend Nayler and only jusb'fied Quaker beliefs, but ingle saw more correctly that without naming him Fox denounced Nayler to Parliament. Fox seemed concerned to separate the Quaker movement from the discredit which the Bristol entry had brought upon it See Bittie, Na~ler,p. 129; HeLarry ingle, First Among Friends, p. 149. With supreme understatement, lngle observed: "Fox's finest hour it was not." ingie, p. 149.
5 1*~arrner, pp. 35-36; Deacon, Grand Imposter, p. A5. Farmer stated that Fox's contention with Nayler was ody that "James should manifest himself to the world, to be Jesus, before him" Fox]. He offered that if there were genuine differences between Fox and Nayler, then the Quakers' daim that they were dl guided by one infallible spirit had been rnanifestly disproved by their leaders' con£Iict. Fanner, sig A445
'Taton MSS, 3:374, Richard Hubberthom to Margaret Fell, Feb. 10, 1657. Hubberthom maintained contact with Nayler, however, and found hirn "loving and much nearer the tmth than he was.""' By the autumn of 1657, Hubberthom reported that Nayler was "nearer to Friends than he was, having a love raised towards them.""
William Dewsbury was also among the Quaker leaders who sought Nayler's rewnciliation with the Friends. Dewsbury informed Nayler of his opinion of what had transpired, insisting that NayIer had:
...sufFered much wrong in barkenhg to the words of Martha Simrnonds and Hannah Stranger and in not reproving what they with others have done out of the Light and wisdom of God ..the tempter assaulted hou] with violence .. .[they] labourai to draw hou] in a self separation fiom the dear and obedient children of my Father.. .they dedover thee.. .opened the mouth of the heathen.. .to blaspheme the holy name of Gd..if thou suffer them in their deceit..their blooû wïll be heavy upon thee ... arise and judge this deceitfid spirit that hath caused the truth to suffer, and hath wronged thee ...pd will redore again.. ."
Nayler responded to Dewsbury by stating that he was grieved about the strife that had arisen through his supporters' dimptive activity, and insisted that he had always condemned the spirit that caused conflict among believerç. While Nayler informed
Dewsbury that he would not "hide my face from shame in what he [God] shall set before me for his tnith sake," he still could not "deny what God haîh laid upon me to suffer for
ni~warthmoreMSS, 4: 12, Richard Hubberthom to George Fox, Mar. 20,1657.
n MSS, 3:387, Richard Hubberthom to Margaret Fell, Sept. 22, 1657.
"~warthmore MSS, 550, William Dewsbury to James Nayler. al1 the ~orld"~~While Dewsbury was attempting to separate Nayler fkom his supporters and to persuade him to denounce their actions, Nayler still felt that he had ken acting according to God's will at Bristol and could not condem what he considered a divinely inspired sign. Nevertheless, in the summer of 1657, Nayler began to seek reconciliation with the Fnends through Margaret Fell. Nayler wrote:
There is nothing dear and precious to me in this world but God's rmth and bis life and righteousness.. .wherein I have come short of this formerly.. .I have been judged of the Lord, and my evil thoughts therein condemned; yea I do condemn them before al1 the world, to be that which favours self..feeling a Spirit of Enmity get head..and now doth exercise its Power agamst the peaceable meetings of the Lord's people, the burden wherein lies heavy upon me, and I suffer under it..that any of the flock of God should be offendeci, or suffer through me.. .[I pray] that dl that are guilty therein may speedily come to repentance... the Lord knows, it was never in my heart to cause you to mourn ... I beseech you al1 that can to receive it, even as you would be received of the Lord; and for the rest, the Lord give me Patience to suffer, till the Lord make up the breach."
Perhaps Fe11 did not respond to Nayler's overture7for a year later he wrote to her again:
...but tdyfor the hardness and unreconcilableness which is in some I am astonished and shaken, les the spirit of Christ Jesus should be grieved and depart ...though this may be just and 1 do not condemn it, yet I have felt a spirit which delights more in forgiving debts. .. 526
524~warthrnoreMSS, 551, James Nayler to William Dewsbury.
"~warthmore MSS, 3:79, James Nayler to Margaret Fell, July 28, 1657. In this correspondence Nayler seemed to recognize his part in the conflict with Fox by confessing the ''enmity" and %ilthoughts" he had held. He dso expresseci distress that his supporters were disturbing Fnends' meetings.
5~~warthmoreMSS, 3:84, James Nayler to Margaret Fell, 1658. It seems that Fell herself and Fox were among the unforgiving ones, since
Parker also sought her support in encouraging reconciliation with Fox:
.. .tme love and life are springing up in him; he is made willing to lie under dl, and would do anything that rnight in the wisdom of God be seen convenient for taking off al1 occasion, as much as in him lies, either by public recantation (which 1 do not judge serviceable) for exalting the truth, or any other way ... 1 have besought G[eorge] F[ox] even with tears to be tender in this thing..James hath writ a few words with much subjection desiring to be reconciled, and I know that George is dearer to him than ever. ..My dear sister, as thou hast been tender, and of large compassion unto the sufTerer, I beseech thee make intercession for him that..as a brother he might be restored again... 1 know it lieth wholly now in G[eorge] F[ox] ... 527
Quakers perceived Nayler's growing desire to be reconciled and even to recant his actions, and saw that Fox was the major impediment to reconciliation. Even
Simmonds and most of her cornpanions were beginning to amend their behaviour.
Hubberthorn reported that: "Martha Simmonds and that Company is quiet and there is something of God stimng in her to reconciliation."" It was not untif 1659 that Nayler was ready to denounce the entrance into Bristol which he had justified to the
Parliamentary cornmittee as an eschatological sign. He then wrote messages of repentance to the Quaker circle for it and for allowing his supporters to promote conflict.
"~aton MSS, 3:3 16- 17, Alexander Parker to Margaret Fell, June 15, 1658.
=Caton MSS, 3:380, Richard Hubberthom to Margaret Fe11, October 22, 1658. Both Simmonds and Hannah Stranger were reconciled to the Friends eventually. See Trevett, "Women Around James Na~ler,"263. In 1670, Fox asked Stranger to appeal for his wife Margaret Fe11 's release from prison. See Hany Emerson Wildes, Voice of the Lord: A Biomaphv of George Fox (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1965), pp. 3 15,327. .. xondemned forever be al1 those false wonhips with which any have idolized my person in the night of my temptation... dltheir casting of clothes in the way, bowings and singings, and al1 the rest of those wild actions which did in any way tend to dishonour the Lord or draw the mincis of any fiom the measure of Christ Jesus in themselve~,~~to look at flesh which is grass, or to ascribe to the visible which belongs to Christ Jesus, dl that 1 condemn... and al1 those ranting wild spirits which then gathered about me in that time of darkness, and al1 their wild actions and wicked words against the honour of God.. .1 deny. ..as far as 1 gave advantage by want of j udgment.. -1take shame to myself ..darkness came over me through want of watchfulness and obedience to the pure eye of Gad, the adversary got advantage... and being taken captive fkom the mie light, walked in the night ... as a wandering bird fit for the prey.. .j30
It is possible that Nayler was willing to disavow his actions and repent humbly for
the benefit of the Quaker movement,j3' but it is also possible that since Nayler had little support among Friends and his supporters were alienating even more with their tactics,
he had to accept defeat in the power çtniggle to end his personal isolation fiom fellow
Quakers. That the prominent and well respected Nayler won so little support among
'%ayler here pointed believen to the presence of Christ in themselves, and away fiom exalting the presence of Christ in others. This may have ken a veiled crïticisrn of Fox who continued to be exalted by some, as well as a confession of his own actions.
'Wayler, Gloq to God, pp. 1-2. It seems that Nayler confessed his guilt, but also claimed that he had been a victim of others as Dewsbirry had suggested he was. Nayler was disavowing that the sinfil actions were his own, but was recognizing that he had done wrong in not reproving his supporters for committing them. He thus expressed the view that was generaily accepted among Quakers that he had been Ied astray, and abandoned his prior justification of the sign. See Hill, Experience of Defat p. 142. Friends in his conflict with Fox attests to Fox's prominence and the security of his
leadership by 1656. Nayler had to be reconciled with Fox to be acceptable among
Friends. Ln September 1659, Nayler was released by the more tolerant Rump Parliament
that had been restored, and he again carried out an active rninistry in on don." in
January or February 1660, Fox was persuaded at last to participate in a meeting with
Nayler which at least simulated reconciliation, as Nayler knelt in contrition before Fox'"
Perhaps Fox was merely acquiescing to pressure from other Quaker leaders to be
reconciled with ~ayler,*%for he wanted Nayler away ffom London and insisted that
surnmer that Nayler go to Durham far to the north. Hubberthorn wrote to Fox on
Nayler's behalf that while Nayler 'doth remernber his dear love to thee," there was much
work for Nayler to do in London, and that "several great ones have a desire to heu
hirn."53' Perhaps Fox found it impossible to trust Nayler again, and feared that Nayler
533SwarthmoreMSS, 4: 134, William Dewsbury to Margaret RH, Febniary 5, 1660; George Fox, The Spitit of Enw, 1663, FI9 16A, p. 9. When the Quaker John Hanvood criticized Fox for making Nayler kneel before him, Fox replied that he had not told Nayler to do so. Fox asserted that if Nayler had felt led to repent %fore the Lord on his knees," Fox would "never deny it, nor call it idolatry." Fox, p. 9. Perhaps Nayler sensed that kneeling before Fox in repentance and in recognition of Fox's spiritual superionty was necessary to win a positive response from Fox, and so regain full acceptance among Fnends.
"SSwarthmoreMSS, 4: 19, Richard Hubberthom to George Fox, Suly 24, 1660. It seems that at this point Nayler was willing to accept Fox's right to issue instnictions to him if Fox insisted on them. One of Harwd's accusations was that Fox assumed 'the place of God" by ordenng Quakers to minister in specific locations, "and thither they must go, whether they have a command or motion of God to go or no." See Fox, S~iritof Enw, p. 6. remained a threat to Quaker mity or to his own position among Friends. Nayler's success as a speaker and apologist and his appeal with some prominent people outside the Quaker community may have stirred a mixture of anxiety and envy in Fox. It is likely that Fox %ad forgiven nothing," for he did not regard the meeting of reconciliation worthy of mention in any of his Wntings.'* Possibly in theFox would have corne to trust Nayler again, as he did Hannah Stranger, but Nayler was aîtacked and fataily injured while travelling in October 1660.~" It is unknown with what mixture of grief, relief, or regret Fox received the news that Nayler had "finished his course ... in the peace of
There is no evidence whether Nayler was attacked and killed because he was a
Quaker, or because he was Nayler, or if he simply fell into the hands of highwaymen.
Fox did not trouble to record Nayler's death when writing his Journal in the next decade.
Nayler was under- represented in Fox's various memoirs, but Fox did comment positively several times on their work t~gether.'~~In the 1st months of his life, Fox was suficiently gracious to record Nayler among the early "able ministers" who "writ many precious books." He stated that though "James Nayler fell yet he rose again and died in the tmtl~."~'Fox and many other Quakers seemed to feel that Nayler had ''fallen7' by
S38~warthmoreMSS, 4:60, John Whitehead to George Fox, 1660.
539~ambridge Journal, pp. 100, 13 1, 138,220,223.
YOGeorge Fox, How the Lord Did Raise UD Frienk 1690, p. 7. Fox was asked tu write this historical account of the movement three months before his death in Ianuary 169 1. See Henry J. Cadbury, ed, Narrative Paoen of George Fox (Richmond, Indiana: 170 king in conflict with Fox and promoting discord among Friends. Nayler seems to have denounced his Bristol entry and his supporters with whom he undertook it for the sake of reconciliation with Fox, the peace of the Quaker community, and his own acceptance within it The significance of the eschatological sign which Nayler explained so clearly to the Parliamentary cornmittee seems to have been lost in the uproar it caused.
As it was noted in the previous chapter, derthe Bristol incident Quakers graduaily became more cautious about expressing the theology of divine inhabitation and performing public signs. [n 1659, the year of great political hope for religious radicals,
Fox did assert this theology, but made no unique daims of divine sonship for hirnself Y '
Generally, Quakers became more careful to restrain one another's prophetic enthusia~rn,~~but the change the Bristol incident brought to the Quaker movernent should not be exaggerated There was no radical and irnmediate retreat fiom prophetic assertiveness in 1656, for this retreat occurred only gradually with the unfolcihg of many other developments that will be discussed below. Neither was the curbing of prophetic excesses among Friends and the authoritative disciplining of one another an entirely new concem after 1656. Already in 1652, the Quaker James Milner was reproved for his false prophecy that he was Christ, while Fox was merely John the Baptist who was unfit
Friends United Press, 1972)' p. 2. 171
to loosen Milner's shoes. Milner was rebuked for this by Nayler hirn~elf,~~who would
have had the same authority to admonish his supporters in 1656 if he had wished to do
so. As Howgill's reproof of Simmonds indicated, Friends checked the words and actions
of fellow Quakers that they considered fauity even before the Bristol entry. Frorn the
beginning Quakers had monitored one another's conduct, for dready in 1652 three
women who had bought expensive new clothes were sent to Fox so that he could
determine what should be done about their misdeed?
Certainly, the Bristol incident did not initiate hostility toward Quaken, but it did
exacerbate it. English society's reaction agaiost the Quakers became quite pronounced
by 1659 when there was a new apex of anti-Quaker fear and hostility? Although the year began with an wurpassed degree of hope among radicals that the millemial age
was about to dam it ended in bitter disappointment which fostered an alteration in
Quaker perspectives and behaviour. The events of 1659 also moved the nation toward
changes that would affect the Quakers7 position in society drarnatically.
Y3~e~ethL. Carroll, "A Look at James Milner and his ' False Prophecy,'" Ouaker History 74 (1985), 2 1-23.
-Barclav MSS, 70, Thomas Aldarn to George Fox, 1652.
545 Reay, p. 6 1. THE QUAKERS IN 1659
The interregnum provided a context in which some radicals participated in govemance, while many others at least received a reasonably patient hearing when they criticized or advised nilers? Several Quakers had inte~ewswith Cromwell in which they were treated courteously despite unresolved di fferences with him regarding tithes and the preservation of the national church-"' A reaction developed as many people became increasingly concerned with the degree to which the nation's nilers extended religious toleration and allowed Quakers and other radicals to participate in govemrnent.
Although Morton contended that the Levellers' defeat in 1649 blasted the radicals' hopes and initiated their "retreat" into sectarian withdrawal, the radicals' hopes continued to
Y7~arbourand Roberts, p. 408. It has been suggested that Cromwell's courtesy to Friends should be interpreted with caution. Cromwell was a shrewd politician, and his attitude toward Quakers was -'ambivalent." Cromwell may have been merely polite, or even amused during inteni-ewswith Friends. See Jonathan Fryer, "Introduction," in George Fox and the Children of Light (London: Kyle Cathie Limited, 199 1), p. xv. Hubberthom7sreport of Cromwell's speech at Whitehall which was noted above indicated the Quakers' sense of betrayal by Cromwell, and their belief that he failed to use the power God gave him to do good for the nation and the world In 1656, when Fox still hoped that Cromwell would respond favourably to the Quaker message, he addressed the hotector as "Friend of the tmth of God, owner and lover of it, whom God hath enlightened." See Swarthmore MSS, 2127. Four disappointing years later, Fox wrote that when he saw Cromwell's exhurned body hanged on a gallows at the Restoration he considered the Protector rightly served for having broken faith with God and the English people by not fulfilling his promise to establish religious liberty. See Cambridge Journal, p. 394. Nayler and Hubberthorn wrote that Cromwell had betrayed God and the people by enacting laws for persecution, and so God had abandoned him as a warning to hypocrites and other treacherous persons. See Hubberthorn and Nayler, Fanatick Histoy, pp. 18- 19. This assessrnent of Cromwell indicated both the Quaken' support of the Revolution, and their discontent with its limited nature. rise and fdl throughout the 1650s. in 1659 Quaker hopes rose highesfY8and then
plummeted.
The Parliament that met in January that year during Richard Cromwell's b~ef
Protectorate was badly disposeci toward the sects, and gave them reason to fear that
intense persecution would be initiated. Since this Parliament considered disbanding the
Army, the Army leaders compelled Richard to dissolve Parliament in April. h May the
Army restored the Rump Parliament at the advice of independent ministes, and Richard
was obliged to depart the political scene. Since the sects saw the Rump as an alternative
to the Protectorate that had disappointed their expectations, they were willing to gant it
support in hope of reform and t~leration?~Quakers saw the hand of God in the fdl of
Richard's Protectorate, and believed that the Lamb and his saints were within sight of
~ictory.~~The sudden alterations in government seemed to be the type of "overturnings" that portended the emergence of the millemium. Sir Henry Vane the Younger, who held
Spiritualist and millenarian beliefs similar to those of the Quakers, supported religious tolerati~n,~~~and numbered Quaken among his friends, was a major Parliamentary leader and a member of the Council of State. He sought the support of the sects in his effort to
548 Reay, p. 20.
%watts,pp. 2 12-23; Liu, pp. 149-50; I.A. Roots, "Richard Cromwell," in Bio-phical Dictionary of British Radicals, Volume 1, pp. 200-20 1.
'%eay, "The Quakers and 1659," 10 1.
'"L.F. Soit and M.A. Hartman, "Sir Henry Vane, Jr.," Bioeraphical Diction- of British Radicals, Volume III, pp. 26265. 174 check the growing forces of reaction against republican govementS5*The newly
established government was willing to free some sectarians who had been irnprisoned for their faith, such as ~a~ler.553 The sects were invited to assist in reforming the *te, and
some leading Quakers responded eagerly to the opportunity to participate in goveniment and help develop a new constitution for English s~ciety.~~Quakers enthusiastically submitted names of Friends who mi& serve as justices of the peace, identified justices who had prosecuted them in hope of obtaining their dismissal, gathered petitions against tithes, and accepted govemment offices. Twelve Friends received appointments as commissioners of the mili tia. "' When a royalist uprising occurred that summer, numerous Quakers fought to defend the Rump g~vernrnent.'~Many Friends believed that they were participating in the establishment of Christ's millemial reign through political activity, and even through military support of the present govemment. That year
Fox felt confident enough to write, "The Light is corne, the night is gone, the Lamb and
S"~aclear,"Quakerkm and the End of the interregnum," 248-52.
'%Reay,Quakers and Revolution, pp. 83-84.
s5S~olles,Ouakers and Culture, p. 41. Such actions were not confined to the events of 1659. Quakers had submitted the names of Friends and Quaker sympathizers who could serve asjustices and militia officers to Cromweli's Council already in 1655 and 1656. The Quakers argued that the persons they proposeci were justifiable choices, since they had the necessary property qualifications and were "well affected to ye Commonwealth." See Extracts From State Pa- Dec. 19, 1655 and Oct. 1656, pp. 6- 13. The Friends did not suddenly become politically interested in 1659, for they had been so earlier. That year their activism intensified due to their belief that national events portended special divine initiative in England's &airs. 1 75
the saints are going on conquering, and to conquer... the throne of the Lamb is set up ...the
Lamb and the saints shall have the ~ictory."'~~
Since the Rump Parliament asked Friends and other radicals for their suggestions
regarding govemance, Fox and other Quakers submitted socially radical Iists of
recommendations. The Quaker petitions of that year represented the final outpouring of
the "millenarian social radicalism" that characterized the Quaker movement during the
uiterregn~m.~~'While Nayler and Fox the Younger constantly spoke prophetically against oppression, the elder Fox aiso submitted a reform programme for England The
Fiftv-Nine Particuiars that were drafted by Fox bore considerable resemblance to the
Leveller programme that had been put forward between 1647 and 1649.~~~FOX'S suggestions for the new society included liberty of conscience and the abolition of tithes and compulsory oaths. Law courts were to be conducted in the vemacular and made more accessible to the poor by allowing persons to appear without an attorney. Prisons were to be rendered more humane, and prison terms made shorter. Persons were to make restitution for theft rather than face the death penalty,- and there was to be no begging but extensive measures for poor relief Fox went so far as to attack property by calling for glebe lands and great houses to be given for the use of the poor, and Whitehall itsel f
"%arbour, "From Lamb's War," 14- 15.
S60This had ken suggested by various Puritan thinkers decades before as a practice more consonant with biblical teachings. See Bozeman, p. 174. was to be transfomeci into an afmshouse. Al1 disabled persons, widows and orphans
were to be provided for. The proceeds of fines were to be designated for poor relief
Schools designed to train ministea were to be abolished dong the legal profession,
since lawyen made "merchandise of law" just as clergy did of scriptme. The clergy
were even to be required to restore what they had taken fiorn the poor. Al1 mlea were to
be humble, just and merciful. The eiite were to lose their privilege of bearing amis, for only those "in office or service" were to be armed Special Quaker concerns also
appeared on this lists of recommen&tions, such as toleration for those who used the
familiar terms "thee" and "thou" and refused to remove the hat to superiors, and the
freedom to speak prophetically and fieely to all. The Quakers' eagerness to impose their vision of godly discipline on society was evident in Fox's Puritan-like cal1 to abolish stage-play s, May-garnes, Christmas and other festivals that "sottish people.. .fools and idiots feast os" and popular forms of recreation. "Costly attire" was to be forbidden and the money spent on it was to be given to provide for the poor instead? Crosses, images, and other "popish" objects were to be eliminated fiom England. Only godly penons were to keep taverns or alehouses to prevent the excessive use of Gd's gifkM2FOX'S proposais indicate that in the Quaker millennium righteousness would be enforced both
%'TheQuakers7 concem to suppress vice and extravagance indicated that they shared the values of the "middling sort" of society, who disapproved of the disorderly habits of the poorer social ranks as well as the luxury of the more prosperous. R. Michael Rogers, "Quakerism and the Law in Revolutionary England," Canadian Journal of History, 22 (1987), 158.
S62GeorgeFox, To the Parliament of the Cornmon-Wealth of Eneland: Fi@-Ninc Particula~,1659, F 1958. in matters of social justice and personai morality.
Quaker hopes of the Kingdom's imminent arriva1 were short-lived The Rurnp
Parliament again proved a disappointment to the radicals as it had before Oliver
Cromwell forcibiy dissolved it in 1653.~~Tk Rurnp merely was irnagined to be radical by radicals and conservatives alike. It offered religious toleration only to those who clairned Scripture was the Word of God, accepted the doctrine of the Trinity, and did not disrupt the wonhip of others. These provisions disqualified the Quakers. In June, the
Rump upheld enforced tithes and the national church and ministq that tithes supportedm Disappointment with the Rurnp was so great that many Quakers were not displeased when the Army resolved its power struggle with Parliament by dissolving it again and ruling through a Committee of Safety from October to December.
Fox had entered a state of deep emotional distress and inactivity for about ten weeks fiorn August to October at the confusing and distressing tuni of e~ents.~~'Other
Quaker leaders were disputing among themselves about the advisability of supporting the current govemment considering its lack of interest in Quaker proposais for refonn.
During the time of Fox's emotional incapacity and confusion, uncertain Friends pleaded for his advice regarding the use of the sword in the government's support. Parker wrote that there was conflict arnong Friends:
...about their acting as Commissioners for the
- -- 563 Liu, pp. 67,80.
564Reay, pp. 85-86.
%SC ambridge Journal, p. 353. Militia .. indeed I have had a great weight upon my spirit about if I see very little, yet something there may be in if 1 cm neither persuade them to it nor dissuade them fkom it, I desire to have a word from thee, and it is Fnends desire also to know what thou sees in it-'7566
Fox was unable to advise Friends at that point He seems to have been confused by the
circumstances, uncertain on the question of military participation, and perhaps suffered a
similar agony of uncertainty as that which had tormented Nayler three years earlier. For
one who claimed infallible divine guidance, it wouid have been most distressing to be
uncertain regarding such major questions for so long a pendof time. Fox was also
suspicious of Vane, whom he had met in 1658 through Fnends who hoped to form a
Quaker alliance with the more refom-minded Memben of Parlia~nent?~Fell's daughter
reported of her fiiture stepfather "His sufferings hath ken great. ..he is much out of
temper at present and hath got little rest this pretty while. Friends are veiy tender over
him as indeed they have ca~se."~Fox later recalled that he "saw how the powers were
plucking each other to pieces. And I saw how many men were destroying the simplicity
S66SwarthrnoreMSS, 3: 143, Alexander Parker to George Fox, August 7, 1659.
567CambrideeJournal, pp. 334-36. Here Fox recalled that at this meeting he had informed Vane: Thou hast known something formerly, but now there is a mountain of earth and imaginations up in thee... whkh has darkened thy brain; and thou art not the man as thou wert formerly." Fox observed that Vane was "proud, and conceited, and that the Lord wodd blast him...hecouid bardly bear Friends without they wouid put off their haîs to him." Vane's demand that commoner Fnends recognize his own social superionty obviously offended Fox, who wouid have doubted his usefulness for helping to establish the divine Kingdom of equity. Fox would have found his contention with Vane a politically convenient fàct to include in his more than a decade after Vane's execution by the Restoration govemment Fox, pp. 334,336.
=Spence MSS, 33, Margaret Fe11 Jr. to Margaret Feli, August 27, 1659. and betraying the truth... So God overthrew hem, and turned them upside dom.. .I was
burdened and almost choked with their hypocrisy and treachery, and fd~eness."%~
Fox resolved his inner himioil and became active again in O~tober.'~~By then he
had detemined to steer Quaken away from political and military activity, and rejected
an offered commission as a colonel. He had corne to beiieve that little good could be
done through participation in any of the Commonwealth governments or Amy, which he
felt had proven their corruption."' Fox cautioned Fnends:
... dlFnends everywhere... take heed to keep out of the powers of the earth that runs into the wan and fightings which makes not for peace ... and will not have the kingdom.. .the Just sets the one against another.. .he that goes to help amongst them is fiom the Just in himself .. keep in the peace and the love and power of God and unity and love one another lest any go out and fa11 with the uncircumcised... have a Kingdom which hath no end and fight for that with spiritual weapo m...there gather men to war as many as you cm and set up as many as you will with these weapons?
Clearly, Fox believed that the current govemment was king confounded by God for its unfaithfulness, was appalled by the recent involvement of some Quakers in warfare, and was convinced that Friends were to continue the Lamb's War with the use of only spiritual weapons. The current and recent govemments were composed of the spiritually
"uncircumcised," and were unworthy of Quaker support.
569Carnbrid~eJournal, pp. 353-54.
570 Gwyn, Covenant Crucifieci, p. 2 14.
57 l Cole, 'Quakers and the English Revolutioc" 46.
"Swarthmore MSS, 2: 103, 1659. The Cornmittee of Safety proved a disappointment, and the Rump that was restored anew in December was no more amenable to the messages of Quaker prophets." When social refoms were not made and even key Quaker goals such as full liberty of conscience and the abolition of tithes were thwarted, leading Quaken chided the successive govemments for their failure and bernoaned the loss of revolutionary endeavo~r.~"By the end of the year, Quakers had moved toward a position of uninvolved neutdity regarding the various rising and falling governments of England "
None had moved England toward the millennium. After the Restoratios Hubberthorn and Nayler catalogued the twelve ineffectual and unfaithful English govenunents that had arisen and toppled between 1652 and 1660, and prophesied that God would remove the King as well if Charles II continued his predecesson' persecuting, injustice, and disobedience to God's pr~phets.*'~There was good reason for Quakers to doubt the efficacy of political involvement, for no government had been genuinely interested in implementing a significant part of their vision for the millemial age. The Quakers found that the nation's elite could not be tnisted to effect the refoms they sought, and withdrew from political rnovement~.~"At the Restoration, Parker cornmented that Friends' involvement with the Interregnurn government, and particularly some Quakers'
"3Hubberthom and Nayler, Fanatick Historv, pp. 20-2 1.
57J~eay,"The Quakers and 1659."
57'~aclear,265-68.
576Hubberthomand Nayler, pp. 16-23.
"Quakers and the English Revolution," 43. 181 participation in the suppression of Booth's royalist uprising was resulting in persecution and a general public suspicion of Friends. He lamented: ".. .better had it ken if dl had kept still and quiet in those times, for because of the forwardness and want of wisdom in some, is one great cause of our present s~f%erings."~~~In a volatile political situation in which govemments were replacing one anther rapidly, this lesson was not lost on many
Quakers. There was les temptation, or opporhrnity, for Quakers to be involved in govemment after the fa11 of the Commonwealth.
Ironically, while the Quaken had found the Rurnp Parliament closed against their radical vision, many English people considered the Rurnp too radical. It had sought support from sectarians like Quakers and Baptists, granted them political offices and militasr commissions, and armed them during the Booth revolt The antiquaker propaganda that was spread fiom pulpits and print by the clergy who felt threatened by
Quaker attacks on their theology and tithes contributeci to the public's fear of the socially egalitarian and theologically unorthodox Quakers. Many people expected anned
Quaken and Baptists to revolt and attack the clergy and magistrates. That summer, some magistrates approved when crowds launched physical assadts on Quakers, for it was considered wiser to attack the sectanans first before they could initiate their uprising. In this atmosphere, many desired the retum of the monarchy in the hope that the King would suppress the sectarian penl they believed was threatening the nation When
General Monck, who had cashiered Quakers and other sectarians corn his forces, entered
London in February 1660, he came as an enemy of radicalism and the sects. By obliging
578~warthmoreMSS. 3: 145, Alexander Parker to George Fox, August 7, 1660. the Rump to readmit the more consetvative Memben who had ken bard from
Parliament since 1648, he set in motion the events that ended in the remof the King that May. Thus, popular fear of Quakers and other radicals contnbuted to the reaction that helped to precipitate the Restoration. j"
THE QUAKERS AND THE RESTOMTION
Mer a decade of anticipating the coming reign of Chnst, Quaken were instead faced *th the coming of Charles LI. Quakers had initially supported the republican form of government, and identified with the anti-monarchist sentiment of the English
Revolution in 1656 and 1657, Fox had warned Cromwell not to accept the crown that some pressed upon him, and admonished the Protector that he should "lay down his crown at the feet of Jesus." Fox cautioned that those who would give Cromwell an earthly crown "would take away his life," and "bring darkness upon the nation."*" On the eve of the Restoration, a collection of Fox's works was published in which he declared that those who wanted any king but Jesus were '-the whore and the taise church and of the beast, antichrists and in the dragon's power." Tme Christians would not "set up any earthly king," for "Christ is their King and they are Kings." Fox cited the biblical warning that kings would prove oppressors of their people (1 Samuel 8), and the biblical
"qeay, Ouakers and Revolution, pp. 85-100; Watts, pp. 2 14- 15; Liu, p. 157.
580CambrideeJournal. pp. 274,289. history that ancient Israel had fard best when only God ded it before the declension into kingship."' Fox had always claimed to be 'a lover of Israe17sCommonwealth. whom the Lord is retuniing out of ~aptivity."~~Nevertheless, when the Restoration occurred the Quakers were able to make their peace with the monarchy and readj utto the new political reality very quickly. This seems at fint an inexplicable depamire from their egalitarian convictions. However, since Charles had declared hirnself for liberty of conscience at Breda before the Restoration, Quakers began to feel that God was reçtoring him to usher in the era of religious toleration that the interregnurn governments had refused to establish. Quaken hopefully began to share the traditional myth of the good rnonarch who would be the "righter of dl wrong~,"~~and were to be disappointed in this
58 1George Fox, Several Paners Given Forth, 1660, F 190 1, pp. 8- 14.
*=FOX, Message to the Parliament, Title Page. This was, of course, England's Commonwealth, which Fox beiieved God was transforming according to his will. Fox had seemed sure that Gd's purposes for England could be achieved only through a republican governunent and not through the despotism of kings.
5a~abelRichmond Bniilsford, Ouaker Women 1650-1690 (London: Duckworth and Company, 19 15), p. 267. Quakers reportai that the King's "moderate carriage" to Friends and his "promise that no persecution shall be for our religion" was encouraging. See S~varthmoreMSS, 1:32 1, Walter Clement to Margaret Fell, June 1660. Popular expectations difTered Just prior to Charles' arriva1 in May 1660, Fox the Younger was attacked by a crowd who promised: "The King is coming now, who will hang or banish you dl." See George Fox the Younger, True Relation of the Unlawfûl Proceedinm, 1660, F2014, p. 3. Subsequent events were not so extreme, but the Friends' expectations proved excessively optimistic.
5%icholas J. Morgan, "The Quakers and the Establishment, 1660-1730, With Specific Reference to the North-West of England," (unpublished Ph-D.dissertation, University of Lancaster, 1985), p. 80. Fox expressed confidence that the King would do right if he knew the situation correctly by stating that if Charles knew of the Friends' suffering: "it would break your heart, as it wodd the heart of any Christian prince." George Fox, For the Kine and His Council, 166 1, F1822, p. 7. 184 like so many subjects before them and since. Friends also interpreted the Restoration as the fulfillment of their constant prophetic warnings of the divine judgrnent that wouid come upon the Interregnum miers for persecuting Quakers and rejecting Gd's will.
Quakers retained their aspiration that Christ would de, and became unconcemed whether the fom of the temporary human govemment was monarchist or republican. "'
Fox the Younger reassured Friends that God would be served by "what is now come up," and that the former rulers would "see their backslidïngs and bewail them bitterly." He encouraged Friends not to be troubled by 'the changing of times and governrnents... for
God hath a rnighty work and hand therein." God would bring change "until that come up which must reign "586 The elder Fox wrote: "We believe and declare that the... hand of the lord hath brought in Charles Stuart, now proclaimed king of Englar~d."'~Quaken insisteci on believing that the Restoration mut have been wrought by God to Mer divine purposes. It was as if they could not have conceived of anything so momentous occurring without its fitting into God's overall plan, however contrary it may have ken to their earlier expectations. Fox the Younger çtated that Quakers would support any righteous govemment, whether it was headed by a King, Protector, General, or
Parliament, just as they would oppose a11 unjust governments however they were constituted.
5g5~raithwaite,p. 48 1.
586 Fox the Younger, General E~istle,p. 8.
Sm~hom~sonMSS. 63.
'"Fox the Younger, Noble Salutation, pp. 17-1 8. 1 85
Both Nayler and Fox the Younger had served the Parliamentary cause in the New
Mode1 Army, but had Iefl the military in discouragement when the interregnum govemments failed to Fulfill radical hopes of transforming society. During the
Interregnurn, Fox the Younger informed the hyleaders that God had "cdled me out from among you, and hath made me a soldier in the Amy of the Lamb, who shali overcome al1 his enemies... he will tear and tread down and consume and destroy them."
He rebuked the military leaders for having gained support with promises of religious freedorn, but then instead of ending oppression becoming oppressors of the poor and persecutors of true Chnstians themselves. He pleaded with them to "remember fiom whence you are fallen," while there was still time to repent? At the Restoration, Fox the Younger stated that it was God's judgment upon the hterregnum miers for
"backsliding" from their original 3incerity and zeai." He charged that many of them had fallen into the temptations which their victory presented, and had used their power to gain wealth and honour. Though they had been Ied by God to overthrow the episcopal clergy and "their imaginaiy worship," they had in nim merely established other false churches and rejected God's Iife iransforming truth. In a broadsheet that was to be disîributed to each Member of Parliament while General Monck was rnarching toward
London in January 1660, in a move that portended the end of the Interregnum, Fox the
Younger warned the Members that since they had refused to do God's will for society
58%x the Younger, 'TJnto You the Officea and Soldiers of the Amies," in Collection, pp. 12- 14, 17- 1 8. This tract is widated, but it clearly predates the Restoration.
'~OXthe Younger, Message, pp. 12- 14,2 1. while they had the time and opportunity, "the sun is gone down over yod' God's
delivemnce would not corne through them but by other means -not according to man's
expectation." Members of Parliament had proven themselves "treacherous, wilful,
proud, self-seeking people" who had rejected God's "counsel" given through his Quaker
prophets. Parliament and the Amy alike were unfaithful. Fox the Younger had written
in the hope of appealing to a "srnail remnan t... who may be winnowed out" to "be
instruments" for God's pirrposes7'9' but this was not to be. In 1660, he concluded that the
Interregnum govemments had ''wrought their own destruction7' because they had rejected
Gd's counsel. God, therefore, had abandoned them to their own devices, leaving them
to becorne confise& divide& and "'blinded."5*
During the disappointing hterregnum, Nayler had exclaimed: "Who would have believed that England would have brought forth no better Wts than these, now afier such deliverance, as no nation else can witness." Instead of establishingjustice, the
lnterregnum leaders '"have got great estates, you Say God hath given you them; you are set up above them who are made poor by your means ... woe unto you that have power in your hands to restrain these things, but instead of using the Sword to scatier the works of iniquity," had used their Gd-given power to oppress othen. "Therefore is the Lord coming to cal1 to account al1 sorts of dissem Mers and oppressors, and by his own nght
- -
591GeorgeFox the Younger, For the Parliament of England and Their h~,1660.
"George Fox the Younger, Breathin~sof Tnie Love, 1660, F1995, p. 8. hand to get himself the victory ...the day of his fierce wrath... is co~ning."'~~Refe~ng to his military service, Nayler infonned Cromwell that he had worked eight or nine years to place Cromwell in his position of pwer, and Iooked for Cromwell to be God's servant and fulfill his promise to God that he would allow religious liberty so that Christ could be king in everyone's co~science.~At the Restoration, Nayler tnumphantly announced that the Interregnum leaders who had wasted the oppomini-ty to establish a nation of justice and mercy and had penecuted God's Quaker prophets for warning them to repent were now suffering divine judgment He asserted:
. . . you that did imprison are Vnprisoned, and you that sought to make yourselves dreadfilI by oppression, now know not where to hide yourselves. ..you have ever rejected his Word in yourselves and others *''
While the elder Fox had refked to serve in the military and in consequence spent six rnonths in prison in 165 1,'% he noted the participation of many Quakers in the Civil
Wars. He infomed the Army that in its earl ier time of sincerity, "thousands of us went in the fiont of you, and were with you in the great heat, who lwked not for the spoil, but
s93Nayler,"The Condition and Portion of the People of England," 1654, in Works, pp. 170-72.
'%George Fox and James Nayler, To Thee. Oliver Cromwell. 1655, F1962, pp. 1, 7. Note the defiantly egaiitarian use of the familiar pronom. "* Nayler, ToThose Who Were in Authonty, Whom the Lord is Now Judging" in Works, pp. 593-94. %y stating that the ders had rejected God's word in themselves and othen, Nayler indicated that they refused to heed the Light within as well as the Friends7 divinely inspireci messages.
5%~ arnbridee- JOUIMI, pp. 64-65. Fox was not absolute in his opposition to warfare until the Restoration, but he had long felt that military participation was not Gd's will for himself This will be explored in Chapter Six below. for the good of the nations." Once in power, however, these erstwhile cornrades in arms persecuted those who had fought to establish their govemment Fox bewailed the fact
%at they shouid requite us so in the end!"m He informed the denthat God had given them military victory and placed them in positions of power so that they would have empathy for the oppressed and end their ~uffering.~~Fox wamed the lnterregnum den:
When he gives you a reward according to your works, ye shall know the wrath of the Lamb, and the judgments of God ...who had time to do good, and did it not, who might have broken off the bonds of iniquity, and showed mercy.599
He inforrned Cromwell that if only the Protector had "ken faithful," God would have given him de, influence, and victory over other natiomm Fox expressed his discouragement with the interregnum govemment and his hope in divine deliverance by
... the people which the Lord hath chosen are trodden upon, and the powers of the earth have set themselves against the mighty power of the Lord in thern. But now is the Lord arising to plead the cause of the just, and woe for ever to al1 Sion's adversaries.
597GeorgeFox, To the Council of Officers of the Amy, 1659, F1955, p. 6. During the Interregnum, Fox would cite the military service which many of those who later became Quakers had aven to the Parliamentary forces, but after the Restoration, he would point to his own refirsal to serve in them.
598~o~This TO Al1 Officers, pp. 3-4.
TOthe Protector, p. 57.
600t'GeorgeFox to Oliver Cromwell," in Burrough and Fox. Good Counsel and Advice, p. 26. Evidently, this appeared in prïnt after CromweI17sdeath
Message to the Parliameng Title Page. I 89
Fox asserted that by persecuting God's people, the govemment was opposing God, whose
power was active in them. As for the unprofitable ders, Fox stated:
You must be cut down with the same power that cut down the king who reigned over the nation, in whose farnily was a nurse for papists, and for bishops ...but the beast and the false prophet is standing still, and they keep their places so another Parliament grew, and God hath cut down that..the Lord will pluck down yoq he that suffered you to reign long, and showed you many favoun, and you have promised many fair promises to the nation, but little you have performed. .6m
Fox promised that God would rule al1 nations as "one judge and one lawgiver, one
At the Restoration Fox gioated, "now you may see what has corne upon you,"
for "when you had power you did not do good," but "have broken covenant with God and man." The prophecies against the Interregnum governments had been fulfilledm
It was time for the Fnends to speak to the new govemment and begin to fom a relationship with it. They continued to expect the coming of the millemium, and though they were not involved in the govemment at the Restoration, they still spoke prophetically to the nation's nilers. Shortly afier his Restoration to the throne, Charles received an open letter frorn Nayler, who introduced the Quakers as the community of
God's persecuted people who were divinely commissioned to adrnonish whatever
*Tex, "To the Heads of This Nation and Al1 Rulers," in Newes, p. 19. This document indicates both Fox's dissatisfaction with the interregnum government, and his displeasure with the Stuart monarchy.
*3F~~Newes. p. 20.
MU~eorgeFox, To Those That Have Been Fonnerlv In Authoritu, 1660, F 1963, pp. 1, 4-6. 190
government may be currently in power. Nayler informed Charles that the Spirit led
Quakers to wam him ody because God loved h,and wanted to keep km from
following sinful courses deaimental to his "eternal welfare." The Quaker wamed
Charles to, "do justice ...relieve the helpless oppresse& and break the yoke of bondage
that lies upon the poor ...lest the meek of the earth cry to God against thee. Venly, God is
nearer this nation to avenge than rnany can belie~e.'*~
At that tirne, the King also received more strident correspondences from Fox the
Younger. Using no ternis of deference whatsoever, Fox the Younger addressed the King
with the insultingly farniliar salutation, "'Unto Thee, Charles Stuarî," instructed him to
mie justly, and sternly told him that: "If thou oppressest îhis people, the Lord will
assuredly take away thy power and avenge their ca~se."~While Fox the Younger
criticized the regicides to the extent that he granted that Charles 1's enemies had gone
further than their divine "commission" allowed for executing God's wrath against hirn7*'
the Quaker also asserted that God had been against the elder Stuart, and that his son was
in Iike danger of bringing God7sanger upon himself. Fox the Younger promised that
605Nayler, "A Letter to King Charles 11," 1660, in Works, p. 599. It is significant that this prophetic admonition was inciuded in a collection of Nayler's &tings which was published in the early eighteenth century. Evidently, Quakers such as the prominent leader Whitehead still retained an appreciation for the more confrontationai approach toward denand society that the earliest Fnends had exhibiteci, and from which Quakers gradually departed in the decades that followed the Restoration.
606~o~the Younger, Noble Salutation, p. 17.
607 During the hterregnum, the elder Fox had viewed the execution of "Charles Stuart7' as "aremarkable record of the righteous judgment of Gd" See George Fox, The West Answerine the North, 1657, F1 988, pp. 96-97. Fox was not so impolitic as to mention this sentiment after the Restoration. 19 1
Quakers would obey good laws and witness against bad govenvnent as Gdled them to
do until Gdwould establish his Kingdom, 'and the kingdoms of the world shall becorne
the kingdoms of the Lord and of his ~hnst- He Merinformed Charles that the
Restoration had not occurred because the roylists were Rghteous, or because Charles
had any right to rule the Kingdom, but only because God had chosen to give it to him,
and could take it away again and entrust it to others. He promised that God "will
overtum and ove-, until he hath brought to pass the thing that he hath decreed, which
is to establish righteousness in the earth." Obviously, Fox the Younger did not assume
that the Restoration necessarily intrduced a permanent arrangement to England. The
rnonarchy could fa11 as the Interregnum governments had if the King was unfaithfid to
God. Fox the Younger clarified that he would not plot either for or against the King, or
anyone else. He did not expect deliverance to come through the "carnal sword," but
knew it wodd come "with or without the help of man'- A few months later, he
infonned Charles that God had said, "1 will set up righteousness in the earth ...establish equity and rnercy among the people, 1 will remove oppression from off the earth." He notified Charles that his rebel enemies "had a just cause... against you," and had been removed from power to allow the Restoration oniy "because of their treacherous dealing with the Lord, and because they perverted the cause ... serving themselves and their lusts."
Fox the Younger noted the extravagant revelry that had accornpanied Charles' arrival,
608~o~the Younger, Noble Salutation, pp. 9, 14- 15, 19-20.
6040~the Younger, pp. 9, 19-20. while ''your own flesh or them of the same blooû,6'0 lie, sif or stand in the streets, crying for a piece of bread" The Quaker asked the King "Do you indeed know the Hand that brought you up?" Did he know what God required of hirn now that he was restored to power? Fox the Younger inquired: "Were you or your father and his fiends able to keep yourselves in power, when the Lord formerly appeared against you.. because of your rebellion against hirn?" He warned Charles to repent, or he too would be removed like those before him.6" By October 1660, Fox the Younger felt led to notify the King:
"'Thou hast highly displeased the Lord God ... and thy good words have not at al1 deceived him ...certainly it had kenbetter for thee that thou hadst never corne, for 1 have seen it tending to thy destruction... when the Lord appears against thee Thou must fdl ... his wrath is near to be revealed.'*12 Fox the Younger was continuing the role he had Mfilled during the last year of the Interregnum as God's "watchman" sent to warn England's ruten with a divine rne~sage.~"One can only imagine that Charles' sense of humour mitigated his response to these missives, since no speci fic repercussions against the prophet followed It was reported that when a leiter from Fox the Younger reached the
King, his brother the Duke of York became angry and advised severe measures. It is
610~dentifjmgthe blood relations that existed between the King and the beggars in his streets was a supreme statement of Quaker egalitarianism.
6'1~oxthe Younger, "The Dread of God's Power," 1660, in Collection, pp. 144-49.
6i2George Fox the Younger, '"To King Charles the Second," Coilection, pp. 26043.
6"Fo~the Younger, "For You Who Are Called Commonwealthsmen in Army and Parliament," in Collection, p. 10 1. impossible to assess the degree of irony with which Charles replied that his own
repentance would be a better resp~nse.~'"It was typical of the fate of prophets that both
Quakers died shortly after delivering their adrnonitions, while the object of their
warnings continued to live and defor more than two decades
Charles aiw received a message fiom the elder Fox, who addressed him and his
advisers with the egalitarian salutation, "Friends," and informed them that though God
had placed the King in power, he must end religious persecution or God would overthrow
km to rescue %is oppressed people. Fox wamed the King: "Now is your day of trial
whether you wil1 answer the expectation of the Lord" The King had been returned by
God to serve as "a rod to the wickeb' interregnu.den, but if he did not establish
toleration as he had promised and give God's prophets fieedom to prophesy against
comipt magistrates and ministers, Charles would be removed in his tum. While Fox
assured the King that Quakers were not opposed to him as many falsely ~harged,~'~and
constantly repeated that he had suffered irnprisonrnent for refusing to fight against
Charles during the interregn~rn,6'~like Nayler and Fox the Younger he continued his
prophetic confrontation of the political powers after the Restoration. Fox instructed
Charles to abolish the death penalty for theft, assure speedy mal to those in prison, and codiQ al1 laws into a brief book to make the law accessible to ail. Fox was bold enough
61"WilIiarnSewel, The History of the Christian People Called Ouaken, Volume I (New York: Baker & Crane, IW), p. 35 1. From the 1725 English edition.
6'5GeorgeFox, The Copies of Several Letters to the Kinp;, 1660, C6 198, pp. 3-5. 194
to tell the King that if he "did profess the name of Christ in he would forgive his
enemies and would not persecute tnïe Chri~tians.~"Although Fox assured the King that
Quakers did honour him appropriately. he also offered the socially egalitarian statement
that al1 persons were to be honoured and not oniy the rich. He asserted that wealthy and
greedy oppresson of the poor failed to honour God or the King correctly, and informed
Charles that Christians must honour God before the human s~vereign.~'~In letters to the
King and Parliament, Fox would continue io promote aspects of the Quaker reform
agenda. He also continued his attacks upon the national clergy."lY The letten of these
three Friends to the King indicate that it is incorrect that with the Restoration "'the
Quaker attitude toward the govemment immediately took a new course. It appears as if
no point of senous political engagement with the new govemment presented itself to
Friends, except the appeal for tolerati~n."~~~While Fox the Younger was more strident
and confrontational than Nayler or Fox, their essential political perspectives and
messages were remarkabl y sirni lar.
Near the end of his life, Nayler continued to hope for the coming &y when Christ
would deon earth with his saints. With his colleague Hubberthom, Nayler envisioned
that Chnst:
617 Fox, For the King and Parliament, pp. 2,7,20.
6'8~eorgeFox, A Word in the Behalf of the King, 1660, F1993, pp. 1.4-7, 10, 12.
6'9~o~,10 Both Houses; For the Kin? and Parliament, pp. 2-3,6-7,9- 10, 13,2 1.
6Zo~eeGwyn, Apocalypse, p. 46. While Gwyn is correct that this transition did occur over time, it was not immediate. ,. . will be tender of the tender in conscience.. .with righteousness will he judge, and deon earth, to deliver the helpless.. .drive wickedness hmhis throne. ..we know his birth is corne to the nations...ye a to the wise in heart..we know his breakhg forth to these islands as the bright sun after the stormy min...p rinces shall dein judgment; this is the royal seed, and he that is of him is the son of nobles...62'
Reflecting on the politically disappointing decade, Nayler stated:
...we have gone seeking die nghteous one, through parliaments and protectors (so caüed) priests, and ders of al1 sorts, but his goverment we have not found...[Q uakers suffered] under every power that yet bath risen, than to join in with the- because we have not heard the voice of the holy one in the midst of them.. .[the rulen followed their] fleshly wisdom and cmai reason-..to accomplish their self ends... we could not but deny them also to be of Godm6=
These statements indicate that for Nayler, political structures and leaders had proven useless, but Christ would still establish the rule of the saints in spite of them.
In the following decades, Quakers did involve themselves with the govenunent by sewing in civil positions when opportunity offered, and by appealing for toleration and the abolition of tithes. They also became involved with Parliamentary elections and alliances in the hope of advancing t~leration.~~As Barbour stated, Quakers did not assume the typically sectarian position that believen must withdraw from al1 political activity, but like the Puritans sought to intluence the govemment and transfom
"'Nayler and Hubberthom, Accomt, pp. 5-6.
6%ayler and Hubberthom, Account pp. 6-9.
623Reay, pp. 107-108. ~ociety.~~~Yet, in the wake of disappointments in the Interregnum, intensifying
persecution in the Restoration, and the delay of the millennium, Quaker interwts in
religious fkdom came to overshadow issues of social transformation. The Quakers'
expression of social concem to the govemment became less pronounced Friends
remained vocal in their appeals for toleration, and persecution kept them in an
adversarial relationship with the govemment and s0ciety,6~'but the focus of protest to the
govemment and involvement with it became more narrowly centred upon issues that
concerned Friends' interests such as toleration, tithes, and exemption frorn the
There was a transition fiom prophetic confrontation to apologetics and appeals for
toleration that was not entirely a product of the Restoration, but had been evident already
in the last years of the interregnum as the persecution of Friends escalated?
In spite of Charles' Declaration of Breda, the hope of toleration with which the
Restoration had begun was doomed as the reactionary Cavalier Parliament met in 166 1
6U~o~informed Friends that as Goci "had a rod..to fetch down" the interregnum persecutors, "so again, God hath a rod in reserve, to bring down these spints... therefore ail dwell in the power and spirit of God, with which ye will comprehend al1 that which is to change, with that which doth not change, and hath no end See Fox, Works, Vol. W, 1662, p. 22 1. With Fox the Younger, Fox apparently expected that there would be more political changes as God continued working in Engïish affairs, and at that point did not assume that the Restoration would be a permanent settlement.
626Tolles,Oualcers and Culhue, pp. 43-44. Fox insisted that Quakers remain faithful by not paying tithes. He adrnonished: "In the power of the Lord maintain the war against the Beast and do not put into his mouth." See Portfolio 24:47, "George Fox to Frïends," 1673. The Lamb's War was still in progress for Fox, even if his range of concems had narrowed in light of persecution and the millenniurn's delay.
627Seepp. 140, 160 above. to unleash an intense persmution of al1 religious dissenten. Political fears of radicals who had overthrown the monarchist govemment fuelled aggressive prosecution. It was correctly recognized that the Quaker movement '%as an explosive force" that threatened the type of society which the elite wished to maintain.6B The Quaker Act of May 1662 forbade meetings of more than five Quakers, and demanded that Friends swear an oath of allegiance even though they conscientiously opposed the use of a11 oaths. ïhe
Conventicle Act of 1664 that Midthe meeting of al1 religious dissenters was enforced with special ngour upon the Quakers for they met openly in deliberate defiance of the laws and so attracted considerable persecution to themsel ves. 629 During the next decades, approximately fifteen thousand Quakers were imprisoned, of whom four hundred and fifty died in prison. Fines and distraints impoverished many more. 6M Fox persevered in the hope that through their wihiess and suffering Friends would touch the consciences of their persecutors. Then, more people would undergo the personal conversion that inspired one to pursue the transformation of England and the ~orld.'~'
62sWill iam C. Braithwaite, The Second Period of Quakerism (2nd ed. ; Cam bridge: Cambridge University Press, 196 1), pp. 6-7.
'"Braithwaite, pp. 7, 2 l-23,52, 102.
'"Endy, Earlv Quakerism, p. 3 14. Fox afirmed that one fought for Christ's Kingdom through suffering, rather than through irûiicting physical violence on others. See Fox, Some Principles, p. 18. He encouraged Fnends: "If you suffer, Christ saereth; and if you be penecuteâ, it is Christ that is persecuted. .be of good faith, and be valiant for the truth upon the earth." Fox, Works, Vol. W, 1664, pp. 258-59. Fox applied the believer's identification with the inner Chnst to the believer's suffenng as well. He promised that judgments wodd soon corne upon persecutors, for "the Lord is coming upon the wicked in his thundering power, for they are ripe. For they are al1 conupt with 198
However, in their effort to become acceptable and tolerated memben of English suciety, the Quakers gradually tempered their aggressive verbal attacks. In 1666 and 1672, leading Friends instnicted Quakers not to offend others unnecessarily7but to deliver their messages in a tacthl manner, and to present the more controversial aspects of Quaker theology cautiously. By the time toleration was granted in 1689, Quaken had become very careful about angering rulers. The Lamb's War had corne to an end for rnany
F~iends.~~~Hurnanity had not repente4 and even God's favoured England had refuseci to respond to the transforming power of the inward LÏght. The hope of conquering the world and remaking it into the Kingdom of Christ dimmed Friends carne to concentrate increasingly upon the preservation of their own faith community, and looked to society for toleration rather than transformation.
The plague of 1665 and the Great Fire of 1666 have ken identified as important milestones in the alteration of Quaker eschatology. Fox and other Quakers viewed these events as the fulfillment of their prophetic wamings that divine judgments would befall the sinful nation that was refusing to repent and continuing to persecute God's Quaker saints.63' The year 1666 had been identified by many as the year when Antichrist's power would be at its height, after which the miIlennial age would begin to dawdY Fox had not aftached his expectations to any specific year, or to a physical appearance of blood" Fox, Works, Vol. WI, 1665, p. 273.
632~auman,pp. 1 17- 1 8, 145-46.
633~ambridgeJournal, pp. 503,s 10.
6Y~.G.Clouse, 'The Rebirth of Millenuianism," in Toon, p. 64. Christ.635Still, it was evident that even though God's judgments seemed to have been rnanifested in the disastem of plague and fire as Quakers had prophesied, England would not repent and was no nearer to the establishing of the Kingdom than it had been before.
Mer the plague and fire the eschatological hope of Christ ruling through the hearts of believers continued among Friends, but the sense of the Kingdom's imminence was lost as Quakers accepted the indefinite postponement of the millemial age. This ~'shattered eschatological expectation" meant that Friends were "faced with a future?"in which they had to [ive with the deferral of their hopes. While Friends continued to believe in the
Kingdom's dtimate amval, its imminence seemed increasingly ~nsure.~Richard L.
Greaves has argued effectively against the position that Quakers were dull and defeated by the Restoration, and insisted that the "dominant characteristics of Restoration
Quakerism are not withdrawal and quiescence but engagement and vigor.""' While this assessrnent is correct, Quaker engagement eventually became focused primanly upon seeking toleration for Friends rather than on promoting a social vision for England and
635 Fox recalled that some had expected "Christ's persona1 coming in an outward fomi and manner in 1666, and some of them did prepare thernselves when it thundered ...and thought Christ was coming to set up his kingdom.. .their looking was like unto the Pharisees 'Lo here," and 'Lo, there, ' but Christ was corne and had set up his Kingdom above sixteen hundred yean since..." Cambrîdpe Journal, p. 4 19.
6-"~amelaM. Oliver, "Quaker Testimony and the Lamb's Wu,"(unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Me1 borne, 1977), 2 18-27. Barbour and Frost also maintained that the Quaker movement was altered not so much by persecution as by the fact that even the appearance of events that seemed divine judgments such as the plague and Great Fire did not bring change and repentance to England See Barbour and Frost, p. 66.
637Richard L. Greaves, "Shattered Expectations? George Fox, the Quakers, and the Restoration State, 1660-1685," Albion, 24 (1W2), 237. 200 the world They no longer anticipated humanity's imminent conversion and the world's political and social transformation- Men expectations of an imminent Kingdom faded, the intensity of Quaker fervour abated Quakers retained their Spiritualism and their ernphasis upon ethical behaviour, but without millenarian expectations their exciternent and sense of urgency could not be sustained
Nayler and Fox the Younger had died before this time. Few of the major early
Quaker leaders besides Fox suMved the 1660s- due to the unhealthy conditions within seventeenth century English prisons.b38The elder Fox lived to assist Friends in keeping their faith in the face of disappointed expectations. He believed that God would continue to bring judgments on the unrepentant nation, waming as he had decades before that the
Day of j udgrnent would "bum as an oven, and al1 the proud, yea, and al1 that do wic kedl y shall be as stubble." He continued also to target prosperous oppressoa, quoting the biblical prophet (Amos 3: 15'4: 1 ) that God would "srnite" the great houses of those who
"oppress the poor and destroy the need~."~'~Fox wished to see the prophetic fervour of the movernent's earlier days kept alive. In 1670, he continued to tell Friends that God's sons and daughten were to prophesy, and that although some had erred in speaiung beyond the message God had given them "many more has quenched the measure of the
638ChristopherHill, "Quakers and the EngIish Revolution," Journal of the Friends ' Historical Society*56 ( l992), 177-78.
639~eorgeFox, A Warnin~to Endand, 1675, F1986, pp. 13, 16, 19. in 1650, near the onset of his prophetic ministry, Fox had similarly wamed, "The Day of the Lord is coming that shall burn as an oven... ail that doth wickedness shall be as stubble." Fox, Ettine MSS, 26, 1650. 20 1
Spirit of God and after becorne dead and d~Il.'~By the 1st years of his life, Fox no
longer expected any Kingdom except the one that had already wme, which Chnst had
established and made availabIe witfiin the hearts of believers where he ruied as their
"invisible E&g." He insisted that believen already "see his kingdom, and press into it,
and are hein and possessors of ita'
When Fox was released fier almost three years of harsh imprisonment in 1666,
he established a network of regional monthly and quarterly meetings throughout the
nation to provide structure for a growing community of ~riends?~This structure of
meetings would provide for unity and discipline among Quakers, but it would also give
each Friend an oppomuiity to participate in the business and decision making of the faith
community. While these meetings provided oppodty for the wider body of believers
to place controls on the individual, it also ailowed the individual to share in the
govemance of the body, and so prevented either excessive individualism or the
imposition of dictatorial rule by a few leaders. In establishing these meetings, Fox
"dethroned himself' fiom the position of preeminence that Nayler, Nayler's supporters,
and many othen had come to resent."' In the last fifteen yean of his life, Fox took a
MoSwarthmoreMSS, 2: 106, 1670.
611George Fox, "Conceming the Kingdom of Gd" in Works, Volume VI, pp. 486-87. This document is not dateci, but its placement in the volume indicates that it was written near the end of Fox's life.
"2c ambridge Journal, pp. 51 1-12.
6J3~ogelklouNorlind, pp. 23-28. FogeMou Norlind suggested that this cCdethronement"was Fox's unspoken "atonement" for his treatment of Nayler. While this is conjecture, Fox's establishment of structures for group decision making did 302 srnaller role in leadership, although he continued to travel, speak, and -te as vigorously as his declining health allowedM By Fox's death in 1 69 1, suficient structures and leaders were in place so that his demise cawd no disruption in Quaker ~ircles."~The transition fiom millenarian fervour to concem for the preservation of a moraiist
Spiritualkt community of believers had occurred already.
indicate a willingness to share power with the wider community of Friends, rather than reserve it to himself.
wIngle, pp. 252,26547. CHAPTER SIX
THE QUAKERS' TRANSITION TO PACFISM
The Quakers gradually adopted a pacifist position due to the influence of their
Spintualin and perfectionist theology, and their discouragement with the Interregnum governments that failed to be agents of the Kingdom's mival. Thus, both the Friends' theology and contemporary national developments contributed to their rejection of warfare. Their insistence that spirihial goals codd not be accomplished by physical means led Quaken to maintain that God called believers to fight evil with spiritual rather than with physical weapons, and to banie against spintual forces rather than kill Goci's human creatures in combat. Pacifism was consonant also with the Quaken' belief in moral perfection, and with their perfectionist tendency to extend widely held Christian beiiefs to an extreme position. As their Spiritualist theology inforrned Quakers that the
Kingdom could not be brought in through force of msbut only with spiritual weapons, their perfectionist theology led them to extend the Christian principles of love and non- retaliation to an absolute rejection of the violence which Mareentails. Although many
Friends had identified with the Parliamentary cause and served in the New Model Army to further it, the Quakers withdrew in discouragement fiom the military and from their temporary affiliation with the Rump goverrunent by the end of 1659. That year they had hoped for a time that their political alliance with the incumbent governent wodd assist the Kingdom's emergence. When this aspiration was disappointed they departed from thei r eadier activist stance and extricated themselves frorn pol itical entanglements, and 304 moved closer toward a full rejection of the sword for the accomplishment of Gds purposes. Thus, by the early 1660s most Friends came to conclude that there was no possibility that God's Spirit would ever lead them to go the route of physical warfare.
Twelve leading Fnends signed the Quakers' fint public declaration of pacifism on January 2 1 , 166 1, after an unsuccessfùi uprising of approximately fi@ Fifth
Monarchists led the govenunent to arrest more than four thousand Quakers on the suspicion that Friends were potential revolutionaries as ~elI.~'The many simi larities between the Fifi Monarchists and the Quakers contnbuted to a confusion in the min& of the English public and authorities, who did not clearly distinguish between the two radical millenarian movements. Indeed, as it will be demonstrated below, the Quaker and the FiW Monarchist movements were suficiently alike in so many respects that the goverment's error was understandable. In this crisis, Quaker leaders adopted a fomal policy of pacifism that had been the position of only a few Friends during the
Interregnum.a8 Due to the circumstances of the Friends' proclamation of their pacifism, and the fact that few Quaken had professed nonviolence during the 1650s, some prominent historians have interpreted the Quakers' adoption of pacifism as a defensive measure that was "forced upon" them by the anirnosity and rnistnist of English society. This view perceives the Friends' pacifism as an attempt to alleviate their persecution by reassuring the state that Quakers were peaceful people who need not be feared, nor persecuted It ais0 regards pacifism as a syrnptom of the Friends' submissive
6-87 Cambridge Journal, pp. 398-403; Braithwaite, Second Penod, p. 9; Capp, p. 199.
a8Reay, "Quakers and 1659," 10% retreat from politicai and military activity following their discouraging experience with
the interregnum governrnent~.~~This position requires examination. Certainiy, their
declaration of pacifism was issued to convince the English govemment and society that
there was no possibility of a Quaker revoit, and thus no need for the Friends'
suppression, but their conviction against participation in warfare developed as a result of
convictions that had been fonning among Friends prior to 166 1.
The Friends7 statement read in part:
...the Spirit of Christ which leads us into al1 Tnith, will never move us to fight and war against any man with outward Weapons, neither for the Kingdom of Christ, nor for the Kingdoms of this World ...the Kingdom of Christ, God will exdt according to his promise, and cause it to grow and flourish in righteousness... do those that use any Weapon to fight for Christ, or for the establishing of his Kingdom or Govemment.. .we deny.. .as for the Kingdoms of this World, we cannot covet hem, much less cm we fight for them; but we do eamestly desire and wait, that (by the Word of God7spower, and its effectua1 operation in the hearts of men) the Kingdoms of this World may become the Kingdoms of the Lord, and of his Christ... whereas al1 manner of Evil hath been falsely spoken of us, We hearby speak forth in the plain Tmth of ow hearts, to take away the occasion of that offence, that so we king innocent, may not suffer for other men's offences.. .6"
In this declaration, Quakers asserted that there was no possibility that the Spirit would
agCole, "Quakers and Revolution" 42,4748; Hill, World Turned U~sideDom, p. 194; Reay, Ouakers and Revolution, pp. 43, 12 1.
6mGeorgeFox, Declaration From the Harmless and lnnocent Peo~leof God, 166 1, F 1789, pp. 2-3. This paper was signed by Fox and eleven other leading Friends. 206 lead them to commit acts of violence,6" and that the Kingdom would corne through
God's life transforming work within persons rather than through revolution. While they affirmed their tmt that the Kingdom would yet emerge, as true Spintualists they disavowed the use of "outward" instruments to bring it about. Friends insisted that their uweapons are spiritual, and not carnal, yet mighty through Go& to puliing down the strongholds of sin and Satan, who is author of Wars, Fightings, Murder, and Plots; and our Swords are broken into Plow-shares ...Therefore we cannot leam War any more.. .lama1 Weapons, we do deny, who have the Sword of the Quaker waffare would be entirely spintuai. Furthemore, while the dectaration emphasized that
Fnends would not seek the govemment's overthrow through violence, it also stated that
Quakers would not fight against any kingdom of this world, nor fight in support of any kingdom, either. This reflected the Frie~ds'caution about supporting any govemment of
England during a time in which so many govemments were quickly nsing and falling.
As noted in Chapter Five above, Fnends were not at al! certain that the monarchy's
Restoraîion would be a permanent political settlement anymore than any of the other recent govenunents had been. It seemed wise to remain neutral and avoid facing
65'Thisstatement was to end the ciifferences among Friends regarding the sword's use, and refute the Antinomian position that the Spirit might lead one believer to take one course, while leading another to take an opposite position. Fox seems to have accepted this Antinomian approach regarding warfme miil the end of 1659, when he emerged hmhis period of uncertainty to cal1 dl Friends to disengage fiom the Interregnum govemment and Amy. It seems that this belief in the Spirit's consistency and predictability was becoming stronger arnong Friends as they worked to deveIop a more clearly defined standard of behaviou. and a unified public witness. See Barbour and Frost, p. 46.
6S2~0~Declaration, pp. 5, 8. 207 repercussions for having supporteci yet another temporary govemment as they had that of the Rump in 1659. Evidentty, the Quakers had corne to feel that if it was wrong and futile to overthrow one govemment through violence, it was no more meritorious or useN to support another with violence.
As noted in Chapter Three above, approximately a hundred Quakes, including
Nayler and Fox the Younger, had served in the Pariiamentary forces. However, as early as 1657, some Quakers who had ken seMng in the Army and navy had felt led to adopt a pacifist position, and General Monck had been informed in the Iate 1650s that many
Quaker soldiers would be mlikely to fight in the event of rnilitary action due to their principles. The prominent Quaker William Dewsbury and the fomer Leveller John
Lilburne, who joined the Friends in 1655, had espoused pacifism well before 166 1 .6" In
1654, Anthony Pearson had informed Cromwell that there were to be no more wars, for
God7speople were "redeemed out of al1 earthly things and that nature whence wars
During the Interregnurn, a justice asked the Quaker Thomas Morford what he would do if the Spirit ordered him to kill. Morford replied unequivocally that the Spirit
"leads out of m~rder?"~There were a number of Quakers who refused to perform militia se~cein Maryland, Rhode Island, and England between 1657 and 1659.~'~In
653PeterBrock, The Ouaker Peace Testimoy 1660 to 19 14 (York: Sessions Book Trust, 1WO), pp. 18- 19.
"Swarthmore MSS, 3:34, ''Anhony Pearson to George FOK" July 18, 1654.
rthmore MSS, 4: 176, 'Thomas Morford to George Fox-" This is undated, but the text indicates that it was written during Oliver Cromwell's regime. 208
1659, Quakers in Barbados were king imprisoned for refusing to bear amis, and for declining even to pay a fine in lieu of rnilitary seMce? Pearson was among those
Quakers who had served as a comrnissioner in the militia during the Booth Rising of
1659, but he wodd not Wear a sword himself '*' This suggests that Pearson was willing to accept a rnilitary position, so long as he did not commit violence. Pearson is cited as a prime example of one of the more militant Fn'ends. 659 The fact that even Pearson was so uncornfortable with the sword's use indicates that there were substantial pacifia tendencies arnong Friends even in 1659 at the height of their involvement with the secular govemment Pearson's rather punling position on the sword indicates the
Friends' confusion regarding the use of force, and helps to explain Fox's perplexity and distress when the events of 1659 brought this complex and unresolved question to the forefiont.
Quaker preachers had gained substantial experience in practising nonviolence when they refiised to retaliate or defend themselves as angry crowds or individuals attacked them. The Friends' declaration of 166 1 reminded readers that when Quakers had been assailed by violent pesons: "We never resisted them, but to them our hair, backs, and cheeks have been ready.'- In his Journal, Fox recalled that when a soldier
6"~sabe1Ross, Margaret Fell: Mother of Ouakerism (London: Longmans, Green and Company, 1949)' p. 8 1.
658~ngIe,First Amone FriendS, p. 172.
65%eay,Quakers and Revolution, p. 88.
Tex, Deçlaration, p. 5. 209 had drawn his sword to protect Fox and other Fnends from a hostile throng, Fox "catched hold of his hand that his rapier was in and bid him put up his sword again if he would corne dong with me.*' The Quakers' belief that one would further the Kingdom7s progress by accepting suffering derthan by retuming violence for violence was not a concept that was newly acquired in 166 1, for Nayler had written of it in his publication,
The Lamb's War, in 1658. There Nayler indicated that he aiso considered spiritual weapons rather than carnal weapons essential for the accomplishment of spiritual pur pose^.^^^ in a statement to Fnends that is reputed to have been his last words, Nayler attested: 'There is a Spirit that I feel that delights to do no evil, nor to revenge any wrong. .. lts hope is to outlive al1 wrath and contention, and to weary out al1 exaltation and cruelty This sentiment implied that Nayler had extended his belief conceming fighting the Lamb's War by suffering to adopt a position of non-retaliation and nonviolence that would have been consonant with a pacifist position. Like Fox, Nayler had applied the Spiritualist theology to his millenarian theology so that both men insisted physical or "carnal" means could not accomplish the spiritual goals of the Kingdom. It remains uncertain whether Nayler would have supported a pacifist position had he lived until 166 1. but his writings offer no support of any warfare except of the Lamb's war that employed spirituai weapons such as the patient endurance of sufTering.
"'~ambrideekumal, p. 129. Readers wodd certainly have seen the analogy between Fox and the soldier and Christ and St. Peter.
M2Seepp. 1 1 8- 19 above.
M3includedin Nayler, What the Possession, 1676, p. 84. 210
Fox's personal refusal to serve in the militasr in 165 1 has been noted. Although
Fox would not employ force himself, it took him severaI years to develop a clearly pacifist position. This lent an uncertainty and inconsistency to the development of
Quaker pacifi~m,~which has been confusing to historians. Hill contended that Fox had not adopted pacifism until the Restoration, and that his later statements that he had rejected military service in 165 1 due to pacifist principles "must be retrospective mental adjust~nent."~~~However, in 1654, Fox had already attested in a letter to Cromwell that his "weapons are not camal but spirinial," and that he rejected -'the canying, or drawing of any camal sword against any or against you, Oliver Cromwell, or any man." He insisted that he did not use carnal weapons, "but am fiom those things dead?j6 Here
Fox informed Cromwell not only that he would not fight against him, which he might have been expected to Say to allay suspicion, but also that he considered himself spiritually above the use of physical force or instruments. It may be surmised that this would not have seemed an orthodox or an entireiy pleasing statement to the ceiebrated
Puritan wurior. From the movement's begiming, Fox had explained that the weapons of
God's "army7' were "not carnal, but spirit~al.'*~Still, while Fox had embraced pacifism for himself quite early, he had felt unable to advise othen to follow his example. In
6fJJosephT. Culliton, ed., Non-violence - Central to Christian Spirituality Perspectives From Scrioture to the Presenl (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1982), pp. 128-29.
G5~ill,Experience of Defeat, p. 1 60.
M6SwarthrnoreMSS, 2:2, "'Answer to the Protector," George Fox, 1654.
667Fo~Newes, 1653, Title Page. 1658, Fox wrote to Quakers who were se~ngin the rnilitia that: "There is something in
the thing, you keeping in the power of the Lord over dl other powea ...be faithful to the
Lord God as you feel and as you are moved..keep fke to bear testimony to the good and
against evil. " However, Fox also cautioned Friends about the deceit and ambition
evident within militia circles, and warned thern not to go "running into places" and doing
%e wills of men, for there is the danger."668
Before the end of 1659, Fox turned fiom this position and strongly counselled al1
Friends to join him in his rejection of "carnal" weapons, and to fight for the Kingdom's
establishment with spiritual weapons 0n1y.~~~He admonished "he that killeth with the
sword, must perish with the sword-..Ftiends take heed of blending yourselves with the outward powers of the earth?'' This statement indicated his concem that Friends avoid
both participation in warfare, and participation with the current political powen. Even before the Restoration, the Friends' discouragernent at the ineffectiveness of political and military involvement for advancing the Kingdom was predisposing leaders Iike Fox toward wi thdrawal fiom government and mi 1itary associations. 67 ' The fact that Friends
668SwarthmoreMSS, 7: 157, "George Fox to Fnends at Bristol," 1658. Fox apparently then considered it possible that Friends could be directed by God to serve in the military, so long as they were carefüi to remain faithful and maintain their witness as God led them.
66YSwarthmoreMSS, 2: 103, 1659. See p. 179 above.
"Tox,Works, Vol. W, 1659, p. 178.
67'~eay,"Quaken and 1659," 105. Hill also identified pacifism as a "product of growing disillusionment" among Friends that was occurring even before 1659. See Hill, Experience of Defeat, p. 16 1. 212 had been seeking Fox's advice on whether to becorne involved militarily in support of the govemment indicates that pacifisrn was already nascent arnong Fnends, or their defense of the estab1 ished govemment against insurrectionists wodd not have been an issue for them at dl. Since by the end of the Interregnum Quakers had declared politicai neutrality in the face of politicai instability and their disappointment with the govemment, it seemed best to them to assert that in the future they wodd fight neither for nor against any contender for control of the state. In 1660, Fox had written that
"Christ's Kingdom is not set up by carnaf weapons," and that those who employed such weapons "are not Christ's servants... for Chnst's Kingdom is fought for with spirihial weapow in patience and sufferings." Those who killed were not of Christ's minci, way, or spirit.672Clearly, the public declaration of pacifism which Friends offered in 166 1 did not represent a sudden alteration in Quaker beliefs, but indicated the direction in which the Quaker movernent had been going by the conclusion of the Interregnum.
It mut be recognized that it was not necessary for Friends to daim to be pacifists to disavow their interest in insurrection. Most Chnstians are neither pacifists nor revolutionaries about tu overthrow their govemment with violence. There is a good deal of middle ground between these two extreme positions which Friends could have claimed The Quakers' statements of loyalty to the newly arrived King wodd have been as credible to England's rulers and people as a statement of their pacifism was, and a pronouncement of their submission to the state would have been adequate if that is ail the Fnends had intended by their declaration of pacifism. However, they intended to convey something quite different
The Quakers' public espousal of pacifism should not be interpreted as a
submissive retreat From political concem and protest at the outset of the Restoration.
Pacifism is not an act of submission to one's govemment or an abandonment of protes
Those who submit to the govemmeot will serve the govemment militady when required
to do so, and will not embrace pacifism and refuse rnilitary service. Governments do not
ordinxily appreciate persons who have pacifist convictions, and are more liable to
prosecute them for their refisal to serve the state by participation in warfare than to
credit them with submission to the state. The history of the Quakers makes this evident.
Decades later, Fox wrote how Friends had been suffenng persecution for not serving in
the trained bands, and for not taking up weapons in the na~y.~'~He also described the
£king and physical abuse of Quakers in Jamaica for refhing to bear arms while they
served on the night ~atch.~'''The Friends' refusal to participate in the militia became
one of the major reasons for their prosecution after the ~estoration.~"If the Friends had
adopted a pacifist position merely out of political convenience and fiom a desire to avoid
persecution, this position would not have been retained when it Ied to their suffenng.
Pacifism betokens a defianf albeit nonviolent, challenge to the state and its
rnilitary goals. A pacifist stance insinuates that the govemment does not ment one's
673~oXHow the Lord Did Raise UD Fnends, p. 27.
674~~i1W. Sharman, ed, No More But Mv Love: Letters of George Fox (London: Quaker Home Senice, 1980), Letter of 1675, p. 99. 2 I4 military service, and a governrnent wodd be unlikely to be pleased to hear a statement which implied that one's cornmitment to pacifism was the reason one would not seek to overthrow that govemment through violence. A governrnent would hope for a more enthusiastic affirmation of loyalty than that nie Quakers' assertion that they would not fight for the Kingdom of Chna or for the kingdoms of the world was not rnerely a statement renouncing insurrection, but was also a statement promising to refuse military
-ce to the Kingdom of England England's national church had regarded the
Anabaptists' pacifism as dangerously seditious, and had condemned pacifisrn as heretical in its articles of faith since 1563. The English church insisted that Christians were to use the sword when they were ordered to do so by the civil g~vernrnent.~~~More recently,
Thomas Edwards' extensive catalogue of heresies, Gangmena, had identified pacifism as one of the many deplorable heresies infesting the nation? Since pacifism was a doctrine that long had been considered antagonistic to government and to tme
Christianity, the Quakers' declaration of pacifism should not be regarded as a statement of submission to the govemment. The declaration of 166 1 did not deny that Quakers anticipated another Gngdorn's arrival, or that they would struggle for its establishment, or that they would continue to resist the unjust laws of the state. They only denied that they would fight with 'outward weapons." Fnends were not disavowing their millenarian expectations or their social protest, but only the use of physical force. This was not the end of Quaker defiance or of the Lamb's War, but only a statement that their
676Brock,p. 4.
6n'Iliomas Edwards, Ganmaena 1646, E228, p. 34. 315 means of fighting wodd not include violence. Indeed, their declaration was a promise to de@ the govenunent nonviolently. Even if Quakers protested the actions of the govenunent as they sought the establishment of the true Kingdom they need not be feared as insurrectionists, for they would not in any case attempt to correct matters hy force. Pacifism thus became another means whereby Friends expressed their subversive yet nonviolent position toward the govemment Just as Quakers committed nonviolent acts of subversion and noncornpliance toward the national church by continuing to refuse it their attendance and tithes, so Quakers would refuse to cornply with the govemment when they believed that it transgressed God's will to do so. Both before and after the
Restoration, the Friends provided ample evidence of this to England's nilers.
In part, the Friends were suspected of having a tendency toward insurrection because they would not swear oaths, including the oath of allegiance to the govemment.
Since Quakers would not take an oath afirming their political loyalty, they hoped a declaration of pacifism would be an acceptable disavowai of treasonous intentions. 678
They linked their pacifism and their refuçal to swear aliegiance by attesting: "He that hath commanded us that we shall not swear at all, Matthew 5:34, hath also Commanded us, That we shall not kill, Matthew 5. So that we can neither kill men, nor swear for, nor against them."679 In this, they sought to explain that their refusal to swear oaths in support of the government was rooted in the same obedience to Christ which kept them fiom insurrection against the govemment. Thus, the fortihlde with which Fnends were
678Bauman,pp. 1 12- 13, 1 17.
679F0x, Declaration, p. 4. 216 refusing to swear the oath was evidence of the determination with which they would reject participation in armed revolt. As Quakers in their tendency toward perfection extended the pnnciple of not swearing to a refusal of even civil oaths, they extended the
Christian principle of love for enemies to a total rejection of warfare.
In their statements of pacifism, however, the Friends were not abandoning an earlier endorsement of violent revolution. In spite of the stridency and militant metaphors of the Quaker preachers, Quaker leaders had not advocated armed insurrection. Fox and Howgill had explained that the sword the Quakers wielded in the
Lamb's war was "thewords of his [Christ's] mouth," and not the outward sword of violence.680The Fnends had aiways believed that the Kingdom wouid come as the divinely inspireci proclamation of the tmth effected the world's conversion to the Light's guidance. They had not expected the Kingdom to come through the Quaken' violent overthrow of the govemment The only occasion when Quakers had participated in rnilitaq action during the Interregnurn was in the Booth rebellion of 1659, when some
Friends had acted to defend the curent government against a counter-revolution from an even more conservative faction. There is no evidence of any Quaker rising against the government during the Interregnum."' However, in their desire to assist the divine transformation of the world, Quakers had ken open to the possibility that God would act in part through the govemment and militaty to establish the Kingdom. For this reason, many Quakers had continued to serve in the New Mode1 Army dlconservative officers
voxmd Howgill, Papist's Strentzth, 1658, p. 75.
"'Cole, "Quakers and Revolutioq" 4 1. 2 17 dismissed them as subversive radical^,^ and Fox had at fim allowed that there was
"something in the thing" when Friends served in the militia Friends saw the Army as an agent of religious toleration and radical social ref~rm,~~and, therefore, during the
Intenegnum they had looked to it and called upon it to accomplish God's purposes Fox reminded the Amy officers of the former days when God had blessed their sincenty with military victories. He asserted that if they had not fallen into selfish ambition, God wodd have used the English military to rid the world of religious tyranny. A faithfkl
English Army wouid have ended oppression throughout the world by overtaking Spain and overthrowing its inquisition, conquering Rome and forcing the pope to end dl
Roman Catholic penecution, and then moving on to vanquish Turkey and I~lam.~"Fox assured the Anny leaders that if they would use the sword to punish the wicked rather than to persecute the righteous, they could still march on to an international victory for
Goda* Clearly, like the Puritans, Fox believed that England had a special role in God's
682Reay,Ouakers and Revolution, p. 42.
"3Hill, "Quakers and Revolution," 170.
mFifth Monarchists also petitioned the governrnent to launch an invasion of Rome and the Turkish Empire. See Capp, pp. 67, 151.
685GeorgeFox, To The Council of Officers of the Amy, 1659, F 1955, pp. 1-3,708. Fox had written in this vein to Oliver Cromwell in the previous year, when he had infomed the Protector that if only he had "ken faithful" he would have ruled Western Europe, defeated the Turks, and "the pope should have withered." See George Fox, "To Protector," 1658, in Edward Burrough, Good Council, p. 26. 218
plan to MerChrist's Kingdom throughout the worIci,= and at that point he dl1felt
that this plan could be assisteci by military conquest He had not yet corne to extend his
own refusa1 to fight to a univenal principle against dl war. However, when Fox at last
called upon Friends to share his pacifism, he insisted: -Triends everywhere, who are
dead to all carnal wea pons...stand in that which takes away the occasion of m...which
saves men's lives, and destroys none ...to bear and cany camai weapons to fight with, the
men of peace ...they cannot act in such things under the several power~."~~~It has been
suggested that Fox may have believed, as some Anabaptists di4 that those who lived
outside of Christ's perfect will anyway could bear the sword and so fdfil God's
purp~ses,~but Fox did not indicate this position in his writings. It is clear that he demanded that fellow believers abandon al1 mcipation in Mare.
Nevenheless, Fox and other Quakers did not becorne totaily consistent in their pacifism. Although they rejected warfare, they recognized that use of the civil sword was
necessary for the government to serve its function of enforcing appropriate Iaws. A repudiation of the goverment's use of the sword for law enforcement would have required either the adoption of anarchism dong with pacifism, or a total separation of believers fiom al1 political activity and concem. Quaken did not consider government and law enforcement evil, but of God. As noted in Chapter Five above, while they
686WilliarnHaller, Libertv and Refonnation in the Puritan Revolution (New York: Columbia University Press, 1955), pp. 298-99.
687F0~Work~, Vol. W, 1659, pp. 168-69. 319 ceased their attempt to form a working alliance with any goverment by the end of 1659, they did not withdraw entirely From plitical fiairs and offices. Quakers like Fox retained a concem for social justice, and attempted to baiance their belief in both peace and justice. Since the maintenance of justice and the achievement of social reform within society would require the use of the magistrate7ssword, such force was considered necessary. When Quakers founded a colony in Pemsylvania in the 1680s- they administered a political state in which the death penalty was inflicted for murder and treason. Quakers thus made a distinction between the sword which God had ordained the govemment to bear against malefactors, and the sword of warfare that was of fallen h~rnanity.~~~Fox continued to stress that the magistrate's sword was ordained of God to rehnevildoer~.~~ Thus, the Quakers' paci fism was moderated by their intense desire to involve themselves in the political realm in the hope of accomplishing
God's will in the world, rather than to withdraw from the political structures in ineffective self isolation. Evidently, the Quakers' pacifism did not prohibit the use of force which was not life threatening, either. In 1670, a clergyman who attempted to hold an Anglican service in the Friends' meetinghouse on Gracechurch Street in London as he had been ordered was surrounded, seized, bruised, and forced to depart by his unwilling
Quaker audience.69'
indeed, a minority of Friends did not come to accept pacifism at all. Some
68')Br~k,pp. 17,93-94, 102.
6WGeorgeFox, Caesar's Due Rendered to Him, 1679, F1753, p. 20.
"'Extracts From State Papzs, Jdy 3, 1670, p. 3 14. 220
Quakers attempted to have the 166 1 declaration withdrawn, and in 1662 some repudiated
a statement on pacifisrn which Fe11 had written? It remained necessary for Fox to
continue admonishing Quakers: "Friends, keep over al1 the bustlings, and wars, and
strife, and the talkers of such things among the sons of Adam in the fall.' Christ led
people to "break their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pnming hooks, that
they shall not learn war anym~re.'%~-'There were incidents in which some Friends
participated in rebellions in England and in warfare in the colonies throughout the
rernainder of the seventeenth century? Eight Quaken were involved in the Kaber Fùgg,
or Northem Plot in 1663,"' and approximately twelve were involved in Monmouth's
rebellion in 1685.6%At lest one Quaker publicly asserted that he would use a sword if
God required hirn to do so? but it had become a rninority position among Friends that
God might require this. Since these nurnben represent a very small rninority within the
movement, it is clear that Fox's pacifism was becoming adopted by the overwhelming
majority of Quakers by the 1660~.*~
69%xtractsFrorn State Papers, Nov. 25, 1662, p. 153.
6g3GeorgeFox, Three General Epistles to be Reaa 1664, F1937, p. 4.
*Mullett. pp. 90-96.
"j~ichaelLA. Thompson, "The Post-Restoration Peace Testimony: Quakers and the Kaber Rigg Plot," in Mullef p. 158.
6%~i11,"'Quakers and Revolutio~"1 77.
b97~xtra~tsFroni State Papen, Feb. 2 1, 1665, p. 237.
@'Richard L. Greaves, Enemies Under His Feet: Radicals and Nonconformists in Britain. 1664- 1677 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1!BO), pp. 136-37-247; 32 1
Fox the Younger was not among the twelve who signed the declaration of January
166 1, but there is nothing remarkable about this. He was one of the many Quakers imprisoned then:" and therefore was simply unavailable for the signing. Furthemore, he was not so prominent among Frïends that he would have been an essential signer.
Only three of the Quakers mentioned in this dissertation, the elder Fox, Hubberthorn, and
Howgill were signatories. Even Dews bury, who had been a firm paci fist even earlier than this, did not happen to be one.'"" Reay insinuated that Fox the Younger's strident correspondence with the King indicated that he would have been unlikely to support the declaration of pacifism.70' This wodd imply that pacifisrn was not liable to be adopted by those who challenged the govemment, which is quite incorrect, for Fox the Younger made his opposition to warfare one of the issues on which he confionted England's rulers. Not only did Fox the Younger take a cntical attitude toward war, but he went so far as to protest against it to the govemment. in 1659, he had admonished the govemment that its recent wars had not been for the peace, safety, and well-being of the nation, but rather for pride. He asserted that nilers would find ways of preventing war if they followed God's guidance, and that govemments which did not do so would experience divine "breaking, breaking, ove-ng, and yet overturning." He instructed
Secrets of the Kingdom: British Radicals From the Popish Plot to the Revoiution of 1688-1 689 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992), pp. 335-36.
699 See p. 53 above.
700Carnbrid~eJournal, p. 403.
"'Reay, Ouaken and Revolution, p. 109. the Army leaden to "seek peace," and not go to war "in your own wills, for to get younelves a name, and to get ithe enemy7s]earthly Treasures." God wodd not "prosper you therein."702 While this was a strong indictment of the govemment7srecent use of war, he did not at that point state that war could never be God's will, or that there were no justifiable occasions for war. In 1660, however, Fox the Y ounger c learl y stated: "1 cannot fight with any creature, but ...with the spiritual wickedness, though it be in high places."703 Here Fox the Younger asserted that he had a nonviolent but confrontational prophetic mission to the govemrnent and society. He spoke in language similar to that of the 166 1 declaration of paci fism when he explained to the King that he would not plot either for or against Charles, or anyone else. Such a statement of neutrality toward one's monarch did not indicatz subrnissive loyalty and obedience. He also denied that the believers7 deliverance would corne through the "carna1 ~word,"'~and 1i ke Nayl er insisted that the Lamb's enemies were not to be fought with *'carna1 ~ea~ons."'*~In his opposition to war and violence, he refused to celebrate the nation's military victories, and insisted that people should stop "rejoicing in the destroying one of an~ther."~~Fox the Younger's pacifism was consonant with his protest against the government's actions,
- 702Fo~the Younger, Honest. Upneht, pp. 6, 14.
703 George Fox the Younger, Honest. Plain Downrinht Dea ling With E~iscopalmen and Presbyterians 1660, F2005, p. 4.
7w~oxthe Younger, Noble Salutation, 1660, p. 19.
"'~eorge Fox the Younger, Two Epistle~,1663, F20 15, p. 4.
706NobleSalutation, pp. 23-24. and did not correspond to a decrease in militant prophetic witness to the state.
Opposition to warfare became an issue on which Friends made protests to the govemment, and for which Friends sufTered prosecution from govenunent. The Friends' pacifism helped to perpetuate their alienation from the govemment and their antagonistic relationship with the state. It did not entail their submission to or their cornpliance with the civil authorities.
QUAKERS AND FIFTH MONARCHISTS
As indicated at the outset of this chapter, the Quaker and Fifth Monarchist movements were remarkably sirnilar in some significant ways. It wouid be incorrect to view the seventeenth centwy Quaken as pacifists in spiritual withdrawal from the world and its political strife, and their Fifth Monarchist contemporaries as violent revolutionaries bent on insurrection and political assassination. Very few Fifth
Monarchists ever felt Ied to rise up against the goverment in the name of King Jesus, while some Quakers did participate in rebellions after the Restoration. Although there was a great diflerence between the Quakers' Spiritualist theology and the Baptist or
Independent beliefs of the Fi& Monarchists who were usually Calvinists, both movements shared similar social goals as stated in Chapter Five above, and emphasized the involvement of the saints in establishing the Kingdom on earth. Aithough there was nothing unique about many of their demands for social reform, since they reflected a 224
tradition of concems that had remained unresolved for many years, Quakers aud Fifth
Monarchists were confused in the public mind, and were feared greatly as dangerous
threats to social and political stability. Many Fi& Monarchists were like Quakers also in their emphasis upon inmediate divine revelation through dreams and visions.707Like a
Quaker seer, the Fifth Monarchist prophetess Anna Trapnel wmte of experiencing an eleven &y trame in which she had a vision of Christ's coming reign, and of a proud and deceitfùl oppressor who looked like a Iarnb but behaved like a Bea~t.'"~Fifth
Monarchists and Quakers both recognized a role for prophetic women to preach the divine message.7@'Quakers and Fifth Monarchists alike sought a theocratic govemment
in which Christ would reign through the people he transformed and guided. As in the
Quaker millennium, in the Fifth Monarchy there would be ffeedom fiom oppressive human law, and the will of Chna would be implernented.7'u Many Fi fth Monarchists expected that Christ would descend from heaven to carry out a persona1 r~le,~"and called believers to prepare political conditions for his by rernoving present
707Capp, pp. 34, 168-71, 183, 185.
708~nnaTrapnel, Stranee and Wonderhl News hmWhitehail, 1654, T2034, pp. 5-6. AI1 but the mod unsubtle of readers would have recognized this as a reference to Cromwell.
709Capp, p. 174.
710~illiamAspinwall, A Bief Description of the Fi fth Monarchv, 1653, A4004, pp. 10-13.
"'~ohnCame, The Time of the En& 1657. C443, p. 14. e~ils.'~~However, others concurred with many Quakers that Christ wodd not retum penonally to establish the millennium, but would dethe Kingdom through his
The plots of some Fi flh Monarchists to assassinate ~romwell '" did not have a parallel among the Quakers, however. The fact that Quakers were generally more prosperous than most Fifth Monarchists seems a likely Factor in their differing propensities to insurrection, since it was only a very few of the more economically distressed Fifth
Monarchists who plotted an abortive rebellion in 1657, and participated in the uprising of
Januaiy 166 1. The rest limited their violence to strident verbal denunciations of the government, and awaited a clearer sign from God that it was time to rise than they had yet ~bserved.~''
Like most Quakers, most Fifth Monarchists went no Merthan to assault society and the government with strident verbal denunciations. One contemporary observer differed £tommany who feared Fifth Monarchist violence by sîating insighrfully that the
Fifth Monarchists' "expressions are more offensive than their intentions, their mouths worse than their rnind~."~'~Verbally bellicose as they were, only a small rninonty from
7'2~ohnRogers, Samir Doomes-Dav Drawine Niph, 1654, R 18 15, p. 136.
7'3~spinwall,pp. 4-5; Hill, Experience of Defeat, pp. 52-53.
7 l-i Capp, p. 173.
715B.S. Capp, "Thomas Vemer," Diction- of British Radicals, Vol. iII, pp. 268-69. Capp suggested that Thomas Venner (c. 1608-6 1) and his small group of supporters were unique arnong Fi* Monarchists in their openness to the use of force to prepare the way for the Kingdom.
Experience of Defeat,
227 continue to meet even under the threat of persec~tioq'~and to accept the consequential suffiering. He identified the Restoration as God's judgrnent upon a sinfui nation that had wasted its God-given opporhuiities during the Interregnum, and as a restoratîve medicine for the nonconfonnist churches which had becorne selfish and unfaithful. The appropriate response to recent events was to recognize the hand of God in them, repent, and cooperate with the Restoration governent as far as the will of God allowed
Nevertheless, he still held out the encouragement that scriptural signs pointed to the imminent coming of King esu us.^' Powell also benignly adrnonished readen that it would be wrong for them to wish the destruction of the simen for the sake of their own safety and vindication. "
Mer the failure of various desperate and futile uprisings and plots against the
Restoration governent corn 1663 to 1685, in whieli a few Fifth Monarchists and
Quakers partkipated, the Fiflh Monarchist movement gradually declined and cmbled in disco~ragernent~~The Quaker movement sunived as Friends continued to hope for the corn ing of the Kingdom and to seek its advance, but they were willing to live without the fulfilment of their millennial hopes for the present. For a n'me, especially in 1659,
Quakers had stmggled between mistihg in purely spiritual means of bnnging in the socially just millennium, and experimenting with political and military means as well.
-- -- -
Tavasor Powell, The Bird in the Cage, 166 1, P3078, p. 9.
n'~owell,"A Word in Season," in Bird in the Caee, pp. 9, 12-14,22,34-35,47.
7zPowell, "Scriptural Observations," in Bird in the Caee, p. 86.
72%app,pp. 22 1-25; Moore, p. 80. 228
By the end of that year, Fox Ied them to decide that attempting to work within a political system dominated by the unregenerate who would not follow the guidance of the Spirit was entirely self defeating. With the exception of a few individuais, Friends did not attempt to merthe Kingdom through insurrection, but decided with Fox that even participating in the defense of any established govemment with physicai violence was con- to God's intentions. CHAPTER SEVEN
EGALITPLRIAN PROTEST AM)PRACTICE
nie Friends' Spirituaiism, perfectionism, and eschatology led them to oppose the deeply entrenched hierarchical values and conventions that marked seventeenth century
English society, and to advocate a greater measure of social equal ity. The Quaken'
Spiritualkt perspective which infonned them that God's Spirit was present within every penon showed them a kinship and an equality among al1 humans whatever their social rank, gender, or econornic condition. Their perfectionism predisposed them to seek the full realization of moral social goals, such as the relief and employment of the poor, which were consonant with the values and concems of English society but were not well attained by it. The Friends' eschatology assured them that Christ's Kingdom of perfect justice was emerging, and that they could assist its arrivai. The traditional relationships within society and the customs which had govemed England in the past were being ovemimed, and Quakers would soon be the victorious harbingen of a new age which they were helping God usher in through their faithful fighting of the Lamb's War against evil. Their eschatological faith allowed them to envision a new world in which their aspirations would be achieved through preaching that was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and encouraged them to preach urgently and codidently for the Kingdom's imminent appearance. Eschatological language provided them wïth a vocabulary of confrontation for expressing their anger against oppression, and for warning oppressors to repent and so escape divine judgments. The Engl ish apocalyptic tradition also enco uraged them 230
with the belief that God would begin his transformation of the world in his especially
favoured England, which would have augmented their expectations and increased their
resolve to be worthy prophets of the coming ~ingdorn?~
Quakers protested defiantly against the contemporv inequality that ranked dl
persons according to their econornic status, parentage and gender, and which was
constant1y evident in society' s govemance, customs and relationshi ps. Through the
Friends' own customs of speech and behaviour, and their more egalitarïan perspective of
women and the poor, they countered inequality and stniggled to bring others toward the
acceptance of social justice. Quakers employed language that was designed to conFront
the proud members of the elite who sought honour from their social idenors. Quaker
men refiised to perform the customary deferential act of removing their hats before social
superion, and al1 Friends granted titles of honour to no one, but used the familiar terms
of address "thee" and "thou" to whomever they spoke." Fox the Younger expressed his
displeasure that a Quaker petition to Parliament was ignored merely because it did not
employ the customary salutation, "To the Right Honourable". He asserted that Friends
would not compromise God's will by using "flattering titles'? to accornplish any
"me Quakers' national meeting of April 1660 adopted the statement: "England is as a family of prophets, which must spread over dl the nations. ..out of which nation and dominion must go the spiritually-weaponed men to fight and conquer all nations, and bring them to the nation of God, that the Lord may be known to be the living God of nations, and His Son to reign, and His people [to bel one." See Braithwaite, Second Perioa p. 35 1.
NReay, Quakers and Revolution, p. 58; Kunze, pp. 169-70. 23 1
purpose? The eider Fox stated that titles such as Your worship, your majesty, your
lordshi p.. .reverend brother" were manifestf y blasphemous, since al1 honour, reverence,
worship and majesty were to be ascribed "%O God al~ne."~Fox hrther expressed his
egaiitarian sentiment when he wrote to the Army officen about their depamire fiom
radical goals for social equality which they had held earlier. He exclaimed: "'Mat a
dirty, nasty thing it would have been to have heard talk of a House of Lords" among the
Amy's leaders in the former days of their faithfiilne~s.'~~Fox would have disarmed the
ranks of the nobility and gentry, and taken fiom them the privilege of bearing arms that
traditionaily had been allotted the elite. He urged that only those who were in the
militaty or held another office that required the bearing of arms be allowed to do so. '*'
Nayler identified deferential speech, behaviours and titles which supported the
hierarchical structure of England and numired the pride of the social ly superior as satanic
customs that believers were to oppose as they fought the Lamb's War. He infonned
England's magistrates that if they demanded marks of social distinction they would soon experience such an outpouring of divine wrath that their king drowned with the
R6Fo~the Younger, "For the House of Commons Assembled in Parliament," August 1660, in True Relation, pp. 6-7.
mGeorge Fox, Friend! Who Art Called a Teacher, 1660, FI 823B. As others accused Quakers of idolatry due to the corollaries of the theology of divine inhabitation, the Friends levelled the same accusation at English society because of the language of deference that social custom demanded,
ng~~~To the Council of Office-, p. 7.
r'>Fox, Fi@-Nine Particulars, p. 12. Twenty-nine of these recomrnendations expressed concem for a more egalitan-ansociety or for relief of the poor. 332 proverbial millstone around their necks would be preferable?' Arguing that to bow before fellow humans was idolatry, Nayler rhetorically asked the nation's economic elite:
"Should we bow to your gold and silver lace, your costly apparel or earthly riches.y731
He merasserted that those who respected the rich but despised the poor sinned against
God's law which required that one love every neighbour as oneselEn2 Nayler's
Spiritualist theology informed him that since God was present to some degree in al1 penons, none were to be oppressed however humble their rank. From Bridewell prison he wrote that instead of valuing persons according to their social status, &ers must be vigilant to see if "that measure of God in everyone is oppressed by any."733
The eider Fox stemly charged Friends not to compromise with evil by employing the language of social hierarchy. He insisted that those who demanded that their social inferion use the respecthl terni 'you" ta them exhibited a "selfish ...spirit" that --must be put dom with the Spirit, and condemned with the Light." Friends who conformed by saying "yod' to individuals outside of Quaker circles were hypocrites, for "none of the fiee bom may lose the tnie language, and speak half the world's language, and half of the people of God's ... let Friends be distinct fiom al1 the world in their language, in their ways, in 10ve."'~ Fox compared the elite who demanded gestures of social deference to
--
730 Nayler, "A Word to You Magistrates," 1655, in Works. p. 190. "' Nayler, Tothe Rulers," 1658, in Works, p. 405. '" Nayler, neRoyal Law and Covenant of Go& 1655. N308, p. 3.
n3~ayler,What the Possession, p. 30. This was first published in 1659.
7Y~0~Works. Vol. W, , 1660, p. 182. 233 the biblical Hamaan who built a gallows for those who would not bow before hirn, but in divine providence was hanged upon it himself Fox mocked the social distinctions that were based on wealth, obse~ngthat people "will seldom bow to the poor, or scrape a leg to a beggar, so if he hath got a feather in his hat and a few nbbons on his breec hes.. .then there's 'Your servant madarn, your servant sir, your humble servant, Mr. ' then scrape and curtsie and doffthe hat-""* Perhaps in mock bewilderment at the rage of the elite who could not bear the Quakers' refusal to pay them hat honour, Fox seemed to marvel how "a very hat confounds tl~ern."~~~He commented on the proud si~erwho was so stnuigely "full of fusl and madness if they speak thou to hirn ...the very word thou stri kes at his brow, and makes him to rage, and he is fond out of the li fe that gave forth the ~cnpture.""~Fox felt that the outrage of the elite at such a small thing as being deprived of the customary language of esteem indicated their defective spiritual state. Of course, the Quakers intended to confond the proud elite who sought to place themselves above their fellow humans. Fox had an eschatological warning for those who demanded the obeisance of othea, declaring: "nie mighty day of the Lord is coming... the fire of the Lord is corning, which will burn you a11 p.""^ As contemporaries realized, the earliest Quakers7speech and behaviour demonstrated their compelling desire for far
------
73sGeorge Fox, Serious People's Reasoning, 1659, F1900, pp. 5-6.
736~ox,Law of Go& p. 1.
"Fox, Concemine Good-Morrow, p. 6.
"*George Fox, The Trumpet of the Lord Sounded. 1654, F 1969, pp. 9- 10. 234 greater social equality than existed in seventeenth century EngIandn9 It also exhibited their certainty that Christ's Kingdom of justice was appearing with its accompanying judgments for the social ly elevated oppressors. This egalitarian and political 1y defiant language was especially evident when Fox and Nayler addressed the Protector as '"Thee,
Oliver Cr~rnwell,"~~and Fox the Younger addressed even the King as "Thee Charles
St~art~"~~'Fox the Younger argued against the hieruchical nature of English govemance by stating that since God was "no respecter of persons," the govemment must do justice for al1 "without respect of penons" as well." Quakers did not advocate complete equality between dl persons, however, since in the Kingdom they anticipated Chnst and his saints would mie the earth. Friends wanted a govemment composed of the economic and hereditary elite to be replaced by a govemment of those they considered the spintual elite and thus the rightful co-ders with Christ. The Friends' egditarian refisal to pay hat honou.and deferentid speech to society's elite was not unique to hem, but Fnends went so far as to insist upon this noncornpliance with social custom and to identiS it as
God7s Again, the Quaken' perfectionism predisposed them to embrace a more widely held principle and extend it to an ultimate conclusion, and to demand its uncom promising and consistent practice.
"%auman, pp. 23-25,4349,5456.
7?o~ and Nayler, To The. Oliver Cromwell.
74 1 Fox the Younger, Noble Salutation. Title Page.
742GeorgeFox the Younger, To the Called of Go& 1660, F20 13, p. 6.
7J3Cole,"Quakers and Revolution," 44. THE STATUS AND ROLE OF WOMEN
In seventeenth century Engiish society women were thought to be intellectually weaker and less rational than men. Manifestly intelligent women were considered dangerous, and liable to use their unusual abilities deceptively to accompiish evil purposes. The female preacher seemed to be the supreme figure of disorder, a usurper of the male role, and a sure indication that the world was being overtumed fiom its safe and proper conditi~n.'~The Quakers' eschatology informed them that God was indeed eng~gedin the process of overturning the world to bring it back to its original and hannonious state, and their Spintualist theology and eschatology alike taught them that the rninistry of men and women was equal. Women were acceptable as prophets since the Quakers' Spiritualism held that when Gd's people of either sex spoke his message it was not the human speakers prophesying through their own limited faculties, but Christ the inward Light speaking his immediate revelation through them. Therefore, the rninistry of Quaker women was not justified on the bais of their equality with males in regard to their human capabilities, but because God was speaking the divine word through them without hindrance hmthe speakers' inadequacies. Quakers did not disagree with the contemporary belief that women were inherently weaker in mind than men, but considered this no prob!em in spiritual matters since God used those who were weak or poor to carry out his work. Certainly, the role of Quaker women was superior to that of women in other religious groups or in seventeenth century English society generally. However, women of the Quaker circle ordinarily were not dlowed an egalitarian role within mariage and the home, since the traditional role of the husband as head over his wife was not aitered significantly in most Quaker marriages."'
Fox struggled against strong opposition fiom those Quakers who disapproved of the degree of influence women did have among Friends. He strenuously defended the establishment of separate business meetings for wornen in which they could use their abilities and have a voice in the Friends' developing administrative structures. Women's business meetings had fint been held in London in the 1650s to arrange for poor relief and care of the sick among Quakers; at Fox's initiative, these became widespread among
Friends throughout England over the next two decades.'* Separate business meetings were advantageous for women who felt uneasy about contributing their ideas in the presence of men. The meetings also afTorded women an opportunity to form relationships with one another, and tu employ their talents and insights for the benefit of the Quaker community. Since women had little opportunity to pamcipate in the most important business meetings of the Quaker circle, separate meetings for them provided important opportunities. However, having separate meetings for women did not lend them equal status with the men."' Had the Friends perceived a full equality between female and male believee, the establishment of separate business meetings for women
"'Catherine M. Wilcox, Handmaids of the Lord: Theolow and Women's Ministry in Seventeenth-Centuxy Endish Quakensm (Lewiston: The Edwin MeIIen Press, 1999, pp. 132, 166,220,226,236,239,244; Mack, pp. 173-74.
'6Chnstine Trevett, Wornen and Ouakerism in the Seventeenth Cent-/ (York: The Ebor Press, 1991). p. 85. wodd have been unnecessary. Full equality wodd have entailed women and men
sh*ng autho&/in the same business meetings and managing their faith community togeher. ~lfioughQuaker women were allowed to preach while they were under the
Spirit's direct inspiration, they did not share an administrative role with men equally. newomen7s meetings were subordinate to the men's meetings, and were responsible to
the men's meetings for their use of finances.7J8 Women's meetings were responsible for the moral and spiritual supe~sionof women, and the relief of the Quakers' poor, sick, prisoners, and orphans.74g Fox argued that women usually were more aware of the needs ofpoor families and widows than men were, and so wouid be of greater service in this
certaiply, poor relief was important work, but since work on behalf of the poor and il1 had generally been considered the women's province in English society,''' there was nothing radical or innovative about the Friends assigning such tasks to the women's meetings. neFriends' comparatively egalitarian position moved them pdyaway from the traditional perspective of women's capabilities and roles, but the Quaker movement did not detach itseif entirely fiom conventionai views regarding gender.
M~J,Quaker men felt that the women's meetings wielded altogether too much
Pwer and threatened male interests. Fox faced some of the greatest challenges to his
7m~eorgeFOX This 1s An Encouraeement to Ail the Women's Meeting, 1676, F 1934, pp. 79-80. 238 leadership over the issue of women's meetings, especially after he assigned to those meetings the responsibility for approving Friends' marriages in the 1670s. ''* This became a major focus of a schism that enrpted among Quakers during that decade.")
Many men objected to the fact that the women7smeetings were charged with approving mamages between Quakers, since this gave women power not only over other women, but also over the men who wished to many them. Men took offense that a meeting of women coulci require thern to appear before it to have their intended marriages sancti~ned~~Evidently, Fox's position regarding the rote of women was too egalitarian for many of his fellow Quakers, but he did not retreat fiom it. As opposition to his advocacy of women's meetings increased, his writings on the subject became more fiequent and polemical. Although Nayler's personal qualities drew many women into
Friendships with him,"' neither he nor Fox the Younger were special advocates of women's ministry as Fox was.
According to Fox's eschatological vision, the promised time of biblical prophecy had corne when God's Spirit wodd be poured out upon sons and daughters alike, enabling them al1 to prophesy. Fox took issue with those who insisted on following scripture's teaching that women must be silent in church. At an early date, he insisted that Christ was the same whether he was speaking through a male or a fernale believer,
7"lngle, p. 254.
7"~ilcox,p. 254.
'%ROSS, p- 285.
755BraiIsford,Ouaker Women, p. 253. 239 and so the gender of the preacher was insignificant '% Chna had "come to rei gn... in his sons and daughters." Fox reasoned tbat St Paul's words against women speaking in church applied only to women who spoke in 'Yhe deceived state," for that Apode also wrote of women prophesying in the early ch~rch.'~~Fox's eschatology Merinformed hm that since believers had entered into the restored prelapsarian state, the inequality between man and woman that had been precipitated by hurnanity's fa11 into sin was overtumed among God's redeemed people. rie pointed out that in paradise "man and woman were meet helpers" for one another and neither was subordinate. Fox noted that the biblicai wornen Sarah and Rebecca had advised their husbands on crucial matters, that Deborah had been a judge over ancient Israel, and that Hulda was a prophetess. He argued Merthat since women were the first to know of Christ's resurrection and tell others of it, women were the first messengen of the gospel. Fox observed that St. Paul numbered women among his coworkers, and that Chria had both male and female disciples. Although some "selfish and unholy men" were trying to discourage women ftom carrying out their work through women's meetings, biblical men had never told women that they were "more fitter to be at home to wash the dishes... but they did encourage them in the work and service of God." He contended, "Males and females are one in Christ Jesus." Since Fox was not a biblical literalist, his perspective on the role of wornen was not informed by the scriptural passages to which many pointed to justiQ the silence of women and their submission to men, He insisted: "If there was no scripture
7MGeorgeFox, The Wornen Learnine in Silence, 1655, F1991, pp. 2-3, 5.
7S7GeorgeFox, Concemine Sons and Dauehters, 1661, F1772, pp. 9-10. 240 for our men and women's meetings, Christ is sufficient, who restores man and woman up into the image of God, to be helps meet in the righteousness and holiness, as they were in before they fe11."~~~Redeemed women and men both had corne to partake of the divine image, and neither was limited by their previous fdlen state. The tmth that Chnn completely transformed persons of both sexes held more authority than any biblical passage.
Fox was strongly confrontational toward those who denied women a place in church govemment He informed women that "whosoever would hinder you in this work, it is the same serpent's spirit that led Adam and Eve into the fa11 frorn the work of
God, which now wouid keep you in the fall." Since women and men alike were redeemed perfectly, "every member of the church hath an office, and so every member is se~ceable."~~~Fox believed that women not only had a right to preach, but a dut.to do so if God called them. He insisted that "none may stand idle... out of the service... the power of the Lord God calls al1 into their duty" and minist~y.~~
Like Quaker men, Quaker women adopted the masculine tone, manner and vocabulary of biblical prophets as they decried sin and injustice. A woman who spoke for God seemed to embody the masculine image of the pr~phet.~~'It must be recognized
758~ox,This 1s Encouragement, pp. 9, 12, 15,34,36,57,7 1,74,85,89.
759~eorgeFox, Epistle to be Read in the Men and Women's Meetin=, 1677, F1809, pp. 2-3,5.
760Shannan,George Fox, Letter of 1666, p. 79.
766'Mack,pp. 133-34. 34 1 that by acting as prophets, Quaker women were not mereiy asserting themselves nor demanding a higher status. Speaking under divine inspiration was an act of submission to their Gdwhom they believed spoke through them. Ministry required acting according to God's will instead of their own desires, accepting the tasks God assigned
This often meant leaving home and fmily to cany out an itinerant ministry. Many
Friends expected their itinerant female ministen to remain celibate even in mamage so that the bearing of children would not hinder their ~ork.'~~Since Quakers of the seventeenth century perceived God in the traditional masculine images of the Father and the Son, the Quaker prophetess did not avoid the customary subse~enceto a male authority figure when she submitted herself and al1 her words and actions to the will of her deity. Instead of asserting themselves and their right to prophesy, female as well as male Quaker preachers were seeking to be passive agents through whom God issued the divine words without interference from their own will, reason, abilities, or ~irnitations.'~.'
However, since they believed that God was speaking through themselves, Quaker prophets of both sexes were very assertive toward other humans, including those who ranked higher in the social hierarchy. Submitting themselves to God as his spokespenons afforded Quaker women and men opportunities to be aggressive toward the rest of the human race, and fieed thern to offer prophetic cornmentary as they felt inspired.
762~argaretHope Bacon, Mothen of Feminism: The Story of Quaker Women in America (San Francisco: Harper and Row Publishers, 1986), pp. 3 1-32; Mack, p. 137.
763Ma~k,pp. 5,7,34, 142, 149. 242
Bomelyn Kunze has suggested that Fox's close friend Margaret Fell, whom he married in 1669, greatly influenced his egalitm-an perception of women and their appropriate role. Kunze also suggested that Fell was the real initiator of Quaker women's business meetings instead of FOX^^ While it is reasonable to believe that Fell and Fox influenced one another and while Fe11 certdy did promote the establishment of women-s meetings, there is no conclusive evidence that Fe11 influenced Fox's perspective on women or convinced him of the value of women's meetings.76.'Five years before Fox met Fe11 in 1652, he had been a coworker of Elizabeth Ho~ten.'~Hooten had been a
Baptist preacher earlier and she became the first woman to minister among the Quakers in 1647.767She certainly would have influenced Fox during those first formative years of his ministry and provided him with an excellent example of female strength and ability.
Fox had woman colleagues frorn the movement 's beginning, and did not require Mer persuasion regarding the statu or role of women. Hooten was not unique arnong Quaker women, for a fifth of the earliest Quaker preachers who descended fiorn the north upon the rest of England in the early 1650s were women."'
The marriage between Fox and Fe11 was unique in that Fox repudiated the
765 Ingle, First Among Friends, n. 17, p. 349.
766~oss,Marearet Fell, pp. 10,283.
"'~rnily Mannets, Elizabeth Hooten: First OderWoman Preacher. 1600-72 (London: Headley Brothers, 19 L 4), p. 4. 343 traditional patnarchai role for himself by making it clear that he did not consider himself the owner of Fell's property by virtue of becorning her h~sband.~*The amazingly egalitarian nature of their marriage was also evident in that Fe11 was a gentlewoman and the widow of an Assize Judge and Member of ~arliament,~'while Fox was the son of a weaver and had been a shoemaker's apprentice. Since they lived together very little because of the transient nature of Fox's rninistry,"' they had little domestic life to scrutïnize for signs of a cornpanionate marriage. However, the correspondence between them indicates affection and mutual concem, and demonstrates that Fox did not issue
Fe11 ordersm Fox did not command Fe11 in his letters as he did both the rest of his feIIow Quakers and the nation's rulers. The evidence indicates that while Fox was an authoritative prophet to most of humanity, to his wife he was a cornpanion within a mariage marked by equal ity and mutuai respect.
Fe11 had aiready dernonstrated her strength of character and independence by embracing the Quaker movement without her first husband's prior consent-773Quakers profited fiom the groundwork that had been laid by other radical sects which also encouraged the spiritual independence of women by teaching that wives mut obey God
"%oss, Mar~aretFelb pp. 3-5.
W. Shacman, "George Fox and His Family, Part II," Friends Histoncal Association, 74 ( 1986), 10- 1 1; Kunze, p. 7.
773Kunze, p. 13. 244 above their husbands, and that women believers were more spiritually insighüùl than their unbelieving spo~ses."~These concepts helped Quaker women and men accept more autonomous religious behaviour for women. While there were other sects that allowed some women to preach, the Quaker movement was unusual in the extent to which the women's preaching ministry was accepted and assumed to be appropriate by
Friends. "' Although pîriarchal thinking remained a factor among Quakers and there was no consensus arnong Friends about the appropriate role of womeds meetings, the
Quaker movement's belief in the spiritual equality of all persons assisted Fnends in being less rnisogynist than other contemporary religious gr~ups."~Quaker women had a secure preaching vocation, and shared to a significant degree in administering the movement 's infernal discipline and mutual aid.
RESPONSE TO THE POOR
The Fnends did not offer an economic solution to the problem of poverty, but they did cal1 for and practise a compassionate response to the poor. In their concem for victims of poverty, the Quakers stood in the Jewish and Christian tradition of
"'Richard L. Greaves, ed., Triumph Over Silence: Women in Protestant Historv (Westport: Greenwood Press, l98S), p. 85.
"6~revett,pp. 13, 130-3 1. 245 philanthropy and social justice that the Puritans dso emphasized.'" Friends also std within an eschatological tradition that especially valued the poor, since the oppressed cornrnon people were to be the prophetic agents of the Kingdom's arrival. However, it is apparent that the Quakers' concem for the poor did not depend upon the preservation of their eschatology, nor was it derived pnmarily Frorn their eschatology. Unlike Nayler and
Fox the Younger, the elder Fox sumived to experience the decrease of millenarian fervour that occmed among Friends, yet he retained his deep concem for the econornicaily destitute. His belief in the essential equaiity of al1 penons and his perfectionist determination to realize fùlly the compassionate ethics of the Jewish-
Christian tradition appear to have been the primary influences upon his response to poverty and the poor. Eschatology has a protean nature, since eschatological beliefs can be used to support and encourage hope for a wide variety of social visions and goals which depend upon the political and social perspectives of the believen. This has been observed in the comparison between the socially radical millenarian vision which the
Friends shared and the more conservative and elitist eschatological vision of thinkers such as Jeremiah ~urroughs.~~Since Fox and the other Friends were concemed for social justice and were cognizant of contemporary injustices, their esc hatology was marked by aspirations for social change?"' Their desire for social reform made belief in a coming millemium in which their hopes wouid be realised exceedingly appealing and
mMullett, Radical ReIi gious Movement~,p. 36.
ns See pp. 124-26 above.
n9See Gwyn in Freiday, Dav of the Lora p. 80. 246 en~ouraging.~Even more, eschatological beliefs provided a motivating inspiration which aroused Quaken to action and fired their prophetic witness and protest on behdf of the oppresseci. Their eschatology made them confident that the overturning of the world in which al1 things would be set right was in progress. It contributed the hope and sense of urgency that were necessary for carrying out their mission of protest, and fiunished them wiih warnings of fllture disaster to aim at oppresson. Eschatology lent
Fox the assurance that since Christ "is corne to reign, and coming to reign," a great social reversal was approaching. It was tirne for the ovemiming of the earth, and for bringing
"into their right order al1 the creation," as the just were exaited and the unjust were cast
Therefore, Fox could promise with confidence that his own social goals soon would be realized when God would "help the poor," and "break the jaws of the wic ked. "782
It was characteristic of the perfectionist Quakers that they were not so radically different from many other members of Fiiglish society in their attitude :oward relief of the poor, except that they were unusually zealous in carrying it out. Many othen agreed that assistance to the destitute was good, but did not pracrise it so fervently or consistently as Friends did. The Quakers' perfectionisrn led them to insist upon a radical and wholehearted compassion for the poor rather than a piecemeal and casual application of charitable principles. While Quaken championed the poor, the procedures of mutual
'@'Toon, p. 7.
'' '~0%Declaration Against Professios pp. 4, 15.
7a~~~L~Wof GO& p. 17. 247 aid that they canied out within their own circle and the specific recornmendations they made to the government regarding poverty were not very different from the standard approach to poor relief in England They distributeci relief to al1 Quakers in neea found work for unemployed Friends, and gave the c hildren of poor Friends positions as servants and apprentices arnong fellow Quakers. As persons rooted in the tradition of English
Separatism, the Quakers carried out their programme among themseives apart from the rest of so~iety.~~Like the English parishw, Quakers did not give relief indi~criminately~ but insisted that its recipients be appropriately grateful and moraily "worthy" of charity, and that they be tdydatitute and without possessions that could be sold to supply their needs before they were apportioned assistance. However, Quaken distributed poor relief in a manner that avoided humiliating the poor, and dispensed it more personally and compassionately than the parishes did in their bureaucratie application of the national
Poor ~aws.~~Indeed, despite the laws that were in place to address the problem of poverty, the parish system of poor relief was conducted very inadequately during the seventeenth cer~tury."~Fox was in&ated that the poor oflen were treated badly according to those laws. hstead of helping their destitute "brothers and sisters" who begged in the streets, professing Christians "rnake houses of correction to whip them and beat them; is this like unto Chnstians that was amongst the apostles?" Such a jack of
7"~unze,pp. 87-94,99- 100.
785~ugusteJoms, The ouakers Pioneers in Social Work, tram. by Thomas Kite Brown (Montclair, New Jersey: Patterson Smith, 1969), pp. 56-57. First Published in 1931. 248 compassion indicated a lack of true faitk7= However, Fox was pieased to find that some govemment officiais shared the Friends' concem for the poor and were impressed with the mutual aid that was carrieci out among Quakers, as well as the assistance Fnends rendered the poor who were outside Quaker circles." Evidently, Friends acted upon a concem for the poor with which English society at least theoretically concurred.
In the tradition of the biblical prophets, Friends spoke to miers and the economic elite to remind them of their responsibility to the needy. Quakers believed that poor relief was the obligation of the govemment as well as of individual benefactors. Fox's egalitarian sentiment was evident as he urged the London merchants to stop "surfeihng" on their wealth, but to use their money to care for their poor "brethren" who were "made of the same blood" as themselves. This kinship with the equally worthy poor demanded a compassionate response. Fox considered it reprehensible that the poor had to seek out the rich and beg from them, for the rich should have been seeking ways to relieve the poor and help them find employrnent so they could raise themselves from indigence. '813
Blasting materialistic values, Fox called those who wanted fine houses and expensive clothes to repent before God would "destroy you with ti~ern.'''~'He berated the rich who in hypocritical formaliv bowed to one another more than to God and were offended by
786 Fox and Howgill, Papist's Strength, pp. 98-99.
7"~o~How the Lord Did Raise UDFriends, p. 46.
'" George Fox, A Wamine to All the Merchants in London, 1658, F198S; To the Protector, 1658, p. 12.
'@)GeorgeFox, A Cry for Repentance, 1656, F 1779, p. 6. 249 those who had more trappings of wealth than themselves. He asserted that those who turned away fkom the pleas of the poor also turned away from Go~i.~~FOXinfonned
London's magistrates that the unreiieved poverty of their city was a 'shame" to their
Christian profession, and cailed for relief and empioyment for the poor. He challenge&
"1s this true Christian religion to see so much preaching, praying, sermons, lectures, and to see so many poor in the streets.77779 1 One of Fox's main criticisms of tithes was that they oppressed "poor people that labour very hard and cm scarce get food and raimenf to maintain them [the clergy] in idleness and pride."" Fox castigated those who professed faith in Christ but then made "themselves lords over the creatures, and oppress with great fines and rents." Denouncing enclosure and enclosers, he deplored those who took "the earth under their hm&, commons, wastes and forests, and fells, and moores, and mountains and lets it lie waste, and cails themselves lords of it, and keeps it from the people, when so many are ready to starve and He exclaimeci, "'O ye earthly minded men! Give over oppressing the poor, exalt not younelves above your fellow creatures, for you are ail of one mould and blood.. .you that set your nests on hi&, join house to house, field to field till there be no place for the poor ...the earth is the Lord's and the fùllness thereof" While Fox charged the rich with oppression, he also disapproved of the sinful poor protesting the injustice they suffiered with an unregenerate
7gOGeorgeFox, To the Hieh and Loftv Ones, 1655, pp. 3-5.
791GeorgeFox, To AI1 the Maejstrates in London, 1660, F1949A.
"2George Fox, Papr Sent Forth Into the World, 1654, F 1WSA, p. 4.
793~ox,Declaration Aeainst Profession, pp. 1 1- 12. 250 attitude. He admonished the poor: "and you that have not so much of the earth, give over your mumuring and reasonuig, fremng and gnidging, for ail your want is for the want of
Fox's own social position seemed to be between the ranks of the prosperous oppressors whom he reproached, and of the poor and oppressed for whom he spoke.
Apparently, he did not want the poor and ungodly people to speak or act against their oppression for themselves. ~e wanted the rich to take the initiative to end injustice and relieve the pr,but perhaps he feared that the discontented poor might act on their own behalf in inappropriate ways. Nevertheless, Fox's emphasis was not upon instructing the poor in patience. He wmte much more to cal1 the prosperous to repentance and compassion than he did to caution the poor.
In later decades, Fox continued to reprimand the rich who conspicuously spent resources whicb should have been used to provide for the needy on their "ungodly l~sts.""~~Long after the Restoraîion, Fox still warned the rich: "now al1 ye great and rich men upon the earth, that fare surnptuously every day ...do you regard the poor Lazanises?"
He rebuked those who ®ardnot the poor, and look lofiily and disdainfully upon your feilow creatures that be in misery." Those who lived without compassion for the poor would find their riches to be of no use "when you are condemned to hell tire and in it r~ar.'''~FOX was still offenng prophetic denunciations in 1677, but instead of promising an eschatological &y of judgment and its approaching "fire," he wamed of consignment
7wF0x, Vials, p. 3.
"'Fox, Waminn to England, p. 4.
'%George Fox, christ's Parable of Dives and LazanisLazanis,1677, F1761, pp. 5,740. 25 1 to hell in the next life. As stated above, his concem for the poor and anger toward the rich oppressors remained, but his millenarian faith in the Kingdom's arrivai on earth had waned. By then he warned of a 'Vire" that the sinner wouid encounter only afier death.
Like the rest of English society, Fox was concemed that the poor assist themselves by working if they were able to do so. He instructed Friends that beggars who had become Quakers were to "be kept in diligence, and not suffered to wander."
They were to be taught "how to labour in the creaîion, and see that they have things decent and neces~ary."~'The Quaker movement afEorded its memben not only emotional support and material assistance, but also discipline and help in avoiding ind~lence.~A favourable interpretation of this was that Friends were concemed to help their poor assist themselves in nsing above their penury rather than remain on the edge of sumival and in constant need of relief? A less positive interpretation was that Friends consigned their poor to the supe~sionof their more prosperous coreligionists to whom they would render wFul and inexpensive seMce and obedience.
Fox's concern for the poor spanned his life. As a young man he wouid go fiom door to door giving the poor money, and would stop bnefly at the weddings of poor couples to make donations to them. Fox instnicted justices to see that servants were paid fair wages, and ordered servants to work for their masters diligently. On one occasion, he ran after a group of beggars to give them a contribution afier they had been spurned by
797~ox,Works, Vol. W, 1655, p. 94.
798Mullett,p. 67.
'P)lorns, p. 72. some persons who professed Christian faith. The sight of beggars was a constant reminder to Fox of the "hard-heartedness amongst hem that professed the name of
Christ" but did not assist the poor?" in the last months of his life, Fox was still writing of his concem for the poor. He instnicted Quakers "not only to give the poor a little victuals, which you cannot eat yourseIves," but to give them money as well, since concem for the poor "manifests a selfdenial and opemess of heart, and of the general love of God.""' Love for God entailed a compassion for the poor which gave them more than table leftovers.
Nayler shared Fox's concem for the poor, and he addressed the rich oppressors in even more vitriolic terms than Fox did Nayler infomed the economic elite what the
Kingdom's approach would mean for them:
God is against you, you covetous... oppressors, who grind the face of the poor and needy ...ge tting great estates in the world ... till there be no place for the poor, and when they are become poor through your deceits, then you despise them, and exalt yourselves above them ...and forget that you are al1 made of one mould, of one blood... what shall your riches avail you at that day...the day of the Lord is at hand ... then woe unto you, for your kingdom must be taken from you, and given to them who will bring forth miits.. .now, you fhitless trees, you must be cut down, and cast into the fire?*
800~ambridge Journal, pp. 7,26, 35, 1 1 1. Evidently, Fox's own financial circumstances were secure enough that he could make fiequent contributions to othea. He did not set out on his early travels without hds, but with "a great deal of gold and silver." See Cambridge Journal, p.50. It seems that Fox's family of origin was among the more prosperous weaves.
"'Fox, Works, Vol. VII, June 1690, p. 3 10.
Wayler, Cal1 to the World to Repentance," in -, pp. 93-94. Nayler's sense of outrage toward the rich was evident also as he wrote of their responsibility to allocate resources so there would be enough for ail:
Woe unto you, you fat swine... now is the Lord corne to require his corn, and his wine, which he gave to feed the poor and hungry, which your lusts have devoured; the wants of al1 the poor in the nation cry out against you ...you plainly appear to be children of the devil ...y ou bear the image of the serpent, you speckled ones, who have painted yourselves in the various coloun to make yourselves seem glorious to the eyes of others, that they may bow and wonhip you ...pride is for the fire, and thy honour for the dust; for now is the Lord coming to enquire &er his wool and his flax which he gave to clothe the naked ... with which thou hast decked the serpent, and spent upon thy iusts ... thou shalt be cast dom to hell, the Lamb is risen to rule the nations.803
Nayler saw that England's laws were not adequate to protect the poor fiom the elite. He stated that oppresson made themselves nch by means which were "within the compass of the laws of the nation, never regarding to be guided by that pure law of God within, written in the heart, which would lead you in dl hngs to do as you would be done by."sOJ Noting that the govemment was not implementing the just laws which Nayler felt the Interregnum rulers had promised to establish, he warned that Christ was "coming to cal1 to account al1 sorts of dissemblers and oppresson and by his own right hand to get himself the ~ictory."~~Since the English Revolution had not brought the era of social justice which Nayler felt had been promised, only the coming of Christ and his Kingdom
H03JamesNayler, "The Condition and Portion of the People of England," in James Nayler and George Fox, Several Pape= 1653, F 1903, p. 2 1.
=~ayler,Discove- of the Wisdom. p. 37.
"'Discovery of the Wisdom, p. 23. could judge the evildoers and establish justice.
Fox the Younger alço spoke out on behaff of those in need. He exclaimed, -Oh!
How do the rich oppress the poor ... and how do the haughty vaut themselves over the rneek!"= He offered the egalitarian statement that the destitute shared human kinship with the King and rebuked Charles that his "own flesh or them of the same blood lie, sit, or stand in the saeets, crying for a piece of bread."8m He especially called attention to the great amount of food that had been wasted celebrating Charles' Restoration, while the poor were in such great need of subsi~tence.~~~Unlike the elder Fox who proposed the Fiftv-Nine Parîicula.rs, Fox the Younger did not submit any specific proposais to relieve poverty other than giving generous char@ to those in need, and husbanding food so that it would not be wasted on superfluity or revelry. In spite of his stridency when he addressed political rulen, Fox the Younger wrote comparatively little about the poor, though that which he wrote was consonant with the sentiments of Fox and Nayler.
Nayler was the most outspoken of the three in his icdignation toward the rich oppressors, while the elder Fox was the most specific in offering the govemment concrete proposals on behalf of those in need. Fox also provided the most leadership in arranging for the assistance of poor Quakers. However, ail three of these Friends demonstrated their concem for the poor, their anger at the widespread lack of compassion toward them, and
wFo~the Younger, To the Called, p. 5.
807 George Fox the Younger, The Dread of Gd's Power Uttenne Its Voice Throueh Man Untu the Heads of the Nation, 1660, F1999, p. 4.
8 Friends, eschatological kliefs offered the motivating assurance that social change was imminent, and that sinful oppressors soon would be judged appropnately. The Quakers' comparatively egalitarian perspective also affected their perception of the relationship between master and servant Ln seventeenth century English society servants were to address their masters and mistresses in deferential terms, and remain bareheaded before them. Fox instnicted Friends that among believers the relationship between rnaster and servant was to be marked by a greater degree of equality and appropriate mutual regard. Fox accepted the conternporary hierarchical suppositions to the extent that he assumed householders wouid be "den of families," but like political denthe mler of the household was not to act in a tyrannical or arbitrary way but according to the Spirit's guidance. Instnicting masters, mistresses and servants, Fox asserted that a11 were to rule or serve in love "as unto the Lord, for the earth is the Lord's.77ogFox apparently deemed it necessary to remind "rulers" of households that the earth's resources did not belong to them, and that they were accountable to the Creator for their treatment of their servants. StiIl, he accepted the contemporary social relationship in which the more prosperous master or mistress was in the appropriate place to command, while the servant was in place to obey. Fox the Younger shared these sentiments as he warned masten and mistresses: "Lay no more upon you.servants than ye would be willing shouid be laid upon you, if ye were in their places and conditions." They were to give their servants "no just cause to murmur or comptain." Of course, 809CatonMSS, 2: 107-108, George Fox, "'For Families." Undated. servants were to be obedient and industrious in returngfO In spite of their quest for perfection, the Quakers were imperfect in establishing full equality among thernselves, or in advocating it within English society. They insisted on fair treatment of servants and abolished customary gestures and words of social deference to masters, but they did not confiont England's hierarchical values and conventions so radically that they questioned the traditional economic and social relationship between master and servant Nor did they extend full equality to women. Friends of the gentry mnk such as the prominent Margaret Fell enjoyed a statu and influence that was not shared by Iess affluent Quakers. Due to her rank as a member of the gentry, she possessed authority among her fellow believers not only while she prophesied under divine inspiration, but at dl times."' The earliest Quakers diligently assisted the poor among them and called England to relieve and employ the needy, but they did not advocate the radical restnictunng of the economy nor attempt extensive philanthropy outside the Quaker circle. Fox's Fie-Nine Particulan of 1659 in which he recommended the confiscation of church property and of great estates for the use of the poo?12 was radical in its cal1 for a substantial reallocation ''Tex the Younger, Exhortation. '"Kurue, pp. 102, 124-25,233. This staternent must be quaiified, since Fell's gifts for ministry and writing the personal strength that she could wield when dealing with others, and her capacity and willingness to provide financial assistance to Quaker ministers and their fmilies also contributed to her position among Friends. See Ross, pp. 39,47; Kunze, pp. 24, 102, 124. '"Sec pp. 175-76 above. of property,si3but even in his most radical proposals during a year of great eschatological expectation he envisioned no econornic levelling of society. Friends had no vision of economic equality, but were aware of the importance of relieving the destitute and preventing unernployment. The Quakers7response to the poor included an admixture of anger toward rich oppresson and compassion toward the poor that extended to philanthropy and a concem for justice, but they proposed litîie beyond providing the necessities of life to the destitute and an opporhu-dy for the poor to survive through industrious service to those who occupied a more prosperous and prominent station in society than themselves. Although Friends like Fox did offer some specific proposais for achieving greater social justice, as in tus Fi-Nine Particulars, they did not have a precise new social systern in mind Like many other contemporary radicals, they tnisted that God would effect the spiritual and moral 'ovemiming" of society in which the millemial Kingdom would unfold according to the divine plan. "'Their task was to speak prophetically so that people would repent and obey God's guidance for '"~ill, Expenence of Defeat p. 155. Fox's Particula~regarding the confiscation of church and crown property for the poor's use were remarkably similar to those which had been proposed approximately a decade earlier by the reformer Peter Chamberlen. Evidently, prophetic Friends were sirnilar to contemporary social reformers in their response to the poor and in the proposals they offered concerning them. See Lotte Mulligan and Judith Richards' "A 'Radical' Problem: The Poor and the English Reformers in the Mid-Seventeenth Century," Journal of British Studies, 29 ( 1990)' 126. ""ee Mulligan and Richards, 143. The statements of these authors regarding the contemporary Ranter Abiezer Coppe would also describe the Friends on this issue. They prophesied the divine reformation of society, but their anticipation of the Kingdom's coming did not lead them to offer a detailed design for social reconstruction since that was in God's hands. establishing the Kingdom. Thus, although the earliest Friends were moving in an egalifarian direction and were chailenging England's hierarchical values, their egalitarian vision was limited in the degree of equality it extended, and in its objectives for addressing economic inequity. In this way, the Frïends' eschatology contributed somewhat to a limiting of their vision for social changes, since God and not themselves would design the precise blueprint of the transformed society. On the other hanci, their eschatology allowed them to aspire to an imminent perfected world, and offered them the encouraging reassurance that the just world for which they hoped was not merely achievable, but was certain to be accomplished through their faimprophetic protest. Eschatology thus propelled them into a prophetic witness against social and economic injustice. Their trust that God would establish the Kingdom in his own way left them content, for the most part, to make prophetic denunciations, warn of coming judgments, and promise deliverance fiom oppression, without offering a plan for the restructuring of society. Their faith that the whole new world that was coming wodd be perfect because it would be fiom God was sumcient for the first Friends. CHAPTER ETGHT CONCLUSION A comparison of the writings of George Fox, James Nayler. and George Fox the Younger seems to support Christopher Hill's observation that the first Quakers were suficiently heterogeneous that one should not speak of early "Quakerism" as one monolithic body of beliefs, for there were "many early Q~akerisrns."~~~However, in spite of important differences which must be noted, there was a great deal more which united these three Quakers in the faith and cause they shared than differentiated them. Al! three maintained a Spiritualist, perf'tionist, and millenarian faith which contributed to their radical social and political perspective and kinded the protest through which they aspired to help God establish his Kingdorn on earth. The elder Fox was the most egalitarian of the three in his attitude toward women, and the most practical in his suggestions for social reform. Fox the Younger was the most strident in his communications with political rulers, although he was less specific in advocating measures of social justice. Nayler was the most acrimonious in his condemnation of those things which he perceived to be errors and injustices, and may be considered the most daring for his bold speech before the Parliament which tried him, and for his performance of the prophetic sign at Bristol which brought him to trial. There is no clear evidence that the theology of divine inhabitation which Fox and Nayler shedwas undentood in the same way by Fox the Younger, but it may be that in this he was more "%ill, Experience of Defeat, p. 130. 360 typical of most Quakers than were the other two Friends. Nayler's eschatology left room for a future physical retum of Christ, while Fox and Fox the Younger's more radically Spintualist eschatology did not. Nevertheless, al1 three stressed that Christ had returned in Spirit, and was present already within believers to effect their spiritual tnuisformation. Although sharp personal contention developed between Fox and Nayler, it is evident that this was not because their theology differed substantially, but because of conflict within the movement which resulted in a struggle for leadership and credibility between them. This dissertation has contested the position of those histonms who argued that the early Quaker movement represented a passive withdrawal fiom political and social radicalism and activism. Such a perspective seems to have resuited from writers overlooking significant events and writings from early Quaker history, from an assumption that a radical social and political agenda and activism are incompatible with religious beliefs which emphasize the enjoyment of inner spiritual experiences, and from projecting the more passive and quietist character of the later Quaker cornmunity back onto the earliest Friends. ûther historians have observed the radical nature of the first Quakers, but some have Iooked too eagerly for a specific early event or point in time from which the movement's transformation from social confrontation to passivity may be identified. This has led some authors to ignore the degree of continuity which existed between the earlier and the later Quaker community that historians such as Hugh Barbour and Michael Mullett pointed The examination of three key representatives of the early Quaker movement has 820 See pp. 15- 1 7 above. 26 I show how the writings of ail tbree Friends conveyed a sense of urgency, expectation, anger, and millenarian excitement as they cam-ed out their prophetic mission to the world For these leaders, the Quaker movernent did not begin as a fonn of otherworldly retreat From social stniggle, but was bom in the mid-seventeenth century environment of religious, political, and social radicalism. They aspired to an aggressive albeit nonviolent conquest of society, and led a subversive and revolutionary movement that arose in an explosive, millenarian, and enthusiastic moment in English history, but had to adapt itself gradually to survive in a more conservative era. The earliest Quakers bel ieved that they were inhabited, empowered and directed by Christ who was working through them to establish his miIlennial reign. They sought not only a spiritual Kingdom within themselves, but a revolution of the world, for the establishment of the Kingdom within was to empower and enable believers in their struggle to build the extemal Kingdom in which Christ would rule the earth through his saints. They spoke against social injustices and encouraged social refoms to help to fulfill their eschatological conviction that God would establish the perfect world through their mission. AI1 three shared the tendency that was typical of Quakers to extend more widely held religious and social beliefs to a radical extreme which shocked and offended contemporary society. Discouragement with the failure of al1 governrnents to move England toward the millemiurn, the Kingdom's delay, and the intense penecution which followed the Restoration inclined Fnends to abandon their conquest of society and to seek toleration and survival within society instead However, even as they came to realize that the millenniwn was not imminent, Quakers retained social concems and continued to seek 262 accomplish some of their Kingdom-like aspirations. The legacy of the first formative years in which Quakers had believed that the millemial age was beginning to dawn and had attempted to Merthe divine restnicturïng of English society through confrontationai prophetic protest continued to inforrn the social consciousness and spirituality of their succesors. 1. REFERENCE WORKS Cadbury, H., ed Annual Catalorme of George Fox's pape^. London: Religious Society of Friends, 1939. -- -- ed. The Swarthmore Documents in America, Journa1 of the Friends' Hiçtorical Socieîy. Supplement No. 20, (1940). Catalomie of the niornason Tracts, 2 vols. London: British Mwum, 1908. lish Books 164 1- 1700. Selected fiom Donald Wing's Short Title Catalo-: A Cross Index of Microfilm Collection. Ann Arbor: UMI, 1982 and 1987. Greaves, Richard L., and Zaller, R. A Bioeraohical Diction? of British Radicals in the Seventeenth Cene,3 vols. Brighton, England: Harvester Press, 19 82-84. Nuttall, G.F. Earlv Ouaker Leîten From the Swarthrnore Manuscri~tsto 1660, Calendared Indexed and Annotated. Typescript in London: Friends Reference Library, 1952. Smith, Joseph. Bibliotheca Anti-Ouakeriana or a Catalomie of Books Adverse to the Society of Friends. London: Joseph Smith, 1873. . Descriptive Catalogue of Fnends Books. 2 vols. and Supplement. London: Joseph Smith, 1867. Tuke, Henry. Biographical Notices of Members of the Societv of Friends. London: Darton, Harvey, and Company, I 8 1S. Wing, Donald. Short Title Catalomie of Books Printed in England Ireland and Wales and British Arnenca 164 1- 1700, 3 vols. New York: Index Society, 1972- 1988. MANUSCRIPT COLLECTIONS London, Friends' Reference Library: Abraham Manuscn~ts. A.R. Barclav Manuscripts Cash ManuscripQ. Caton Manuscri~Q. Children of the Lieht Papen. Epistles and Oueries of George Fox's. Emne Manuscripts. Gibson Manuscri~ts. Markev Manuscriots. Numbered Portfolios. Collections of Manuscripts. Peningon ManuscrÏpts. Richardson Manuscripts. Spence Manuscripts Swarthmore Manuscno~. Taapp~rManuscripts. Thirnbeck Manuscn~ts. Thorn~sonMariuscriots. Watson Manuscripts. London. The British Library. London. The Institute of Historicai Research, University College. Oxford. Chnst Church. The Francis Bugg Collection of Quaker and Anti-Quaker Books and Tracts. Abboa, W.C. The Wntings and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell. Vols. III and IV. Cam bridge: Harvard University Press, 1947. Archer, John. The Personall Raigne of Christ. 1642. A36 17. Aspinwall, William. A Brief Description of the Fiflb Monarch~. 1653. A4004. Barbour, Hugh and Roberts, Arthur O., eds. Early Quaker Wn'tines 1650- 1700. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1973. Barclay, A. R., ed. Letters of Early Friends. London: Harvey and Darton, 1 84 1. Baxter, Richard. One Sheet Against the Ouakers. 1657. B 1334. Benson, Gervase, and Fox, George. Cry of the Op~ressed1656. B 1900. Besse, Joseph. J.A. A Collection of the Suffennes of the People Called Ouakers. 2 vols. London: Meeting of SufTerings, 1753. Billings, Edward. A Mite of Affection. 1659. B86. Bishop, George. Throne of Tmth Exalted 1657. B3008. Brightman, Thomas. The Works of Thomas Briehtman. 1644. 84679. Bugg, Francis. Letter to the Ouakers. 1690. B5374. . Modest Defense. 1700. B5375. . New Rome Arraimed 1694. 85376. . New Rome Unmasked. 1692. B5378. . One Blow More at New Rome. 169 1. B5379. . Pichire of Ouakerism. 17 14. BS38 1. . Pilmirn's Pro-ss. From Ouakerism to Chnstianitv. 1698. B5382. ers Set in Their True Lighl- 1696, B5388. . Seasonable Caveat 1 70 1. . Seventv Ouenes to Seventy Ouaken. 1698. 85393. Burrough, Edward. Declaration From the People Called Quakers. 1659. B5989. . Dedaration to Ail the World of Our Faith. 1660. B5995. . General Epistle to Al1 the Saints. 1660. B6005. , and Fox, George. Good Counsel and Advice. 16%. B6006. . Messqe to the Present Rden of England. 1659. B60 15. Standard Lified Up. 1657. 86029. . To the Parliament of the Common-wealth of Eneland. 1659. B6039. , and Howgill, Francis. To the Seed ofAbraham. 1655. Burroughs, Jeremiah. A Glirmse of Sions Gloy. 164 1. G l24SA. Burton, Thomas. Diarv of Thomas Burton. Vol. 1. Edited by Rutt, John Towill. London: Henry Colbum. 1 828. Cacibury, Henry J. Edited Narrative Papen of George Fox. Richmond Indiana: Friends United Press, 1972. Camm, John. True Discovery of the Imorance of the Magistrates of Carlisle. 1654. Canne, John. The Improvement of Mercv. 1649. C44 1. . The Snare 1s Broken. 1649. C442B. . The Time of the End 1657. C443. Coppe, Abiezer. Abiezer Coppe: Selected Wntines. Edited by Andrew Hopton. London: Apon'a Press, 1987. Some Sweet Sips of Some Spiritual Wine. 1649. C6093. Crane, Richard. God's Holy Narne Mamifiea. 1665. C6812. Deacon, John. Exact Historv of the Life of James Navlor. 1657. D482. . Grand Imposter Examined 1656. D484. Declaration of His Hiahness- 1654. Edwards, Thomas. Ganeraena 1646. E228. Erbury, William. The Testimonv of William Erburv. 1658. E3239. Farmer, Ralph. Satan Inthroned in His Chair of Pestilence. 1656. F444. Farnsworth, Richard, and Fox, George. The Spiritual Man Judeeth Al1 Things. 1654. F505. , Fox, George, and Nayler, James. To You That Are Called bv the Name of Baptists. 1654. F 1967. - Message From the Lord. 1653. F49 1A. FeH, Margaret. False Prophets. 1655. F631. . Letter Sent to the King. 1666. F633. , and Foq George. Paper Concemine Such As Are Made Ministeq. 1659. F634A. Fisher, Samuel. To the Parliament of Enaland. 1659. F1059. Fox, George. Al1 You Peoole That Have Had a Tendemess. 1660. F 174OC. . Ancient Simplicig. 166 1. F 174 1. - Answer to a Paoer Which Came From the Pa~isa.1658. FI 742. . Answer to Doctor Bur~essHis Book. 1659. F 1743. . Answer to the Armunents of the Jews. 166 1. F 1 745. . . 1688. F1746. . Answer to Thomas Tillam's Book. 1659. FI 747. -, Furley, Benjamin, and Stubbs, John. Battle-Door for Teachers. 1660. F1751, - 1679. F1753. . Catechism for Children. 1657. F l7S6A. ause Whv Adam and Eve Were Driven Out of Paradise. 1683. F 1758. . sethe1662. F1761. . Christ's Parable of Dives and Lazanis. 1677. F 1 762. . Clear Discoverv. 1662. F1763. . Concemine Gathering in the Narne of Jesus. 1671. B4826. . Cc.1657. FI 766. . Conceming Mama%- 166 1. F 1 767. . Concemine Sons and Dauehten. 166 1. F 1772. Copies of Several Letten to the King. 1660. C6 198. . C7t.1657. C6080A . Cyfor Reoentance . 1656. F1779. . Dear Friends. Keep Your Meetinm. 1 664. F 1 782A. ,et. al. Declaration A~ainstAl1 Po& 1655. FI 783. . 1654. F1784. 269 +r. +r. I - 1656. FI785 -. . -. 1661. F1789. . Declaration of the Di fference of the Ministefi- 16%. F 1790. . Declaration of the Ground of Error- 1657. F 1 79 1. . klaration of the Present Sufferin~s.1659. . Declaration to the Jews. 166 1. F1792. . Difference Between the Worlds Relation. 1659. . Discovexy of Some Fruits. 1656. FI 795a.A. . Distinction Between the Phanatick Spirit. 1660. F 1796. . Epistle Concemine the Government of Christ. 168 1. F1 800. . Epistle General to Tbem Who are of the Royal Priest-hood. 1660. F 1802. . Epistle to Al1 Peoole on the Earth. 1657. F 1805. . Epistle to Ail Planters. 1682. F 1805A. - Epistle to All the Christian Mapistrates 1659. G 14 14. - Epistle to be Read in AI1 the Assernblies of the Righteous. 1666. Fl8O7. . Epistle to be Read in AI1 the Christian Meetings. 1662. F 1808. . Epistle to be Read in the Men and Women's Meetines. 1677. F1809. - Etemal. Substantial Truths. 166 1. F 1 8 14. . Examination and Trval of Marearet Fe1 l and George Fox. 1664. E37 10. . Few Plain Words By Wav of Ouerie. 1660. FI 8 1 7. . Few Oueries for Thomas Moor. 1660. FI 8 l7A. . . For Ali Bishoos and Pnests. 1665. F18 19. . For the Ernperour of China 1660. . For the Kine and Both Houses of Parliament 166 1. F 1 82 1. . For the King and His CounciI. 166 1. F1822. . For the Po-Cardinals and Jesuites. 166 1. Fi 823. . For Your Whoredoms. 1660. F 1 823A. . Friend! Who Art Called a Teacher. 1660. F 1 8238. F-. . F-. Undated. . General Epistle to Al1 Frien&. 1664. FI 824. . General Enistle to Be Read. 1662. F 1825. . Glory of the Lord Arising. 1655. . Great Mistery of the Great Whore. 1659. FI 832. . Ground of Desperation. 1656. F 1 833. . Ground of Hi* Placq. 1657. F 1834. . Grounds and Causes of Our Sufferings. 1656. . Heathens Divinity. 1671. F1835. Here is Declared the Manner of the Namine of Children. 1658. FI 840. . Here You May See What the True Honour. 1660. F 184 1. . fiow the Lord Did Raise üp Friends. 1690. . Instruction to Judges and Lawvers. 1658. F1848. . John James 1 Hea"ng That Thou Doest Make a Noise. 1658. FI 853B. . Journal of George Fox Edited by Henry J. Cadbury. New York: Capricorn Books, 1963. ûriginally Writîen in 1675, Published in 1694. Journal of George Fox Edited by John L. Nickalls. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1952. . Journal of George Fox. Edited by Noman Penney. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19 1 1. Justice and Judment 1s to RuIe. 1656. F 1838. . Lambs Officer. 1659. F 1855. . Law of God the Rule for Law-makers. 16%. F 1856. . Line of Righteousness and Justice. 166 1. F1857. . Measurin-Rule Concemin Liberty. 166 1. F1862. . Message From the Lord to the Pariiarnent. 1654. F 1863. - Newes Out of the North. 1653. F1868. . Of Bowings. 1657. Fl869. . Old Simon the Sorcerer. 1663. F 1870. ur Covenant With God 1660. F l87lB . Pamr Sent Forth Into the World, 1654. FI 875A , and Howgill, Francis. Papist's Strend. 1658. F 1877. . Pearle Found in England. 1658. F 1878. . hests' and Professors' Catechism. 1657. F 1 882. . Priests' Fruits Made Manifest. 1657. FI 883A. . Primer For the Schollers. 1659, F1884. . Protestant Chnstian-Ouaker. 1680. F 1889. Ouenes Concemine Tithe~.1663. FI 889A. . Oueries Put Forth. 1657. . Re~ivto the Pretended Vindication. 1658. F1890. . and Nayler, James. m.16%. Fi 895. . Second Covenant. 1657. FI 898. . Secret Works of a Cruel Peode. 1659. FI 899. . Several Pa-pers Given Forth. 1660. F 190 1. . Short Jomai. Edited by Norman Pemey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1925. On'ginally Written in 1664. . Some Pnnci~lesof the Elect People of Gd 166 1. FI 907. . Some Ouenes to Al1 the Teachers. 1666. FI 9O8A. . Somethinn Concemine Silent Meeting. 1657. F l9O9A. . Somethine- in Answer to That Book Called the Church-Faith. 1660. F 19 15. . Somethine in Answer to the Old Common-Prayer-Book. 1660. F 19 16. . Spirit of Eny. 1663. F 19 16A. . Summ of Such Pariiculars As Are Chareed Aeainst George Fox. 1660. F1923. Surelv the Magistrates of Nottingham Are Blind. 1659. FI 923A. . Teachers of the World UnvaiIed. 1656. F 1 924A. . Testimonv of the True Lieht. 1657. Fl929. -~ieht~ee . -~ieht~ee Who Thev Were. 1657. F 193 1. . These Oueries Are Given Forth. 1665. FI 932. . Thirty of the Priests EKOQ- 1660. FI W2A. - This For &ch Parliament-Man. 1656. FI933. . This 1s a Controversy Betwixt the Ouaken and Pa~im.1664. F1933B . This 1s An Encouragement to AH the Women's Meetines. 1676. F 1934. . This 1s to AI1 People Who Sturnble. 1660. FI936 . This To AI1 Officers and Soldiers and Magisbates. 1657. F 1834. . To AI I Kings. Princes. and Govemours. 1677. F 1949. . To AI 1 People in AI1 Christendom. 1663. F 1940. . To Al1 Schwl-masters. Priests. and Teachers. and Ma9istrates. 1660. . To A11 That Make Mention of the Name of the Lord. 1655. . To Al1 That Profess Christianity. 166 1. F 194 i A. . To AI1 That Profess the Tnith of God. 1690. . To A11 That Wodd Know the Wav to the Kinedom. 1655. F 1943. -- -- To A11 the @orant People. 1655. F 1948. . To Al1 the Maeistrates in London. 1660. FI 949A. . To AI1 the Nations Under the Whole Heavens. 1660. F 1950. . To Al1 the People Who Meet in Steeplehouses. 1657. FI95 1. . To AI l the Professors and Teachers. 1660. F 178 1, . To AH Rulers and Maf&rate~. 1683. FI 94 1. . To Both Houses of Parliament. 1660, FI 952. . To Fnends in Barbadoes. 1666. F 1953. . To the Chief Magismite. 1684. F1954. . To the Council of Officen of the Armv. 1659. F1955. . To the Great Turk. 1680. F1956. . To the Heads of England and Other Nations. Undated. . To the Hieh and Loftv Ones. 1655. . To the Jud~esof Life and Death. Undated. . To the Parliament of the Common-Wealth of Eneland: Fi-Nine Particulas. 1659. F 1 958. . To the People of Uxbridpe. 1659. F1959. . To the POE and Al1 His MaPistrates. 166 1. F 1960, . To the Protector and Parliament. 1658. FI 96 1. and Nayler, James. To Thee. Oliver Cromwell. 1655. F1962. . To Those That Have Been Formerlv in Authority. 1660. F 1963. . To You That Are C~ng;.1657. FI 964. . True Discoverv of the Ignorance of the Maeistrates of Carlisle. Il . Tme Judment. 1654. FI 967. . Tntm~etof the Lord Sounded. 1654. F1969. and Hubberthom, Richard. Truth's Defence. 1653. F1 970. . Truths Triurnoh in the Eternal Power. 166 1. F 1971. . Unmasking of Anti-Christ. 1654. F 1974. . Viais of the Wrath of God. 1655. F1 976, . Visitation to the Jewes. 1656. F1978. . Voice of the Lord to the ffeathen. 1656. F1979. . Wamine From the Lord. 1654. FI 98OA. . Warnine From the Lord to the Pope. 1656. FI98 1. . Waniin~to Al 1 in This Proud Citv. 1654. FI 982. . W-ng; to A11 Teachers of Children, 1657. F1984. . Warning: to AI1 the Merchants in London, 1658. F1985. . Waminrr to Professors. Undated, . Wamine to the World. 1655. FI 987. . West Answennrr the North. 1657. F1988. . Women Leamine In Silence. 1655. FI99 1. . Word in the Behalf of the King. 1660. FI 993. , and Nayler, James. Word From the Lord to All the World. 1654. F 1992. - Works of George Fox. Vols. IV-W. Philadelphia: Gouid, 183 1. Volumes IV-VI were first compiled in 1706, Volumes W-VIII in 1698. Volumes 1-iI comprise Fox's Journal and Volume III is The Great Misterv of the Great Whore cited above- Fox, George the Younger. Breathines of Tme Love. 1660. FI 995. . Collection of the Several Books and Writines Given Forth Bv That Faithful Servant of God and His People. George Fox the Youneer. 1665. F 1997. . Compassion to the Captives. 1662. F1 W8A . Dread of God's Power Uttering Its Voice Throueh Man Unto the He& of the Nation. 1660. FI999. . Ennland's Sad Estate. 166 1. F2000. . Exhortation to Familig. 1659. F200 1. . Few Plain Words to Be Considered Bv Those of the Armv. 1659. F2002. . Few Queries to the Teachers. 1660. F2002A. . For the Parliament of England and Their Armv. 1660. F2003. . General Epistle and a Tender Greeting- 1660. R004. . Honest. Plain Downrieht Dealing With E~iscodmenand Presbvterian~. 1660. F2005. . Honest. Uprieht Faithful. and Plain Dealine With Thee O Armv. 1659. F2005A. . Message of Tender Love Unto Rofesson. 1660. F2006. . Noble Salutation and a Faithful Greeting unto Thee Charles Stuart. 1660. F2008. - Oh Peo~le!MY Bowels Yearn. 1670. F2009A. , and i-iubberthom, Richard. Sornethin~Aeainst Sweaing. 1660. - Testimonv of God. 1660. F20 10. - To the Called of God. 1660. F20 13. . To theFlesh ofGod. 1660. . Tme Relation of the Unlawful Proceedin~s. 1660. F2014. . Two E~istles. 1663. F20 15. . VisitationofLove. 1659. F2018. . Word to the People of the World 1660. F2020A. . Words of the Everlastin~and True Libt. 1659. F202 1. Freiday, Dean, ed. Barclav's Apolow in Modem English. Elberon, New Jersey: Dean Freiday, 1967. Robert Barclay's Apolow for the True Christian Divinity. First Published in 1676. Grîgge, William. The Ouakers' Jesu. 1658. G2023. Hall, Ralph. Ouakers Pnnciples Ouaking 1656. H423. Harwood, John. To AI1 People That Profess. 1663. Hl 104. Histoe and Proceedines of the House of Cornrnons From the Restoration to the Present Time ( 1 660- 1680)-Vol. 1. London: Chandler, 174 14. Howgill, Francis, Fox, George, et. al. Caines Bloodv Race. 1657. C208A Hubberthom, Richard, and Nayler, James. A Short Answer to a Book Called the Fanatick History. 1660. H3232. James Nailor's Recantation. 1659. Last Will of George Fox the Ouakers Great Awstle. 170 1. Lawson, Thomas. An Appeal to the Parliament Concemine the Poor. 1660. L722. Lilburne, John. The Resurrection of John Lilbume. 1656. L2 175. Nayler, James, and Hubberthom, Richard. Account from the Children of Lieht. 1660, N256. Nayler, James. AI1 Vain Jannlers. 1654. N257. - Answer to Some Ouenes Bv John Pendarves. 1656. N260. , and Audland, John. Answer to the Perfect Pharisee. 2654. N26 1 . Answer to The Ouakers Catechism. 1655. N258. . hswer to Twen-Ekht Ouenes of Francis Harris. 1655. N262. . Antichrist in Man. 1656. N263. . Behold You Rulers. 1658. N264. . Boaster Bared. 1655. N266. . Churches Gathered Aeainst Christ. 1653. N267. . Collection of Sundry Books. Epistles and Papers Written bv James Navler. ed by George Whitehead, 17 1 6. . Deceit Broueht to Dav-light. 1656. N269. . Discovery of Faith. 1653. N270. . Discovery of the Beast 1655. N27 1. . Discoverv of the First and Second Wisdom. 1653. N272. . Discovery of the Man of Sin. 1655. N274A. . Dispute Between James Navler and the Teachers. 1655. N275. - Door ODened tu the Im~risonedSeed 1660. N276. . Few Words In Answer. 1659. N278. . Few Words Occasioned bv 'A Discoune Conceming the Ouakers.' 1653. N279. . Fool Answered Accordine to his Folly. 1655. N280. . Foot Yet In the Snare. 1656. N28 1. . Give Ear You Gathered Churches. 1660. N28 1A. - Glory to God Almighty. 1659. N282. . Havine Heard That Some Have Wroneed Mv Words. 1659. N284. . How Sin Is Strenerthened. 1657. N285. . How the Ground of Temptation. 1662. N289. Larnbs War Against the Man of Sin. 1658. N29 1. .,and Fox, George. Lamentation Over the Ruines of this (h~ressedNation. 1653. N292. . Letter to Several Friends. Undated, . i&ht of Christ 1656. N293. . Love to the Los. 1656. N294 . Message Frorn the Spirit of Truth. 1658. N298. . Milk for Babes. 166 1. N299. . Power and Glory of the Lord 1656. N303. . Public Disçoverv. 1656. N305. . Railer Rebuked. 1654. N306. . Roval Law and Covenant of God. 1655. N308 . Salutation to the Seed of Gd. 16%. N309. . Satan 's Desirn Discovered. 1655. N3 1 3. . Second Answer to Thomas Moore. 1656. N3 14. . Secret Shooting of the Wicked Reproved. 1655. N3 15. , et al. Several Letters Written to the Saints. 1654. DI 272. , and Fox, George. Several Papers. 16%. F 1903. . Several Petitions Answered, 1653. N3 16A. . Sin Kept Out of the Kinedom. 1653. N3 17A. . Somethiner Fwther in Answer to John Jackson's Book. 1655. N3 18. . Spiritual Wickedness in Heavenlv Places. 1654. N3 19. - To Al1 the People of the Lord Gathered and Scattered 1659. N320. . To theLifeofGodinAl1. 1659. N321. . True Discovery of Faith. 1655. N323. ,and Whitehead, George. True Ministers Livine of the Gospel. 1660. W1968. Truth Cleared From Scandais. 1654. N324. Two Eoistles. 1654. N325. Vindication of Truth. 1656. N326. Weakness Above Wickedness. 1656. N327. What the Possession of the Livine Faith 1s. 1659. N328. What the Possession of the Living Faith 1s. 1676. N330. ' Wickedness Wei~hed. 1656. N33 1. Pagitt, Ephraim. Heresioaaohv. 5th ed, 1654. P 180. Penington, Isaac, Burrough, Edward, and Fox, George. The Wav of Life and kath. 1658. P1219. Penn, William. "The Testimony of William Penn Concerning That Faithful Servant George Fox." in Jounial of Georee Fox. Edited by Henry J. Cadbury. New York: Capricorn Books, 1963. Penney, Norman, ed. Extracts From State Papers Relatine to Friends 1654 to 1672. London: Headley Brothers, 19 13. Powell, Vavasor. The Bird in the Cage. 166 1. P3078. Prynne, William. The Ouakers Unmasked. 1655. P4047. Ouestions Prowunded to George Whitehead and Geor~eFox at Cambridge. 1659. Q 184. 'There are segments in this later edition that are not included in the earlier work. Rich, Robert Copies of Some Few Papers- 1657. C6080A. . Hidden Thinps Brought to Liszhl. 1678. FI 842. Rogers, John Mene. Tekel. Perez 1654. R 1I Sa@ Doomes-Dav Drawine Ni&. Salt, William. Some Breathings of Life. 1663 Shaman, Cecil W., ed No More But Mv Love: Letters of George Fox London: Quaker Home Service, 1980. Simmonds, Mariha Lamentation for the LostSheep. 1655. S379 1. .Stranger, Hannah., and Nayler, James. O Eneland Thv Time Is Corne. Undated. S3793. . When the Lord Jesus Came to Jenisalem. 1655. S3794. Trapnel, Anna. Stranee and Wonderful News from Whitehall. 1654. T2034. True Narrative of the Examination, Trial, and SufFenng: of James Navler. 1657. T2789. Tme Relation of the kserved Sentence of the Grand Ouaker of Endand 1657. Weld, Thomas. The Perfect Pharisee. 1653. W 1S68A. Whitehead, John, Whitehead, George, and Fox the Younger, George. A Bief Discovery. 1659. Wl869. Winstanley, Gerrard. The break in^ of the Dav of God 1649. W3042. . Winstanlev: The Law of Freedom and Other Writines. Edited by Christopher Hill. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. . Works of Gerrard Winstanlev. Edited by George K Sabine. New York: Russel I and Russell Inc., 194 1. Alsop, James. "Gerrard Winstanley7sLater Life.' Past and Present, 82 ( 1979), 73-8 1. Anderson, A.B. "The Social Origins of the Early Quakers." Ouaker Histo- 68 ( 1979)- 33-40." . "A Study in the Sociology of Religious Perseeution: The First Quakers." Journal of Relimous History, 9 (1977), 247-62. Anderson, Philip J. "A Fiflh Monarchist Appeal and the Response of an independent Church at Canterbury, 1653." The 33 ( 1989), 72-80. Ash, James L. Jr. '"Oh No, It 1s Not the Scriptmes!' The Bible and the Spirit in George Fox." Ouaker Histox 63 ( 1974), 94-107. Austin, M.R. "Bible and Event in the Journal of George Fox" Journal of Theolomcal Studies, 32 (198 1), 82- 100. Bacon, Margaret Hope. Mothers of Feminism: The Stoy of Quaker Women in America San Francisco: Harper and Row Publishen, 1986. Bailey, Richard New Light on George Fox and Earlv Ouakerisrn: The Makin~and Unmaking of a GdSan Francisco: Mellen Research University Press, 1992. BaJi, Bryan W. A Great Expectation: Eschatoloeical Thought in English Protestantism to 1660. Leiden: E.J. BriIl, 1975. Barbour, Hugh. "Frorn the Lamb's War to the Quaker Magistmte." Ouaker Histoy, 55 ( I966), 3-23. . "Protestant Quakerism." Quaker Relifzious Thoueht, 1 1 ( 1969), 2-33. . "Quaker Prophetesses and Mothers in Israel." in Seekine the Li~ht:Essavs in uaker History in Honor of Edwin B. Bramer. Edited by J. William Frost and John M. Moore. Haverford, Pennsylvania: Pendle Hill Publications, 1986. en in Puritan Eneland. New Haven: Yale Univenity Press, 1964. . and Frost, J. William. The Ouakers. New York: Greenwood Press, 1988. . "Ranters, Diggers and Quakers Rebom." Friends Historical Association, 64 ( 1975),60-65. Barnan, Richard. Let Your Words Be Few: Svrnbolism of Speaking and Silence Arnone Seventeenth Cent- Ouake~.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Birkel, Michael L. "Review." Ouaker Histow 82 ( 1993), 1 1 1-12. ., and Newman, John W., ed The Lamb's War: Ouaker Essa~sto Honor Hu& Barbour. Richmond, Indiana: Earlharn College Press, 1992. Bitterman, M.G.F. "The Early Quaker Literature of Defense." Church Historv, 42 (1973), 203-28. Bittle, William G. James Navler 16 18- 1660: The OderIndicted bv Parliament. Richmond, Indiana: Friends United Press, 1986. . "The Trial of James Nayler and Religious Toleration in England." Quaker HistovJ 73 (1984), 29-33. Blackwood, Bruce Gordon. "Agrarian Unrest and Early Lancashire Quakers." Journal of the Friends' Historical Society, 5 1 ( 1%6), 72-76. Bozeman, Theodore Dwight, To Live Ancient Lives: The Primitivist Dimension in Puritanism. Chape1 Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1988. Brailsford, Mabel Richmond A OderFrom Cromwell's Amy: James Navler. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1927. . Ouaker Women 1650- 1690. London: Duckworth and Company, 19 15. Braithwaite, Alfred W. "Early Friends' Experience With Juries." Journal of the Friends' Historical Societv, 50 ( 1964), 2 17-17. . "Early Friends' Testimony Against Camal Weapons." Journal of the Friends' Historical Societv, 52 ( 1969), 10 1- 105. . "Thomas Rudyard: Early Friends' -Oracle of Law. "' Journal of the Friends' Historicai Society. Supplement No. 27, (1 956). Braithwaite, William C. The Beeinnin~sof Oualcerism. 2nd ed-, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955. . The Second Period of Ouakerism- 2nd ed, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961. Brayshaw, A.N. The Personality of Geo Fox. London: Headley Brothers Publishers, Ltd, 191 9- Brink, Andrew W. "Paradise Lost and James Nayler's Fail." Journal of the Frienàs' Histoncal Sociew 53 (1973), 99-1 12. Brinton, Howard. Friends for 300 Yem. London: George Allen and Unwin Limited, 1953. . "The Quaker Doctrine of the Holy Spirit" Quaker Relieious Th~ught,1 (1959), 2- 10. Brock, Peter. The Ouaker Peace Testirnonv 1660 to 19 14. York: Sessions Book Trust, 1990. Brown, Elisabeth Potts, and Stuard, Susan Mosher, ed Witnesses for Change: uaker Women Over Three Centuries. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1989. Burtt, Ruth G. Yïhe Quaker Marriage Declaration." Joumal of the Friends' Histoncal Society, 46 ( 1954)' 54-58. Butler, David M. "Friends' Suffenngs 1650-88: A Comparative Summary." Joumal of the Friends' Historical Society. 55 ( 1988)' 1 80-84. Cadbury. Henry J. "Answenng That of God." Ioumal of the Friends' Historical Socie, 39 (1947), 3- 14. . "Early Quakerkm and Uncanonical Lore." Harvard Theoloeical Review, 40 ( 1947). 177-205. . "The Edito Princeps of Fox's Journal." Journal of the Fn'ends' Historical Society. 53 ( 1974)' 197-2 18. . "Friends and the Inquisition at Malta." Journal of the Friends' Histoncal Societv. 53 (1974), 2 19-25. ' . "Obscure Chapter in Quaker History." Joumal of Relimon; 24 ( 1944)' 20 1- 13. Capp, Bernard S. The Fifth Monarchv Men: A Studv in Seventeenth-Century Endish Mil lenarianism. London: Faber and Faber, 1972. . "Godly Rule and English MilIenarïanism." Past and Preseng 52 ( 1971), 106- 17. . "The Millennium and Eschatology in England" Past and Present, 57 ( 1977)- 156-62. Carroll, Kenneth L. "Early Quakers and 'Going Naked As a Sip."' Quaker Histoy, 67 ( 1978), 69-87. . John Perrott: Earlv Quaker Schismatic. London: Fnends7Historical Society, 1971. . "A Look at James Milner and His 'False Prophecy. "' Quaker History, 74 ( I985), 18-26. . "Martha Simmonds, A Quaker Enigrna" Journal of the Friends7 -, -, 53 (1972), 3 1-52. . "Quaker Attitudes Towards Signs and Wonders." Journal of the Friends' Historical Societv, 54 ( 1977), 70-84. - "Sackcloth and Ashes and Other Signs and Wonders." Journal of the Friends' Historical Society, 53 ( 1975)-3 14-25. Cherry, Charles L. '-Enthusiasrn and Madness: Anti-Quakerism in the Seventeenth Century." Ouaker History, 73 ( l984), 1-24. Christianson, Paul. ''The Causes of the English Revolution: A Reappraisal." Journal of British Studies, I 5 ( 1W6), 40-75. . Reformen and Babvlon: Enpiish Apocalyptic Visions from the Reformation to the Eve of the Civil War. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978. . "Reformers and the Church of England Under Elizabeth 1 and the Early Stu-," Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 3 1 (198C), 463-82. Cogley, Richard W. "SeventeenthCentury English Millenarianism." Relieion, 17 ( 1987), 379-96. Cole, Aian. 'The Peace Testimony in 1659." Journal of the Friends7 Historical Society* 46 (1954), 48-52. . 'The Quakers and the English Revolution." Past and Present, 10 ( 1956), 39- 54. . "The Social Ongins of the Early Friends." The Journal of the Friends' Historical Society, 48 ( 1957), 99- 1 18. Cooper, Wilmer A. "Quaker Perspectives on the Nature of Man." OderRelieious Thou&& 3 ( 196 1 ), 15-24. Creasey, Maurice A. 'Inward' and 'Outward7: A Studv in Earlv Ouaker Lanmia~e. London: Friends' Historical Society, 1962. - "Quaker interpretation of the Significance of Christ." Quaker Reiieious Thou&, 1 (1959), 2-15. Culliton, Joseph T. Non-violence - Central to Christian Spirihüility: Perspectives fiom Scrioture to the Present. Edited by Joseph T. Culliton. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1982. Dailey, Barbara The Husbands of Margaret Fell." Centre for Seventeenth- Centurv Shidies, 2 ( 1987), 55-71. Davis, J.C. Fear. M-i.and Historv: The Ranters and Their Historians. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. . "Religion and the Stniggle for Freedom in the English Revolution." Historical Journal, 35 ( 1992). Davenport, Lucy. ''Chnst Jesus the Covenant of God: Two Views of the Quaker Doctrine of the Light" Ouaker Religious Thou& 26 ( 1993), 7- 16. Disbrey, Claire. "George Fox and Some Theories of Innovation in Religion." Relieious Studies, 25 ( 1989)- 6 1-74. Doncaster, L. Hu&. 'The State in Which Adam Was." Journal of the Friends' Historical Society, 4 1 ( 1949), 13-24. Dow, F.D. Radicalism in the English Revolution 1640- 1660. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1985. Durnbaugh, Donald F. "Baptists and Quakers - Lefi Wing Puritans?" Ouaker Histow, 62 (1973), 67-82. Edwards, George W. 'The Great Fire of London." Journal of the Friends' Histoncal society, 5 1 ( l966), 67-71. Ellsworth, Kathleen Anne. "'As Sheep Enfolded': William Erbery, the Seekers and Radical Religion in the English Revolution. " Unpublished M. k thesis, Queen's University, 1989. Endy, Melvin B. Jr. "The Interpretation of Quakerisrn: Rufus Jones and His Cntics." Ouaker Historv, 70 ( 198 1 ), 3-2 1. . William Penn and Earty Ouakerism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973. Evans, Eric J. "'Our Faithfül Testimony" - the Society of Friends and Tithe Payments, 1690- 1730." Journal of the Friends' Histoncal Society, 52 ( 1969)- t 06-2 1. Feola-Castelucci, Maryann. "'An Experience of Defeat: George Bishop, From Soldier to Quaker During the English Civil War and Interregnum." Unpublished Ph-D. dissertation, City University of New York, 1990. . "'Wamnge With ye Worlde': Fox's Relationship With Nayler." Quaker History, 8 1 ( 1992), 63-72. Finlayson, Mic hael. Historïans. Puritanism. and Enal ish Revolution: The Rel ieious Factor in Enelish Politics Before and Merthe Interregmm (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985. Firman, N.S. "Perceptions of the Quaker Movement in the 1650s." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of East Anglia, 1 985. Firth, Katharine R. The A~ocalwticTradition in Reformation Britain 1530- 1645. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979. Fletcher, A.J. "New Light on Religion and the English Civil War." The Journal pf Ecclesiastical History, 38 ( 1987), 95-1 06. Fogelkloy Emilia. James Navler: The Rebel Saint 16 1 8- 1660. Translated by Laj la Yapp. London: Emest Benn Lirnited, 193 1. Fogelklou Norlind, Emilia The Atonement of George Fox. Edited by Eleanore Prie Mather. Lebanon, Pemsylvania: Sowers Printing Company, 1969. . "Quakensm and Democracy." Journal of the Friends' Historical Societv, 42 ( 195O), 1 740. Frank, Joseph. The.Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955. Freiday, Dean, ed The D~Yof the Lord: Eschat* in Ouaker Persoectk~. Newberg, Oregon: The Barclay Press, 198 1. Friedman, Jerome. Blaspherny- ïmmorali. and Anarchv: The Ranters and the Endish Revolution. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1987. Fryer, Jonathan. -'Introduction." in George Fox and the Children of the Li&. London: Kyle Cathie Limited, 1991. Gardiner, Judith Kegan. "Re-Gendering Individualism: Margaret Fe11 Fox and Quaker Rhetoric." in Privileeine Gender in Earlv Modem England. Edited by Jean R. Brink. Kirksville, Missouri: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, Inc., 1993. Gilbert, C.D. "Some Incidents in Early Worcester Quakerism." Jounüil of the Fn'ends' Historical Society 57 ( 19941, 5- 12. Greaves, Richard L. Enemies Under His Feet: Radicals and Nonconformists in Britain. 1 664- 1677. Stanford: Stan ford University Press, 1990. . "John Bunyan and the Fifth Monarchists." Albion, 13 ( 1981 ), 83-95. . "The Puritan-Nonconfonnist Tradition in England, 1560- 1700." Albion, 17 f 1985), 449-86. . Secrets of the Kingdom: Bntish Radicals From the Po~ishPlot to the Revolution of 1688-1 689. Stadord: Stanford University Press, 1992. . "Shattered Expectations? George Fox, the Quakers, and the Restoration State, 1660- 1685." Albion5 24 (1W2), 237-59. , ed. Triumph Over Silence: Women in Protestant Histoy. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1985. Greene, Douglas G. "Muggletonians and Quakers: A Study in the Interaction of Seventeenth Century Dissent" Albion, 15 ( I983), 102-22. Grimes, Mary Cochran. "Saving Grace Among Puritans and Quakers." Ouaker History, 72 ( 1983), 3-26. Grubb, Edward The HiMcand the Inward Chn'st: A Studv in Ouaker Thouerht. Bishopsgate: Headley Brothers, 19 14. Gura, Philip F. A Glimpse of Sion's Glory: Puritan Radicalism in New England, 1620- 1660. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1984. Gwyn, Douglas. Awcalypse of the Word: The Life and Message of Geor~eFox [ 1624- 169 1 1. Richmond, indiana: Friends United Press, 1986. - The Covenant Crucified: Ouakers and the Rise of lapitalism. Wallingford, Pa: Pende Hill Publications, 1995. Haller, William. Liberty and Reforrnation in the Puri-tan Revolution. New York: Columbia University Press, 1955. Hamilton, Alastair. The Familv of Love. Cambridge: James Clarke and Company, 1981. Hill, Christopher. Antichrist in Seventeenth-Cenhirv Eneland. London: New Left Books, 1990. Revised Edition. . Exgerience of Defeat: Milton and Some Contemmraries. London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1984. . Nation of Change and NoveItv: Radical Politics. ReliPion- and Literature in Seventeenth Cenw Endand. London: Routledge, 1990. . "Quakers and the English Rev~lution.~~Journal of the Fnends7 Historical Societv, 56 ( l992), 165-79. . World Tunied Upside Down: Radical ldeas Durine the Endish Revolution. London: Temple Smith, 1972. Hirst, Derek. Authority and Conflict: Eneland 1603- 16%. London: Edward Arnold, 1986. Hodges, David George Fox and the Healine Minim. Guildford, Surrey: Friends Fellowship of Healing, 1995. Holden, David E. W. Friends Divided: Conflict and Division in the Society of Friends. Ric hrnond, Indiana: Friends United Press, I 988. Holshui, James, ed Parn~hietWars: Prose in the English Revolution. London: Frank Cass and Co. Ltd, 1992. Horle, Craig W. "Quakers and Baptists, 1647-1660." Baptist Qua.rterlvJ26 ( 1976), 344- 62. . Ouaken and the Endish Legal S-em 1660-1 688. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988. Howell, Roger. Puritans and Radicals in North Eneland. Lanham: University Press of Arnerica, 1984. Huber, Elaine C. "'A Wornan Must Not Speak' Quaker Women in the English Lefi Wing." in Women of Spirit: Female Leadership in the Jewish and Christian Traditions Edited by Rosemary Ruether and Eleanor McLaughlin. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979. Hudson, Winthrop S. "Gerrard Winstanley and the Early Quakers." Church History, 12 ( 1943)- 177-94. - Notes and Communications - "Quaker History: Dr. Hudson Replies." Journal of Religion, 24 ( 1944), 279-8 1. . "A Suppressed Chapter in Quaker History." Journal of Relieion, 24 (1944), 108-18. Hughes, AM. "Gender and Politics in Leveller Literature." Political Culture and Cultural Politics in Earlv Modem En land: Essays Presented to David Underdown Edited by Susan D. Amussen and Mark A. Kishlansky. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995. Huntington, Frank C. Jr. "Quakerism During the Commonwealth: The Experience of the light." Quaker History, 71 (1982)- 69-88. Hurwick, Judith Jones, and Vann, Richard. "The Social Origins of the Early Quakers." Past and Present, 48 (1970), 156-65. Ingie, H. Larry. First Amone Friends: George Fox and Lie Creation of Quakerism. New York: Odord Universiîy Press, 1994. -'From Mysticism to Radicalism: Recent Histotiography of Quaker Beginnings." Ouaker Historya 76 ( l987), 79-94. . "George Fox as Enthusiast." Journal of the Friends' Historicd Society, 55 ( l989), 265-70. . "George Fox, Hiktorian." Quaker Hi~t0r-y~82 ( 1993), 28-35. . "George Fox, MillenaRananTTAlbion, 24 ( 1W2), 26 1-78. . "Richard Hubberthome and History: The Crisis of 1659." Journal of the Friends' wstorical Societv, 56 ( l992), 1 89-200. Johnson, George Arthur. "Frorn Seeker to Finder A Study in Seventeenth-Century English Spirihialism Before the Quakers," Church History, 17 ( 1948), 299-3 15. Jones, Rufus M. Mvsticism and Democracv in the Ennlish Commonwealth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932. . Spiritual Refonnen of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Cemees. Boston: Beacon Press, 19 14. . Studies in Mvstical Relieion. New York: Rwell and Russell, 1970. First Published in 1909. Jones, T. Canby. "The Bible in George Fox and Contemporary Quakerism." Quaker Relieious Thoueht, 4 (1962), 18-36. . George Fox's Attitude Toward War. Richmond, Indiana: Friends United Press, 1972. Jordan, W.K The Development of Relieious Toleration in England. Vols. III and W. Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1965. Joms, Auguste. The Ouakers as Pioneers in Social Work. Translated by Thomas Kite Brown. Montclair, New Jersey: Patterson Smith, 1969. First Published in 193 1. Karsten, Peter. "Plotters and Proprietaries, 1682-83: The 'Council of Six' and the Colonies: Plan for Colonization or Front for Revolution?" Historian. 38 ( 1W6), 47484. Keene, J. Calvin. "Historie Quakensm and Mysticisrn." Ouaker Relieious Thou&, 7 (1965), 2-17. Kegl, Rosemary. "Women's Preaching, Absolute Property, and the Cruel Sufferings (For the Tmttis Sake) of Katherine Evans & Sarah Chevers." Women's Studies, 24 ( 1995),5 1-83. Kent, Stephen A. "Mysticisrn, Quakensm, and Relative Deprivation: A Sociological Reply to R.A. Naulty." Relimon, 19 ( 1989), 157-78. . The 'Other' Civil Religion and the Tradition of Radical Quaker Politics." Journal of Church and State, 36 ( 1994), 373-87. - 'The 'Papist' Charges Against the Interregnurn Quakers." Journal of Relimous Histow, 12 ( 1982), 1 80-90. - "Psychological and Mystical lnterpretations of Early Quakerisrn: William James and Rufus Jones." Relieion, 17 ( 1 987), 25 1-74. . -'Quaker Ethic and the Fixed Price Policy: Ma. Weber and Beyond." Sociological Inauiry, 53 ( 1983), 16-32. - "Relative Depnvation and Resource Mobilization: A Study of Eariy Quakerism." British Journal of Socioloev, 33 ( 1982), 529-44. Knott, John R. Jr. "The Acts of George Fox: A Reading of the Journal." Prose Studies, 6 ( 1983), 2 15-38. Knowles, G.W. ed Friends: Some Quaker Peace DocumentS. London: Peace Book Company, 1939. Knox, R.A. Enthusiasm: A Chapter in the Historv of Religion. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1950. Kunze, Bonnelyn Young. Marearet Fell and the Rise of Ouakerisrn. London: The Macmillan Press Llmited, 1994. Lamont, William M. Godlv Rule: Politics and Religion. 1603-60. London: Macmillan and Company Limited, 1969. Lavare, Ruth M. "The Early Letters of George Fox: 1650-1660." Unpublished Ph D. Dissertation. University of California, 1954. Levy, Barry. Ouakers and the Amencan Familv: British Settlement in the Delaware Val lev. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. Li y Tai. Discord in Zion: The Puritan Divines and the Puritan Revolution 1640- -- -- 1660 The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1973. Loukes, Harold The Discovery of O~ake~sm.London: George G. Harrap and Company Limite& 1960. . The Ouaker Contri-bution. London: SCM Press Limiteci, 1965. Lloyd, Arnold. Ouaker Social Historv 1669-1 738. London: Longmans, Green and Company, 1950. Matar, N.I. "Some Notes on George Fox and Islam." Journal of the Friends7 Historical Societv, 55 ( 1989), 27 1-6, Mack, Phyllis. Visionarv Women: Ecstatic Prophecv in Seventeenth Cenw Endand. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1992. Maclear, James F. "Popular Anticlericalism in the Puritan Revolution." Jounial of the History of Ideas, 17 ( l956), 443-70. . *'Quakensm and the End of the Interregnum: A Chapter in the Domestication of Radical Puritanisrn." Church Historv, 19 ( 1950), 140- 70. Marx, Steven. "The Prophet Disanned: Milton and the Quakers." Studies in English Literature, 32 (1992), 111-28. Matthews, Ronaid. Endish Messiahs: Studies of Six English Relirrious Pretenders 1 656- 1 927. London: Methuen & Company Limited, 1936. McGinn, Bernard. Apocat-vptic Spirituality. New York: Paulist Press, 1979. McGregor, J.F. and Reay, Barry. eds. Radical Relimon in the Endish Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984. . "Rantensrn and the Development of Early Quakerism." Journal of Relieious Histom 9 ( 1977), 34963. Mamers, Emily. Elizabeth Hooton First Ouaker Woman Preac her. 1600- 1672. London: Headley Brothers, 19 14. Mason, James. Cromwell. York: Longman, 1980. Monaghan, Hanna Darlington. "Dear Georgg": George Fox Man and Proohet Philadelphix Franklin Publishing Company, 1970. Moore, Rosemary Anne. 'The Faith of the First Quakers: nie Development of Their Beliefs and Practices Up to the Restoration." Unpublished PbD. dissertation, University of Birmingham, 1993. . "Leaders of the Primitive Quaker Movement" Friends Histoxical Association, 85 ( l396), 29-44. . "Reactions to Persecution in Primitive Quakerism." Jooumal of the Friends' Historical Societv, 57 ( 1995). 123-3 1. Morgan, Nicholas J. "Lancashire Quakers and the Oath: 1660-1 722." Journal of the Friends' Historical Society, 54 ( 198O), 235-54. . "The Quaken and the Establishment, 1660-1730, With Specific Reference to the North-West of England" Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Lancaster, 1985. Mortimer, Russell. Early Britimuakerisrn: The Society of Friends in the City 1654- 1 700. Bristol: Bristol Branch of the Historical Association, 1 967. . "Marriage Discipline of Early Friends." Journal of the Fnends' Historical Society, 48 ( 1957)' 175-95. Morton, Arthur Leslie. The World of the Ranters: Relieious Radicalism in the Enelish Revolution. London: Lawrence & Wishart, IWO. Moss, Jean Dietz "Godded with Gd:Hendrik Niclaes and His Familv of Love. Philadelphia: The Amencan Philosophical Society, 198 1. Muilett, Michael, ed. New Li&t on George Fox. York: The Ebor Press, 199 1. . Radical Reli~ousMovements in Eariv Modem Eurow. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1980. Muiligan, Lotte and Richards, Judith. "A 'Radical' Problem: The Poor and the English Reformes in the Mid-Seventeenth Century." bumal of British Studies, 29 ( 1990), 1 184. Naulty, R.A "Stephen A. Kent and the Mysticism of the Early Quakers." Relieion, 19 ( I989), 1 5 1-56. Nuttall, Geoffrey F. Holv Spirit in Puritan Faith and Experience. Oxford: Basil BIackwell, 1947. . "JamesNayler: A Fresh Approach." Journal of the Friends' Historical Society- SuppIement No. 26, ( 1954). . "Last of James Nayler, Robert Rich and the Church of the First-Born.'' Friends' Quarterlv, 23 ( l985), 527-34. . "A Letter by James Nayler Appropnated to George Fox." Journal of the Friends' Historical Societv, 55 ( 1988), 178-79. . "Overcoming the World: The Early Quaker Programme." Sancti~and Secularitv: The Church and the World. Edited by Derek Baker. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1973. . "Reflections on William Penn's Preface to George Fox's Journal." Journal of the Friends' Historical Sotie% 57 ( 1995). 1 13-17. . Studies in Christian Enthusiasm: Illustrated from Early Quakerism. Wallingford, Pennsylvania: Pendle Hi1 1, 1948. . Welsh Saints 1640- 1660. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1 957. OyDay,Rosemay. "Immanuel Borne: A Defense of the Ministerial Order." Journal of Ecclesiastical Histo~,27 ( 1976). 10 1- 14. Oliver, Parnela M. "Quaker Testimony and the Lamb's War." Unpubiished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Melbourne, 1977. . "The Quakers and Quietism From George Fox to Thomas Story." Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Melbourne, 1972. O'Malley, Thomas. "'Defying the Powen and Tempering the Spirit': A Review of Quaker Control Over Their Publications." Journal of Ecclesiastical Histo~,33 (1982), 72-88. Palmer, T. Vail. "Eariy Friends and the Bible: Some Observations." Quaker Relimous Thou&, 26 (1993), 41-55. Penney, Norman, ed. The First Pub1 ishen of Tntth. London: Headey Brothers, 1907. Petegorsky, David W. Lefi-Wine Democracv in the En lish Civil War: A Shidy of the Social Philosophv of Gerrard Winstanle~.Gloucestershire: Alan Sutton Publishing Limited, 1995. First Published in 1940. Pickvance, T. Joseph. Geo- Fox and the Purefoys. London: Friends' Historical Society, 1970. Georee Fox on the Lieht of Christ Within. Gloucester: George Fox Fund, 1984. . "George Fox's Use of the Word 'Seed'" Journal of the Friends' Historical Society, 41 (1949), 25-28. . Reader's Cornpanion to Georee Fox's Journal. London: Quaker Home Service, 1989. Punshon, John. Portrait in Grey. London: Quaker House Services, 1984. Raistri& Arthur. Ouakers in Science and Industrv. Newton Abbot: David and Charles Limited, 1968. First Published in 1950. Reay, Bany. "The Authorities and Early Restoration Quakerism." Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 34 ( 1983)- 69-84. . 'The Quakers and 1659: Two Newly Discovered Broadsides by Edward Burrough." journal of the Friends' Historical Societv, 54 ( 1977)- 10 1- f 1. . The Ouakers and the Enelish Revolution. London: Temple Smith, 1985. Rogers, R. Michael. "Quakerism and the Law in Revolutionary England." Canadian Journal of History, 22 ( I987), 149-74. Ross, Isabel. "The uifl uence of North-West England in Early Quaker Expansion. " Journal of the Friends' Historical Society. Supplement No. 24, ( 1952). . Mamiret Fell: Mother of Ouakerism. London: Longmans, Green and Company, 1949. Ruether, Rosemary Radfort. "Prophets and Humanists: Types of Religious Feminism in Stuart England" Journal of Relieion, 70 ( 1 990)- 1- 18. Russell, Elbert. The History of Ouakerism. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1942. Schenk, W. The Concern for Social Justice in the mintan Revolution. London: Longmans, Green and Company, 1948. Schofield, Russell G. "Some Ranter Leaders and Their Opinions." Bulletin of Friends Historical Association, 39 ( 1950)- 63-73. Scott, David. Ouakerism in York 1650- 1720. York: University of York, 199 1. Scott, Jonathan. '-Radicaiism and Restoration: The Shape of the Stuart Experience." Historkal Journal, 3 1 ( l988), 453-67. Seppanen, Aimo. "The Inner Light in the Joumals of George Fox: A Sernantic Study." Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Helsinki, 1965. Sewel, William. The Historv of the Christian People Called Ouakers. New York: Baker & Crane, 1844. From the 1725 Engiish Edition. Sharman, Cecil W. 'George Fox and His Family. Parts 1 and U." Friends Historïcal Association, 74 ( l985), 1- 19; 75 ( l986), 1- 1 1. . George Fox and the Ouake~.London: Quaker Home Service, 199 1. Smith, Nigel. Perfection Proçlaimed: Lanmage and Literature in Endish Radical Relirrion 1 640-1660. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989. Solt, Leo F. "Anti-Intellectualisrn in the Pwitan Revolution." Church Histos 25 ( 1W6), 306- 16. . "The Fifth Monarchy Men: Politics and the Millennium." Church History? 30 (196 l), 3 14-24. . Saints in Arms: Puritanism and Dernocran, in Cromwell's hv. London: Oxford University Press, 1959. Steele, Springs. "Feminist Biblical Hermeneutics." Quaker Religïous Thou~ht, 26 (1 994)- 29-42. Steere, Douglas V. New York: fadist Press, 1984. Sykes, John. The Ouakers: A New Look at Their Place in Society. London: Allan Wingate, 1958. Taylor, Emest E. The Valiant Si*. London: The Bannisdale Press, 1947. Thomas, Keith. "The Levellen and the Franchise." The Interregnum: The Que9 for Settlement 1646- 1660. Edited by G.E. Aylmer. London: The Macmillan Press, Limited, 1972. . "Women and the Civil War Sects." Past and Preseng 1 3 ( 1 958)- 42-62. Tolles, Fredenck B. Ouakers and the Atlantic Culture. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1947. . "1652 in History: Changing Perspectives on the Founding of Quakerisrn." Then and Now. Edited by Anna Brinton Freeport, New York: Books for Libraries Press, 1960. Tolrnie, M. The Triwnph of the Saints. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Toon, Peter, ed. Puritans. the Millennium and the Fuhire of lsrael: Puritan Eschatologv 1600 to 1660. Cambridge: James Clarke and Company Limited, 1970. Trevett, Christine. Women and Quakerïsrn in the Seventeenth Centwy. York: The Ebor Press, 199 1. - "The Women Around James Nayler, Quaker: A Matter of Emphasis." Reli pion, 20 ( 1WO), 249-73. Troeltsch Ernst. The Social Teachine of the Ckstian Churchg. Translated by Olive Wyon. Vol. n. London: George Allen and Unwin Lirnited, 193 1. Tual, Jacques. "Sexual Equality and Conjugal Harmony." Journal of the Friends Hiçtorical Society, 55 (1988), 16 1-74. Underdown, David. Revel- Riot. and Rebellion: Po~ularPolitics and Culture in England 1603- 1660. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985. Underwood, Ted L. "The Baptist Henry Denne and the Quaker Doctrine of the Imer Light" Ouaker Histo~,56 (1967), 34-40. Van Etten, Henry. George Fox and the Ouake~.Tninslated by E. Kelvin Osbom. London: Longmans, 1959. Van& Richard T. "Friends Sufferings - Collected and Recollected" Quaker History, 61 (1972)- 24-35. . "From Radicalkm to Quakerism: Gerrard Winstanley and Friends." Journal of the Friends' Historical Society, 49 ( 1959), 4 146. . "Quakerism and the Social Structure in the Interregnurn." Past and Presenc 43 (1969), 71-91, . 'The Social Devebpment of Enelish Ouakerism 1655-1 755. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969. Vipont, El m'da. Geo- Fox and the Valiant Sixty. London: Hamish Hamilton, 1975. . The Stocy of Ouakerism. London: The Bannisdale Press, 1954. * - Walzer, Michael. The Revolution of the Saints: A Studv in the Ongins of Radical Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965. Watkins, Owen C. The Puritan Experience. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972. Watts, Michael R. The Dissenters. Vol. l of From the Reformation to the French Revolution. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978. Whitney, Janet Payne. "The Apprenticeship of George Fox." Jooumal of the Friends' Historical Society, 5 1 ( 1965)- 3-20. Wilcox, Catherine M. Handmaids of the Lord: Theolow and Wornen's Minis* in Seventeenth-Centurv Enelish Ouakerism. Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1995. Wildes, Hany Emerson. Voice of the Lord: A Biomohv of George Fox. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1965. Wilson, John F. Pul~itin Parliament: Puritanism the Enelish Civil Wan 1640- 1 648. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969. Wilson, Theodore A., and Merli, Frank J. "Naylor's Case and the Dilemma of the Protectorate." University of Birmingham Historical Journal, 10 ( 1965- 66)- 44-59. Woodhouse, A.S.P. Puritanikm and Liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951. Woolwych, Ahn"The Cromwellian Rotectorate: A Military Dictatorship?" Histoy 75 ( 19901,207-3 1. Zagorin, Perez. Rebels and Rulen 1500- 1660. Vol. II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. Zakai, Avihu. Exile and finedom: History and Apocal~sein the Puritan Migration to America Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. APPENDIX 1 THE LEWLLERS nie Levellen were a group of disparate radicals who were disappointed with the lack of social change that occurred following Parliament's victory over the King's forces in the Civil Wars. They united as a group between 1646 and 1649 to forward their agenda,"' contending that al1 Iaws should be based on Christian principles consonant with society's welfare and with the removal of tyranny and oppression. Levellen advocated fieedorn of speech and of the press, and to protect the people fiom political repression, placing limits on the powers of those who represented the people. They argued that Parliamentary elections should be held a~uallyor at least biannually so that Members would not become corrupted by the power they possessed. Levellen demanded religious liberty and some believed that the clergy were unnecessary and exploitive, and that common people could understand religious truth better than the leamed clergy who obscured the scriptures. They also saw lawyers as exploiters of the people and distorters of the law, and believed that the 1aw should be translated and expressed simply so people could plead their own cases before their neighbours who would adjudicate according to simple equity. Levellen were concemed to relieve the poor, and tended to be small property holders themselves." The Leveller agenda favoured the economically "'Frank, p. 2. =Brian Manning, "The Levellers and Religion," in Radical Reli~on, pp. 65-90. independent people of the middling mnks of society, and sought to protect small tradespeople from the negative effects of current economic change? Levellers wanted the govenunent to extend the franchise,= prohibit economic monopolies, and abolish tithes and imprisonment for debt? When Levellea fomented rninor rnutinies in a few Amyregiments in Apd and May 1649, they were quickly suppressed and some of the ringleaders were executed? Quakers seem to have derived many of their social goals from the Levellers, but Fox had harsh words for them. He numbered Levellers among those ^who are in notions, whose minds are turned From the Light" He charged that they attempted to reform society without God's inspiration and direction, and that their goals were self serving, asserting that they were "levelling with their earthly nature, and speaking of things of God through the lusts of the flesh...who go under a colour of levelling," but "draw people's mincis into the earth." Fox upheld, "such that dwell in the Light, whose minds are guided up to Goci... to serve one another in love, such levellers that levels down the '=F.D. Dow, Radicalism in the English Revolution 1640- 1660 (Oxford: Basil Biackwell, 19851, p. 56. a4While Joseph Frank argued that the Levellen would have extended the franchise only to householden, Keith Thomas offered evidence that Levellers would have preferred to enfranchise al1 but the poorest and least independent of the male population. in any event, the Levellers wished to lower property qualifications to give a substantially larger num ber of England's men a voice in Parliarnentary elections. See Frank, pp. 176- 77; Keith Thomas, "The Levellers and the Franchise," in The Interregnum: The Ouest for Settlement 1646-1660, ed. by G.E. Aylmer (London: The Macmillan Press, Ltd., i972), pp. 57-78. "Frank, p. 1 14. 0 *6~rank,pp. 204,209. 303 comrption and filth, with us are hono~red."~Nayler agreed that the Levellers did not build on "the rock of Christ's tr~th~~ "Fox, Declaration Aeainst Profession, pp. 3-6. 828JamesNayler, Answer to Twenty-Eieht OuesEio ns of Francis Harris, 1655, N262, p. 19. APPENDDCn THE RANlXRS J-C. Davis contended that the Ranters lived largely in the min& of seventeenth century propagandists who "projected" their fear of heresy and anarchy ont0 this nonexistent sect He suggested that twentieth cenhuy Marxist historians like Chrktopher Hill and Arthur Leslie Morton then impnidently believed these propagandists in their ideologically motivated desire to find antireligious opponents of property interests among the cornmon people during the English ~evolution." However, contemporw reports of encounten with flesh and blood Ranters, records of Ranter pro sec ut ion^,^ and uniquely "playful" and "boisterous" extant writings by Ranters provide solid evidence of a Ranter presence in rnid-seventeenth century ~ngland."' Fox recaIled that in 165 1 he met with Ranters, whom he called %ose people that had tasted of the power of God but was al 1 scattered to pieces." They "had spent their portions ...and now they were dry; they had some kind of meetings but twk tobacco and drunk ale in them and so grew light and loose." Fox's assessrnent indicated that he recognized the Ranten as people who shared some aspects of his own faith, but who had become unfaithful, no longer heeded divine 829 J-C. Davis, Fear. Myth. and Historv: The Ranters and Their Historians (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 4,9, 13, 123-37. " Hill, Nation of Change, pp. 174, 177-78. 83 1 Byron Nelson, "The Ranters and the Limits of Language," in James Holstun, ed., Pamphlet Wars: Prose in the English Revolution (London: Frank Cass and Co. Ltd., 1992), pp. 63,70. 305 inspiration, and Iived fiivolously. When a Ranter responded to Fox's theology warmly and declared himself to be "onen with Fox in 1652, the Quaker leader responded by labelling this undesired cordiality a "slander7' against himself and the tmth. lu* Evidently there were sigificant points of agreement which Fox preferred to deny to those with a reputation for immorality. That wune year Fox, who would later argue so strenuously for toleration of Quakers, wrote a letter to the justices of Westmorland in which he praised Parliament for its laws against Ranters and such blasphemer~.~~ "Ranterism" was not a sect or an organized rno~ement,~but was rather "a style of protest," "'a "rn~oci,"~or an athtude expressed by pesons who rejected conventional morality and traditional Christian orthodoxy. Ranten shared the pantheistic belief that God existed in al1 things and a Spiritualist faith that stressed the divine presence in dl persans."' Although Ranters were antinomians who insisted that the spiritual person was fieed from obedience to preordained moral laws, it wouid be incorrect to characterize al1 Ranters as libertine or amoral, since only some employed the 832SwarthrnoreMSS, 7: 142, 1652. "3Swarthmore MSS, 7334, "To the Right Honorable the Justices of the Peace for Westrnorland," 1652. Fox's early use of such conventional titles of respect was contrary to the practice that was soon to develop among Friends. However, Fox was careful to point out to the justices that: "That which is right honorable is ...pure ... of God." J.F. McGregor, "Seeken and Ranten," in Radical Relieion, p. 129. 835 Nelson, p. 63. 836 J.F. McGregor, "Rantensm and the Development of Early Quakerism," Journal of Relieious History, 9 (1977), 350. "Morton, pp. 17,70-71,75-76,82. 306 antinomian concept to defend a libertine life~tyle.~~Some Ranters such as Abiezer Coppe offered a social protest that was predicated upon the moral values of compassion and generosity toward the poor and ~ppressed?~It seerns, therefore, that antinornianism codd denote the belief that the redeemed must act as the Spirit imrnediately led them to do at the moment, rather than behave according to preestablished laws given to others in the past and recorded in scnpture. in this the Quakers, who shared the conternporary Spiritualist milieu with the ~anters,~were similar. Ln the highly polemical religious atmosphere of the 165Os, Quakers understandably were accused of king Ranten and of sharing their antinomianisrn and religious anarchy."' It has been noted that Quakers did not consider themselves bound to baptize persons or participate in communion merely because the fir~century Christians had ken so commanded. Indeed, Nayler asserted that the Cornrnandments are not a "rule of Iife" for those who are in the new Covenant and contended that "the law in the heart, and..Christ is the rule of life to me, and my law is spintual and not moral." Nayler thus insisted that one must be led only by the Light's immediate g~idance."~However, it was also his contention that Christ's Light would lead one into perfect rnorality, not into arnorality, and that the Quakers' insistence on Watts, pp. 179, 183. =%orton, pp. 87-89, 1 1 1. %Il, Nation of Change, p. 169. "'McGregor, "Seekers and Ranters," in Radical Relimon, p. 13 1. "wayler, Answer to Ouaken Catechism, pp. 1 1- 12. 307 siniess perfection indicated that Friends differed more from the Ranters than anyone?-' "~ayler, Boaster BareB, pp. 10- 1 1. APPEwDrx III THE FAMILISTS One group which wodd have agreed with the concepts of the believer's siniess perfection and divine inhabitation was the Family of Love, or Familists. ûriginating in the Netherlands, some Farnilists were present in England by the late sixteenth century. Although direct connections between the Quakers and the Familists cannot be discovered, the Familists were of that Spintuakt milieu in England which the Quakers sharedeW Familists believed that "Christ is come forth in their flesh, even as he came forth of the Virgin Mary." In this, they held that the etemal Christ was bom in believers, that the believer was -'boni of Gd"and thus became "Christ in a spiritual ser~se.""~ Like the Quakers and other Spirituaiists, the Familists' eschatology was patterned after the teachings of the twelflh century thinker Joachim of Fiore, who taught that the age of the Holy Spirit would come to replace the contemporary age of the Son. The age of the Spirit was to be an era of love and spiritual liberty in which divine inspiration and revelation would corne to believers' hearts? FamiIists and Quakers believed that age had arrived in their own bme. The Familist leader Hendnk NicIaes taught that the believer could become deified, or as he expressed it, "Godded with God." Such a person &u Alastair Hamilton, The Familv of Love (Cambridge: James Clarke and Company, 1981), pp. 3,4, 115, 123, 139. "'Hamilton, pp. 1 18, 123-24. 816 Morton, pp. 126, 182. 309 is "so Godded..with the Godhead of Jesus Christ, that he in his inward man is altogether becorne unifom or made one in the heavenly being or celestial state with the Godhead." Believen had "put off Adam [the fallen human nature] and put on Christ" Like the Quakers, the Familists also insisted upon the Spirit's power to inform and transfomi believers perfectly. With the Friends, Niclaes had aiso looked for the imminent day of judgment when the righteous would deupon earth, and spoke of God's Light in humankind Fox seems to bave considered Familist beliefs sufficiently shilar to his own that he possessed some of Niclaes' writings, which were translated into English and published dwing the 1640s.~~The Quaker movement took roots in geographical areas such as the north, Bristol and London where the Familists had also gained support. Familist ideas were held by an English group known as the Grindletonians who have been suggested as a link of continuity between Familists and Quaken, although direct influences and contacts cannot be pro~en."~Nevertheless, Farnilist concepts certainly were available in England to be adopted or adapted by English religious radicals of the mid-seventeenth century, and their concepts of divine inhabitation and human divinization bore resemblance to the Quaker beiiefs that are discussed in Chapter Four above. - "7~orksby Niclaes which were published in English translation during the 1640s include The Prophecv of the SDI~~of Love, 1649, NI 129, and A True Testification of the S~iritualLand of Peace, 1449, N 113 1. "'~ean Dietz Moss, "Godded with God: Hendrik Niclaes and His Familv of Love (Philadelphia: The Amencan Philosophical Society, 1981 ), pp. 8, 11,33,46,57,59,68. The Fiflh Monarchist movement arose in 165 1 as a "pressure group" supported by some Baptists and Independents who endeavoured to reform the govemment and so prepare the world for Christ's tnumphant retum and the establishment of his Kingdom on earth. This movement denved its name from a biblical prophecy of a divine tifth and final monarchy that wodd replace al1 the human kingdoms of the world (Daniel 236- 45). Since they believed that the Protectorate of Cromwell that was established in 1653 was usurping the authority that nghtfully belonged only to Christ and his saints, a few Fi& Monarchists were prepared to empioy violent measures to establish a govemment composed of saints. A few of the most economicaily disadvantaged of them attempted insurrections in 1657 and 166 1. Economic circumstances seem to have influenced their decision to rise at least as much as theology did. Fifth Monarchists were pnmarily labourers, servants and jounieyrnen in the urban south of England, and may have numbered up to ten thousand penons. A few leading Fifth Monarchists were prosperous clergy, Amy officen, or justices of the peace, and twelve had been Members of the Nominated Parliament of 1653. However, many more were ernployed in economically insecure occupations. Despite the violence of a few, the great majority Iimited their belligerence to strident verbal denunciations of the government, and awaited a clear sign fiom God that it was time to revolt w9~app,Fifth Monêrch~Men, pp. 134, 137-40, 1 72, 177, l90-92,230; 'The Fi& Monarchists and Popular Millenarianism," in Radical Religion, pp. 170-71;Hill, Experience of Defeaf pp. 54,56,62. lMAGE EVALUATI O N TEST TARGET (QA-3) APPLIED IMAGE,lric =- Io53 East Main Street --.- - Rochester. NY t 4609 USA ------Phone: 716/482-0300 ------Fax: 71 61280-5989 @ 1993. Applied Image. 1%. All Rights Rasenred