A Portraiture of Quakerism Volume Ii Part 15

The Quakers reject every thing that appears to them to be superst.i.tious, or formal, or ceremonious, or ostentatious, or spiritless, from their wors.h.i.+p.

They believe that no ground can be made holy; and therefore they do not allow the places on which their Meeting-houses are built to be consecrated by the use of any human forms.

Their Meeting-houses are singularly plain. There is nothing of decoration in the interior of them. They consist of a number of plain long benches with backs to them; There is one elevated seat at the end of these. This is for their ministers. It is elevated for no other reason, than that their ministers may be the better heard. The women occupy one half of these benches, and sit apart from the men.

These benches are not intersected by part.i.tions. Hence there are no distinct pews for the families of the rich, or of such as can afford to pay for them: for in the first place, the Quakers pay nothing for their seats in their Meeting-houses; and, in the second, they pay no respect to the outward condition of one another. If they consider themselves, when out of doors, as all equal to one another in point of privileges, much more do they abolish all distinctions, when professedly a.s.sembled in a place of wors.h.i.+p. They sit therefore in their Meeting-houses undistinguished with respect to their outward circ.u.mstances, [138]as the children of the same great parent, who stand equally in need of his a.s.sistance; and as in the sight of Him who is no respecter of persons, but who made of one blood all the nations of men who dwell on all the face of the earth.

[Footnote 138: Spiritual officers, such as elders and overseers, sit at the upper part of the Meeting-house.]

The Quaker ministers are not distinguishable, when in their places of wors.h.i.+p, by their dress. They wear neither black clothes, nor surplices, nor gowns, nor bands. Jesus Christ, when he preached to the mult.i.tude, is not recorded to have put on a dress different from that which he wore on other occasions. Neither do the Quakers believe that ministers of the church ought, under the new dispensation, to be a separate people, as the Levites were, or to be distinguished on account of their office from other men.

The Quakers differ from other Christians in the rejection of psalmody, as a service of the church. If persons feel themselves so influenced in their private devotions, [139]that they can sing, as the Apostle says, "with the spirit and the understanding," or "can sing[140] and make melody in their hearts to the Lord," the Quakers have no objection to this as an act of wors.h.i.+p. But they conceive that music and psalmody, though they might have been adapted to the ceremonial religion of the Jews, are not congenial with the new dispensation that has followed; because this dispensation requires, that all wors.h.i.+p should be performed in spirit and in truth. It requires that no act of religion should take place, unless the spirit influences an utterance, and that no words should be used, except they are in unison with the heart. Now this coincidence of spiritual impulse and feeling with this act, is not likely to happen, in the opinion of the Quakers, with public psalmody.

It is not likely that all in the congregation will be impelled, in the same moment, to a spiritual song, or that all will be in the state of mind or spirit which the words of the psalm describe. Thus how few will be able to sing truly with David, if the following verse should be brought before them: "As the hart panteth after the water-brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O G.o.d." To this it may be added, that where men think about musical harmony or vocal tunes in their wors.h.i.+p, the amus.e.m.e.nt of the creature will be so mixed with it, that it cannot be a pure oblation of the Spirit, and that those who think they can please the Divine Being by musical instruments, or the varied modulations of their own voices, must look upon him as a Being with corporeal organs, sensible, like a man, of fleshly delights, and not as a Spirit, who can only be pleased with the wors.h.i.+p that is in spirit and in truth.

[Footnote 139: 1 Cor. 14. 15.]

[Footnote 140: Ephes. 5. 19.]

The Quakers reject also the consecration and solemnization of particular days and times. As the Jews, when they became Christians, were enjoined by the Apostle Paul, not to put too great a value upon "days,[141] and months, and times, and years;" so the Quakers think it their duty as Christians to attend to the same injunction. They never meet upon saints days, as such, that is, as days demanding the religious a.s.semblings of men, more than others; first, because they conceive this would be giving into popish superst.i.tion; and secondly, because these days were originally the appointment of men and not of G.o.d, and no human appointment, they believe, can make one day holier than another.

[Footnote 141: Gal. 4. 10.]

For the latter reason also they do not a.s.semble for wors.h.i.+p on those days which their own government, though they are greatly attached to it, appoint as fasts. They are influenced also by another reason in this latter case. They conceive as religion is of a spiritual nature, and must depend upon the spirit of G.o.d, that true devotion cannot be excited for given purposes or at a given time. They are influenced again by the consideration, that the real fast is of a different nature from that required. [142] "Is not this the fast, says Isaiah, that I have chosen, to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke? Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast out, to thy house? When thou seest the naked, that thou cover him, and that thou hide not thyself from thy own flesh?" This the Quakers believe to be the true fast, and not the work of a particular day, but to be the daily work of every real Christian.

[Footnote 142: Isaiah 58. 6. 7.]

Indeed no one day, in the estimation of the Quakers, can be made by human appointment either more holy or more proper for wors.h.i.+p than another. They do not even believe that the Jewish Sabbath, which was by the appointment of G.o.d, continues in Gospel times, or that it has been handed down by divine authority as the true Sabbath for Christians. All days with the Quakers are equally holy, and all equally proper for the wors.h.i.+p of G.o.d. In this opinion they coincide with the ever memorable John Hales. "For prayer, indeed, says this venerable man, was the Sabbath ordained: yet prayer itself is Sabbathless, and admits of no rest, no intermission at all. If our hands be clean, we must, as our Apostle commands us, lift them up every where, at all times, and make every place a church, every day a Sabbath-day, every hour canonical. As you go to the market; as you stand in the streets; as you walk in the fields--in all these places, you may pray as well, and with as good acceptance, as in the church: for you yourselves are temples of the Holy Ghost, if the grace of G.o.d be in you, more precious than any of those which are made with hands."

Though, however, the Quakers believe no one day in the sight of G.o.d to be holier than another, and no one capable of being rendered so by human authority, yet they think that Christians ought to a.s.semble for the public wors.h.i.+p of G.o.d. They think they ought to bear an outward and public testimony for G.o.d; and this can only be done by becoming members of a visible church, where they may be seen to acknowledge him publicly in the face of men. They think also, that the public wors.h.i.+p of G.o.d increases, as it were, the fire of devotion, and enlarges the sphere of spiritual life in the souls of men. "G.o.d causes the inward life, says Barclay, the more to abound when his children a.s.semble themselves diligently together, to wait upon him; so that as iron sharpeneth iron, the seeing the faces of one another, when both are inwardly gathered unto the life, giveth occasion for the life secretly to rise, and to pa.s.s from vessel to vessel: and as many candles lighted and put in one place, do greatly augment the light and make it more to s.h.i.+ne forth, so when many are gathered together into the same life, there is more of the glory of G.o.d, and his power appears to the refreshment of each individual; for that he partakes not only of the light and life raised in himself, but in all the rest. And therefore Christ hath particularly promised a blessing to such as a.s.semble in his name, seeing he will be in the midst of them." For these and other reasons, the Quakers think it proper, that men should be drawn together to the public wors.h.i.+p of G.o.d: but if so, they must be drawn together at certain times. Now as one day has never been, in the eyes of the Quakers, more desirable for such an object than another, their ancestors chose the first day in the week, because the Apostles had chosen it for the religious a.s.sembling of themselves and their followers. And in addition to this, that more frequent opportunities might be afforded them of bearing their outward testimony publicly for G.o.d, and of enlarging the sphere of their spiritual life, they appointed a meeting on one other day in the week in most places, and two in some others, for the same purpose.

CHAP. XIII.

_Miscellaneous particularities--Quakers careful about the use of such words as relate to religion--Never use the words "original sin"--nor "word of G.o.d," for the scriptures--Nor the word "Trinity"--Never pry into the latter mystery--Believe in the manhood and divinity of Jesus Christ--Also in a resurrection, but sever attempt to fathom that subject--Make little difference between sanctification and justification--- Their ideas concerning the latter_.

The Quakers are remarkably careful, both in their conversation and their writings, on religious subjects, as to the terms which they use. They express scriptural images or ideas, as much as may be, by scriptural terms. By means of this particular caution, they avoid much of the perplexity and many of the difficulties which arise to others, and escape the theological disputes which disturb the rest of the Christian world.

The Quakers scarcely ever utter the words "original sin," because they never find them in use in the sacred writings.

The scriptures are usually denominated by Christians "the word of G.o.d."

Though the Quakers believe them to have been given by divine inspiration, yet they reject this term. They apprehend that Christ is the word of G.o.d. They cannot therefore consistently give to the scriptures, however they reverence them, that name which St. John the Evangelist gives exclusively to the Son of G.o.d.

Neither do they often make use of the word "Trinity." This expression they can no where find in the sacred writings. This to them is a sufficient warrant for rejecting it. They consider it as a term of mere human invention, and of too late a date to claim a place among the expressions of primitive Christianity. For they find it neither in Justin Martyr, nor in Irenaeus, nor in Tertullian, nor in Origen, nor in the Fathers of the three first centuries of the church.

And as they seldom use the term, so they seldom or never try, when it offers itself to them, either in conversation or in books, to fathom its meaning. They judge that a curious inquiry into such high and speculative things, though ever so great truths in themselves, tends little to G.o.dliness, and less to peace; and that their princ.i.p.al concern is with that only which is clearly revealed, and which leads practically to holiness of life.

Consistently with this judgment, we find but little said respecting the Trinity by the Quaker writers.

It is remarkable that Barclay in the course of his apology, takes no notice of this subject.

William Penn seems to have satisfied himself with refuting what he considered to be a gross notion, namely, that of three persons in the Trinity. For after having shown what the Trinity was not, he no where attempts to explain what he conceived it to be. He says only, that he acknowledges a Father, a Word, and a Holy Spirit, according to the scriptures, but not according to the notions of men; and that these Three are truly and properly One, of one nature as well as will.

Isaac Pennington, an ancient Quaker, speaks thus: "That the three are distinct, as three several beings or persons, the Quakers no where read in the scriptures; but they read in them that they are one. And thus they believe their being to be one, their life one, their light one, their wisdom one, their power one. And he that knoweth and seeth any one of them, knoweth and seeth them, all, according to that saying of Christ to Philip, 'He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father.'"

John Crook, another ancient writer of this society, in speaking of the Trinity, says, that the Quakers "acknowledge one G.o.d, the Father of Jesus Christ, witnessed within man only by the spirit of truth; and these three are one, and agree in one; and he that honours the Father, honours the Son that proceeds from him; and he that denies the Spirit, denies both the Father and the Son." But nothing farther can be obtained from this author on this subject.

Henry Tuke, a modern writer among the Quakers, and who published an account of the principles of the society only last year, says also little upon the point before us. "This belief, says he, in the Divinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, induced some of the teachers in the Christian church, about three hundred years after Christ, to form a doctrine, to which they gave the name of Trinity; but, in our writings we seldom make use of this term, thinking it best, on such a subject, to keep to scriptural expressions, and to avoid those disputes which have since perplexed the Christian world, and led into speculations beyond the power of human abilities to decide. If we consider that we ourselves are composed of a union of body, soul, and spirit, and yet cannot determine how even these are united; how much less may we expect perfect clearness on a subject, so far above our finite comprehension, as that of the Divine Nature?"

The Quakers believe, that Jesus Christ was man, because he took flesh, and inhabited the body prepared for him, and was subject to human infirmities; but they believe also in his Divinity, because he was the word.

They believe also in the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, as connected with the Christian religion. In explaining our belief of this doctrine, says Henry Tuke, we refer to the fifteenth chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians. In this chapter is clearly laid down the resurrection of a body, though not of the same body that dies.

"There are celestial bodies, and there are bodies terrestrial; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. So also is the resurrection of the dead: It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body: there is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of G.o.d; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." Here we rest our belief in this mystery, without desiring to pry into it beyond what is revealed to us; remembering "that secret things belong unto the Lord our G.o.d; but those things which are revealed, belong unto us and to our children."

The Quakers make but little difference, and not such as many other Christians do, between sanctification and justification. "Faith and works, says Richard Claridge, are both concerned in our complete justification."--"Whosoever is justified, he is also in measure sanctified; and as far as he is sanctified, so far is he justified, and no farther. But the justification I now speak of, is the making of us just or righteous by the continual help, work, and operation of the Holy Spirit."--"And as we wait for the continual help and a.s.sistance of his Holy Spirit, and come to witness the effectual working of the same in ourselves, so we shall experimentally find, that our justification is proportionable to our sanctification; for as our sanctification goes forward, which is always commensurate to our faithful obedience to the manifestation, influence, and a.s.sistance, of the grace, light, and spirit of Christ, so shall we also feel and perceive the progress of our justification."

The ideas of the Quakers, as to justification itself, cannot be better explained than in the words of Henry Tuke before quoted: So far as remissions of sins, and a capacity to receive salvation, are parts of justification, we attribute it to the sacrifice of Christ; "In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace." But when we consider justification as a state of divine favour and acceptance, we ascribe it, not simply either to faith or works, but to the sanctifying operation of the spirit of Christ, from which living faith and acceptable works alone proceed; and by which we may come to know, that "the spirit itself beareth witness with our spirits, that we are the children of G.o.d."

In attributing our justification, through the grace of G.o.d in Christ Jesus, to the operation of the Holy Spirit, which sanctifies the heart and produces the work of regeneration, we are supported by the testimony of the Apostle Paul, who says, "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but of his mercy he saved us, by the was.h.i.+ng of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." Again--"But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the spirit of our G.o.d."

"By this view of the doctrine of justification, we conceive the apparently different sentiments of the Apostles Paul and James are reconciled. Neither of them say that faith alone, or works alone, are the cause of our being justified; but as one of them a.s.serts the necessity of faith, and the other of works, for effecting this great object, a clear and convincing proof is afforded, that both contribute to our justification; and that faith without works, and works without faith, are equally dead."

CHAP. XIV.

_Quakers reject Baptism and the Lord's Supper--Much censured far it--Indulgence solicited for them on account of the difficulties connected with these subjects--Christian Religion spiritual--Jewish types to be abolished--Different meanings of the word "Baptise"--Disputes concerning the mode of Baptism--Concerning also the nature and const.i.tution of the Supper--Concerning also the time and manner of its celebration --This indulgence also proper, because the Quakers give it to others, who differ from them as a body on the subject of Religion_.

The Quakers, among other particularities, reject the application of water-baptism, and the administration of the Sacrament of the Supper, as Christian rites.

These ordinances have been considered by many as so essentially interwoven with Christianity, that the Quakers, by rejecting the use of them, have been denied to be Christians.

But whatever may be the difference of opinion between the world and the Quakers, upon these subjects, great indulgence is due to the latter on this occasion. People have received the ordinances in question from their ancestors. They have been brought up to the use of them. They have seen them sanctioned by the world. Finding their authority disputed by a body of men, who are insignificant as to numbers, when compared with others, they have let loose their censure upon them, and this without any inquiry concerning the grounds of their dissent. They know perhaps nothing of the obstinate contentious; nothing of the difficulties which have occurred; and nothing of those which may still be started on these subjects. I shall state therefore a few considerations by way of preface, during which the reader will see, that objections both fair and forcible may be raised by the best disposed Christians, on the other side of the question; that the path is not so plain and easy as he may have imagined it to be; and that if the Quakers have taken a road different from himself on this occasion, they are ent.i.tled to a fair hearing of all they have to say in their defence, and to expect the same candour and indulgence which he himself would have claimed, if, with the best intentions, he had not been able to come to the same conclusion, on any given point of importance, as had been adopted by others.

Let me then ask, in the first place, what is the great characteristic of the religion we profess?

If we look to divines for an answer to this question, we may easily obtain it. We shall find some of them in their sermons speaking of circ.u.mcision, baptismal was.h.i.+ngs and purifications, new moons, feasts of the pa.s.sover and unleavened bread, sacrifices, and other rites. We shall find them dwelling on these as const.i.tuent parts of the religion of the Jews. We shall find them immediately pa.s.sing from thence to the religion of Jesus Christ. Here all is considered by them to be spiritual.

Devotion of the heart is insisted upon as that alone which is acceptable to G.o.d. If G.o.d is to be wors.h.i.+pped, it is laid down as a position, that he is to be wors.h.i.+pped in spirit and in truth. We shall find them also, in other of their sermons, but particularly in those preached after the reformation, stating the advantages obtained by that event. The Roman Catholic system is here considered by them to be as ceremonial as that of the Jews. The Protestant is held out as of a more spiritual nature, and as more congenial therefore with the spirit of the gospel. But what is this but a confession, in each case, that in proportion as men give up ceremonies and become spiritual in their wors.h.i.+p, their religion is the best, or that spirituality is the grand characteristic of the religion of Jesus Christ? Now there immediately arises a presumption, if spirituality of feeling had been intended as the characteristic of any religion, that no ceremonious ordinances would have been introduced into it.

If, again, I were to make an a.s.sertion to divines, that Jesus Christ came to put an end to the ceremonial parts of the Jewish law, and to the types and shadows belonging to the Jewish dispensation, they would not deny it. But baptism and the supper were both of them outward Jewish ceremonies, connected with the Jewish religion. They were both of them types and shadows, of which the antetypes and substances had been realized at the death of Christ. And therefore a presumption arises again, that these were not intended to be continued.

And that they were not intended to be continued, may be presumed from another consideration. For what was baptism to any but a Jew? What could a Gentile have understood by it? What notion could he have formed, by means of it, of the necessity of the baptism of Christ? Unacquainted with purifications by water as symbols of purification of heart, he could never have entered, like a Jew, into the spiritual life of such an ordinance. And similar observations may be made with respect to the Pa.s.sover-Supper. A Gentile could have known nothing, like a Jew, of the meaning of this ceremony. He could never have seen in the Paschal Lamb any type of Christ, or in the deliverance of the Israelites from Egyptian bondage, any type of his own deliverance from sin, so clearly or so feelingly as if the facts and customs had related to his own history, or as if he had been trained to the connexion by a long series of prophecies. In short, the pa.s.sover could have had but little meaning to him.

From these circ.u.mstances, therefore, there would be reason to conclude, that these ceremonies were not to be continued, at least to any but Jews; because they were not fitted to the knowledge, the genius, or the condition of the Gentile world.