GEORGE FOX,THEFIRST OF THE QUAKERS."This man, the first of the Quakers, and by trade a Shoemaker, was one of those to whom, under ruder or purer form, the Divine Idea of the Universe is pleaded to manifest itself."—Carlyle."That nothing may be between you and God, but Christ."—George Fox.PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.The Author has long believed that a popular sketch of the Life and Work of George Fox was wanted. His noble labours in the Gospel, and the many excellences of his character are not known as they deserve to be. The story of his life is full of dramatic interest, and the author has endeavoured to tell it with sympathy and yet with faithfulness.Too few outside the Society of Friends are aware of the great and happy change which has lately come over it. The cramping influence of custom and precedent is yielding to the free spirit which first made the Society a power. In the present remodelling of its "Practice and Discipline," the study of its early days is of great importance. And for a fervent and constraining piety, for free and large-hearted devotion to "the truth" wherever it leads, few men are more worthy of study and imitation at the present day than George Fox.Should this effort prove a success, companion sketches of Penn and Barclay will shortly follow.The Manse,Batheaston, near Bath;September, 1883.PREFACE TO THE PRESENT EDITION.That "a popular sketch of the Life and Work of George Fox was wanted," was proved by the sale of 1500 copies of this pamphlet within six months of its publication. The opinions expressed by competent judges made me feel that I had not laboured in vain. Ministers of various denominations wrote to thank me, and to confess that they had not understood George Fox before.This Second Edition contains little that is new, but in the sketch of Barclay will be found several extracts from Fox's letters hitherto unpublished.GEORGE FOX,THEFIRST OF THE QUAKERS.The Protestant Reformation was at once a revolt against the claims of Popery, and an assertion of the authority of the New Testament. In neither particular did it satisfy the early Quakers. In their opinion it retained some remnants of Popery to its great disfigurement, whilst it was timid and halting in its acceptance of some of the teachings of the Christian dispensation. They regarded it as their work to reject the forms and ceremonies and "priestly pretentions" that had been retained, in order to reproduce the spiritual worship and simple church life of the apostolic days. Especially they believed themselves raised up to assert the living presence of Christ with his church by his Holy Spirit. They protested that feeble life, however orthodox its creed, was as dishonouring to Christ, and as unworthy of these days of the large outpouring of the Holy Ghost, as was formalism itself. The first and chief exponent of these views was George Fox.George Fox was born at Fenny Drayton, in Leicestershire, in 1624. His parents were pious members of the Church of England, and he tells with satisfaction that his father was generally denominated "righteous Christer," whilst his mother sprung from "the stock of the Martyrs."His religious life seems to have commenced almost in infancy. His childhood and youth were marked by a sober bearing, a precocious thoughtfulness, and a loveof solitude, which made many notice him; and it was proposed to make him a clergyman. Accordingly, Nathaniel Stevens, the parish priest, seems to have regarded him hopefully, until his deepening experience made the youth aware how blind his guide was, when the former friend became a bitter persecutor. But as some of George's friends objected to his entering the church, he became, in the mingling of businesses so common in that day, shoemaker and shepherd, excelling in the latter contemplative employment, which his friend, William Penn, regards as a fit emblem of his future work. Though he had received only the plainest English education, yet the keen cravings of his strong mind, together with his earnest Bible-reading and much careful thought, soon made him at home in Christian truth, the great topic of conversation and theme of discussion in that age. A noble, severe truthfulness foreshadowed his future teachings, and indicated the stamp of the man. It "kept him to yea and nay," refusing all asseveration or other strengthening of his statements, excepting his favourite "verily." But people remarked that if George said "verily" it was impossible to move him. His own strict and pure life made him feel keenly the poor living of some who made great professions.But his great preparation for his future work was soon to begin. In his 20th year, his soul began to be racked with conflicts, the nature and source of which he could not understand. This crisis in Fox's history is generally spoken of as his conversion. In some respects it resembles more the deepening and intensifying of a life which already existed. His spiritual nature was waking up to vigorous life. The slight and ill-grasped views which had satisfied the boy did not satisfy the man. They seemed to give no real and sufficient answer to his questionings. He wanted to understand the meaning of life, the plans of God, and his own part in them. In religionhe felt that there should be the clearest and strongest mental grasp, insight into the very heart and core of things. He had only seen as in a mist. Where was the seer that could show, by his apt and living words and his accent of conviction, that the veil had been lifted up for him, and that he had verily seen the Shekinah? To such a one he would listen reverently if he could find him; all others seemed mere triflers to his earnest mood. Then again, if God was a real Father, he felt that real and close relations with him must be possible, but he sadly owned that he did not enjoy those relations, and asked himself and others "Why am I thus?" He began to look facts intently in the face, to find out their meaning. He looked at himself and saw only sin; he looked into the professing church, and even there saw the same sad sight. It made him ask, was the gospel a mistake and Christ powerless? Or was he worse than others that his soul should be in such darkness and distress? Was he worse than in former days when he enjoyed comfort, and when the Lord shewed him some of his truth? Had he sinned too deeply to be allowed to enjoy peace? Had he sinned against the Holy Ghost?In his anguish, like a good churchman he went to his vicar, and asked him to explain his condition to him, but he could not. Then he sought other clergymen, who had a name for strict living or wisdom, but they could give him no help, though he went as far as London in the quest. Some of the advice which he received, he mentions with a pity that is keener than the severest sarcasm. One bade him sing psalms and chew tobacco; another wished to bleed him, but his large frame had been brought into such a condition by his distress, that no drop of blood would flow from him. Such blindness was not peculiar to the clergy. His friends proposed to relieve his sorrows by excitement, and by diverting his attention. Some recommendedhim to marry, but he sadly replied he was but a lad and must gain wisdom. Others would have him enlist and seek diversion in the exciting events of the civil war; but says Marsden, the historian of the Puritans, "though the bravest man in England, perhaps, if moral courage is bravery, he detested the business of the soldier. Far other thoughts possessed his mind. He had been religiously educated by Puritan parents of the Church of England, and he was now awaking to the consideration of his eternal state."Meanwhile he fasted often and searched the Scriptures with desperate earnestness. He wandered in solitary places, and spent hours in the trunks of hollow trees in meditation and prayer. Disappointed in the clergy, he turned to the dissenters with no better success. Evidently the thing was of God, for he missed men like Baxter, who could have given him at least good counsel and Christian sympathy. Fox was for some time in Coventry, in 1643, when Baxter was preaching there, one part of the day to the garrison, and the other to the civilians. But possibly if they had met, Baxter's hatred of heresy might have overborne his charity, and obscured his spiritual vision, and he might have branded Fox as a heretic, just as he afterwards dubbed his followers "malignants."[1][1]A similar experience is to be found in the unpublished memoir of that pious and accomplished Quakeress, Miss P. H. Gurney, p. 43. "I was painfully struck with the want of any sign of true devotion or spiritual mindedness in the several congregations I attended in London, both in preachers and hearers. Had I gone, as I once felt some inclination to do, to that called St. Mary Woolnoth, (Jno. Newton's) I might have found an exception to this description; but being accidently prevented, I have sometimes thought it was in the ordering of Providence that whatever of spiritual religion was then circulating in the national church, I was not permitted to find it, though I sought it with the most earnest desire of success." Miss Gurney took these facts as a proof that God intended that she should turn Quakeress; but surely the true explanation of these providences is that God will have us look to Him, and not rest unduly on any man or human system. He spoils our idols that we may worship only Him.Every experienced pastor must have met with such cases. Until God satisfies the soul the words of men are vain; when His hour has come, the truth which brings light and peace is often one that has been explained and urged before. George Fox had to learn that it is God's work to enlighten, that there is still to be enjoyed a real guidance of the Holy Spirit, resulting in the solution of difficulties and mysteries, in a clear apprehension of the truth, and a soul-satisfying sense of its power. And if the lesson was slowly and hardly learnt, it resulted in a clearer insight into the truth, and more fitness to deal with other tried souls.At times during these days of trial the dark clouds broke, and for a time the sun shone through. But until he learnt that Christ was to be his Teacher and Comforter, it was but for a time. It was a short respite to gather strength, a brief foreshadowing of the coming joy. Hear his touching thanksgiving for the goodness that did not break the bruised reed. "As I cannot declare the misery I was in, it was so great and heavy upon me, so neither can I set forth the mercies of God to me in my misery. Oh! the everlasting love of God to my soul when I was in distress. When my torments and troubles were great, then was His love exceeding great. Thou, Lord, makest the fruitful field a wilderness, and a barren wilderness a fruitful field. Thou bringest down and settest up. Thou killest and makest alive. All honour and glory be to Thee, O Lord of Glory. The knowledge of Thee in the Spirit is life." But the clouds finally passed away, and abiding sunshine settled on him, when Christ revealed Himself to him as the Great Physician, for whom he had been longing so earnestly. His troubles had lasted three years, and, no doubt, had been aggravated by his morbid fears and mistaken loneliness. But through life his nature was keenly susceptible; for example, the sins of the nation at the Restoration made him blind and seriously ill withgrief, in spite of active work and much society. No wonder then that his anguish wore him out at the time when his soul was in the dark, and when that which appeared to him alone worth living for seemed denied him. But now that he was weaned from trusting in an arm of flesh, came the time of divine deliverance. "When all my hopes in them (the dissenters) and in all men were gone, so that I had nothing outwardly to help me, nor could I tell what to do, then, O! then, I heard a voice which said, 'There is one, even Jesus Christ, that can speak to thy condition,' and when I heard it my heart did leap for joy. Then the Lord did let me see why there was none upon the earth that could speak to my condition, namely, that I might give him all the glory. For all are concluded in sin and shut up in unbelief as I had been, that Jesus Christ might have the pre-eminence, who enlightens and gives grace, faith, and power. Thus when God doth work who shall let it? And this I knew experimentally. My desires after the Lord grew stronger, and zeal in the pure knowledge of God and of Christ alone, without the aid of any man, book, or writing. For though I read the Scriptures that spake of Christ and of God, yet I knew Him not but by revelation, as He who hath the key did open, and as the Father of Life drew me to His Son by His Spirit."This discovery was to Fox what the unfolding of the great doctrine of justification by faith was to Luther. It was not only the commencement of a new life, it was the theme of his life-long ministry, and the special message which he was raised up to deliver to the world. In neither case was there the revelation of a new truth, only an old truth was to be emphasized, and to take its right place in the minds and hearts of men.To this grand truth, that Christ is still with us to guide us by His Holy Spirit into all truth, Fox henceforth trusted to clear up all doubts, and to unfold alltruths, and to explain the Holy Scriptures. So in our day has Mr. Moody set forth prayer as the all-sufficient practical commentator on the Bible. Henceforth, Fox expected Divine prompting to every service and Divine guidance in its performance, and without these he would not move. He had already been convinced of several points afterwards prominent in Quakerism, especially that no place or building can properly be called "holy ground," and that a University training was not a sufficient qualification for the ministry. As to the last point, just as the modern Quaker apostle, Stephen Grellet, said he could no more make a sermon than he could make a world, so did Fox protest against a man-made minister. As he was ever the enlightened and persistent advocate of sound education, this contention must not be mistaken for a contempt of human learning in its right place. It was but an emphatic assertion that the only availing spiritual knowledge comes not through human teaching but through the teaching of the Holy Spirit; and that, on the other hand, where He calls a man to the office of the ministry, the absence of a scholastic training was an utterly insufficient reason for interfering with the call. The abundant blessing which attended the preaching of Fox, Bunyan and other "unlearned and ignorant men," gave emphasis to this doctrine in that age. To these views the other Quaker "testimonies" were speedily added, and soon the whole scheme of doctrine was complete in his mind.Two points must here be insisted upon:—1st, neither George Fox nor any of the early Friends, though their language is sometimes hazy, ever claimed to be inspired. Says a recent authority, [Fielden Thorp, B. A., in the Friends' Quarterly Examiner for April, 1870,] "It has often been a cause of satisfaction to us that nowhere in the authorised documents of our society is the word (inspiration) applied to the ministry of Friends." Secondly, notice that Fox was most careful to note how his convictions corresponded with Holy Scripture. So he says, "When I had openings they answered one another, and answered the Scriptures, for I had great openings of the Scriptures."[2]Whilst, then, the fallibility of the ministry is acknowledged, and the infallibility of the Bible asserted, surely the doctrine of the Divine Guidance is not perverted through insufficient safeguards. But we are not prepared in all points to defend Fox's application of the doctrine. Possibly he sometimes mistook the workings of his own mind for the promptings of the Holy Spirit. Nor are his theology and his interpretations of Scripture beyond criticism. His ideas on the Divine In-dwelling took the form of the famous doctrine of the Seed or Light within. But though the teaching and guidance of the Holy Spirit are taught by Friends as distinctly as ever, it is questionable whether the doctrine of the Light withinin the precise form in which Fox preached it, and Barclay developed it theologically, has obtained the general acceptance of the Society. It certainly is not to be found in its authorised publications, such as the official "Doctrine, Practice and Discipline." It speaks well for the independence of thought in the society, that the pet-child of its great leaders should be abandoned when it failed to secure their conscientious assent.[3][2]The following passage from an American life of George Fox, coming from a reliable Quaker source, corroborates this assertion. Speaking of the early Friends the writer says:—"Their belief in a divine communication between the soul of man and its Almighty Creator, through the medium of the Holy Spirit, by which the Christian may be 'led into all truth,' did not at all lessen their regard for the authority of the Holy Scripturesas the test of doctrines. They constantly professed their willingness that all their principles and practices should be tried by them; and that whatsoever any, who pretended to the guidance of the Spirit, either said or did which was contrary to their testimony, ought to be rejected as a Satanic delusion; and also, that 'what is not read therein nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith.'" Page 357.[3]The reader will not mistake this for an assertion that Friends have surrendered the doctrine of the Divine guidance and indwelling. For a fuller discussion of the question see the close of the sketch of Barclay.Since Macaulay so grossly caricatured Fox, it has been assumed that Penn and Barclay added to Fox's ideas whatever was meritorious in Quakerism. On the contrary, not only the theology of the society and its polity, but also its philanthropy and its enlightened views on religious liberty, must be ascribed to him as their chief exponent. If the Quakers object to call him their Founder, it is only because they wish to honour God, rather than the human instrument. They never hesitate to give him his due, nor do they falsify their own teachings by seeking to win favour for them by great names. There is no clearer testimony than that of Penn, that Fox's services received full recognition in the Society during his life-time. Indeed the position accorded him moved the envy of some, in spite of his own meekness and humble carriage.Fox's personal spiritual experience may be regarded as the laying of the foundation-stone of Quakerism. Now let us turn to the rearing of the superstructure. Having learnt where to look for help and enlightenment, his heart soon found rest. His bodily strength returned, and his mind as well as his soul received a vast impulse. He seemed to have a sympathetic insight not only into the hearts of men, but also into the secrets of nature, so that at one time he questioned whether he ought not to practice medicine. To the end of his life he remained an ardent lover of nature and of science, so that his friend, William Penn, calls him "a divine and naturalist too, and all of God Almighty's making." But soon he settled down to his true life-work as an itinerant preacher of the gospel. His patrimony was sufficient to enable him to devote himself freely to the work. In his wanderings in search of light, he had made the acquaintance of many anxious seekers after truth. To these he naturally went in the joy and ardour of his heart, to tell them what God had taught him; and many of them received "the truth." His first convert was a woman,Elizabeth Hooton, who also became the first lady preacher in the new Society, and after much service died in the West Indies, whilst accompanying Fox and others on a preaching tour. Soon we find him preaching in ordinary congregations, and in the conferences common in that day, and gaining a name for spiritual discernment.Though but a youth of 23 when he began to preach, there was a spiritual power attending his ministry that was remarkable. Macaulay speaks of his "chant" in preaching; many Welsh preachers now "chant" the gospel with great effect, and the recitative in Mrs. Fry's ministry was acknowledged to be wonderfully impressive. But it must not be supposed that it was deliberately chosen, it is probable that he fell into it unconsciously. The intensity of his emotion too added to the impression; his large frame quivered and shook with his strong feeling. Charles Lamb has given a vivid description of what he calls "The Foxian orgasm:" probably the description would accurately apply to Fox. We can judge from his Journal how keen and penetrating his appeals must have been, and how exultant his praises and thanksgivings.Then again he preached, not metaphysics, nor formal theology, but a living, present Christ. He told his experience with pathos and power. No wonder that people wept and laughed for joy, for they felt it was true glad tidings that he brought. His word was literally "in power and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance," and many received it as the word of God to them. Soon his converts were numbered by hundreds. In 1647 he first began to preach publicly, and in that and the next year several "meetings" were gathered.Any one who passes along the East Lancashire Railway from Colne to Burnley, must be struck by the towering grandeur of Pendle Hill; and if he climbs it, he will be rewarded by a glorious panorama. Whilst looking onthis magnificent view, George Fox tells us he had a vision, in which he saw that this region would be the home of thousands of Quakers; and certainly nowhere did Quakerism find such a stronghold, and receive such sturdy helpers and gifted preachers. Alas! the glory has departed! Partly as the result of extensive emigration, many of the meeting-houses then so full of devout worshippers are now empty, whilst in some others a formal few, whom Fox would hardly acknowledge as his followers, meet in cold silence sabbath by sabbath.Fox did not long work single-handed; in a few years, especially from this district on and about the Penine Range, a band of preachers gathered round him whom Quakers still delight to honour. In 1654 he tells us there were sixty preaching in all parts of England and Wales. Some of his helpers had been ministers, like Francis Howgill and John Audland. But it was not taken for granted that they would still preach, unless there was the manifest call. Thus Thomas Lawson, a clergyman at Ramside near Ulverston, a man of considerable learning, seems to have relinquished preaching when he was converted by Fox. He was a great botanist, and saysSewel, "one of the most skilful herbalists in England," so he seems to have gained his livelihood by this skill and by tuition. Yet the authoress of "The Fells of Swarthmoor Hall" calls him a man of fervid eloquence, so that it was not lack of gifts that kept him from preaching, but it must have been the persuasion that he was not called to the work. So in our own day, that master of eloquence, John Bright, though a man of strong religious feeling, never preaches, in spite of the freedom which Quakerism allows.Besides clergymen and other ministers, the converts included magistrates, like Justice Hotham and Anthony Pearson, author of "The Great Case of Tithes;" and officers in the army like Col. West and Capt. Pursloe, besides gentlemen of substance and standing like I.Pennington, and scholars like Samuel Fisher and Thomas Lawson just mentioned. But among them all Fox stood chief, not only as the father of the fathers among them, but also in his firm and clear grasp of the truth, his entire devotion, his gifts of leadership, his many labours and sufferings, and his God-given success. "I notice," says a contemporary letter, "that in any company when George is present all the rest are silent;" and a joint letter by Edward Burrough and Francis Howgill says, "Oh but for one hour of his company! what a treasure it would be to us!" Even those who had held similar views before they met with him, often gained from him more clearness of view and fulness of knowledge.The manner of conducting the Quaker "meetings for worship," was the result of practical conviction rather than of theory. They thought that for Christians to meet together in order to go through a stated form of service, was at once to cramp the outpouring of the heart to God, and to interfere with the Holy Spirit in his direction of the utterances of Christ's ministers. When they met in silence, each could speak to God what was in his heart, and each could hear in his spirit "what God the Lord would speak;" and if any one was "moved" to declare any truth, the way was clear. Thus Christ was owned practically as a present Lord, and the Holy Spirit trusted as a real and practical guide. They read in their New Testaments that when the saints met together, all the gifted might prophesy one by one as anything was revealed to them; and that each might contribute to the service his psalm of thanksgiving, or hymn of adoration, or edifying doctrine. It seemed to them that in the "apostacy" of the churches not only the rights of private Christians, but the claims of the Holy Spirit had been interfered with by the "one-man ministry." And probably none of them, whatever his gift of discernment, imagined in those days of burningzeal and abundant labours, that the time would come when their simple system would prove a rigid bond, which would leave half their meetings without ministry of any kind. Encouragement of a true ministry is as needful as discouragement of the spurious.Very early in the history of the Society, the distinguishing views of Friends on the Sacraments were clearly enunciated. In 1656, Fox sent out a manifesto clearly stating his views, especially on the Lord's Supper. He thought the outward rites were simply adaptations of Jewish customs, temporary condescensions to the weakness of the converts from Judaism until the destruction of Jerusalem, and even during that period, optional, not obligatory. If the early Christians kept up the old custom of sipping the wine and breaking the bread, then they must do it in remembrance of Christ's death, and not of the deliverance from the bondage of Egypt. But he believed the outward rite Jewish in its style, and foreign to the pure spirituality of Christianity. So also with regard to Baptism.[4][4]The other leading "testimonies" of Friends were against all war, and against oaths, even in a court of justice.There were two kinds of service which the devoted leader rendered to Christian truth—he preached it with zeal and unction, and he suffered for its sake. His sufferings were unquestionably often the result of his own unwisdom. Many Friends themselves now lament his want of a conciliatory spirit. He could not put himself in the place of others, so as to see how they viewed himself, his conduct and his claims. Thus he was constantly led to impute dishonest and impure motives to others if they did not agree with him. All but his own unpaid ministers were "priests" and "hirelings" and so on. But nothing can justify the treatment he received, often through the connivance, sometimes from the instigation, of clergymen and magistrates. Whitefield's hootings and peltings were nothing, in comparisonwith Fox's stonings, and brutal beatings, and horrible imprisonments. As Marsden says, "He rebuked sin with the authority of a prophet, and he met with a prophet's reward."We must remember in extenuation of his admitted faults that he aimed to be a reformer, appealing afresh to first principles in conduct, and seeking to arouse others to feel their force. He purposely set himself against mere conventionalism, especially when it fostered pride or cloaked some rottenness in society. When persecuted, he never resorted to flattery or depended on wheedling, but appealed to conscience and to the humane or Christian feelings which ought to have been in the breast of the persecutor.He proved to the full the power of passive endurance. Smitten on the one cheek, he literally turned the other. He believed that a large share of his work for the Master was in the testimony of suffering, and he was more anxious to be obedient than to avoid what seemed to him the pains and penalties of obedience. He would not walk out of prison unless he could do it not only honourably, but conscientiously, satisfied that he was not flinching from his appointed testimony. He truly gloried in afflictions for Christ's sake. While refusing to honour an unchristian statute by keeping it, he bore patiently and unresistingly the legal penalties, unshaken in his loyalty to the government and unsoured in his disposition towards mankind. But further, Fox clearly saw that endurance was sure to end in victory, and he inspired his friends with the same conviction. "The more they imprison me," he writes triumphantly, "the more the truth spreads." In the same spirit said William Penn at a later date, "I will weary out their malice. Neither great nor good things were ever attained without loss and hardship. The man that would reap and not labour must perish in disappointment." No wonder that men grew weary of punishingthose who endured in this spirit. No wonder that the lofty conscientiousness of the Quakers was felt to be the salt which had a large share in counteracting the corruption of the Stuart reigns, and in preserving our civil and religious liberties. Says Orme in his Life of Baxter, "The heroic and persevering conduct of the Quakers in withstanding the interferences of government with the rights of conscience, by which they finally secured those peculiar privileges they so richly deserve to enjoy, entitles them to the veneration of all the friends of civil and religious liberty." And again he says, "Had there been more of the same determined spirit among others which the Friends displayed, the sufferings of all parties would sooner have come to an end. The government must have given way, as the spirit of the country would have been effectually roused. The conduct of the Quakers was infinitely to their honour."Meanwhile Fox abounded in labours, sparing no exertions to make known the truth and to plead for righteousness. He sought a purer life as much as a purer faith. He went into public houses to plead for temperance, and into fairs to plead for uprightness and honesty, and into courts to plead for justice, as well as into churches to plead for spiritual religion. We must not forget that in those fermenting times it was no uncommon thing for questions and remarks to be thrown at the preacher during divine service, and it was considered quite in order for any one to address the people after the clergyman had finished his sermon. Thus when Fox was speaking in the Ulverston Church, Justice Sawrey cried, "Take him away," but Margaret Fell interposed, "Let him alone; why may not he speakas well as any other?" So that these interruptions were not considered so strange and disorderly then as they seem to us now. But public feeling was against the man and against the truths he preached, and to that public feeling he could not and would not yield. He couldnot take off his hat before the great, for that was an honour which he reserved for God alone. He felt bound to protest against all flattering titles and speeches, which, though the world counts them harmless civilities, seemed to his sober spirit and delicate conscience such as should neither be given nor received by the followers of the lowly Nazarene. His "thee and thou," and plain speaking, and sober dress, and keen rebukes, brought on him a perfect storm of anger and abuse. He felt that he stood in the forefront of the battle against worldliness, and bore the brunt of it; and he was meekly thankful for such an honourable post.His first imprisonment was at Nottingham, for interrupting divine service; but he had his triumph, the very Sheriff was converted, and compelled by his new-found zeal to go forth into the market-place, and take up the imprisoned preacher's work. His second term soon followed at Derby, on a charge of blasphemy. He believed in the doctrine of perfection, and told those who opposed him that they pleaded for sin. The Derby Magistrates asked him if he was sanctified, and he answered, "Yes." "Then they asked me if I had no sin? I answered 'Christ my Saviour has taken away my sin and in Him there is no sin.' They asked how we knew that Christ did abide in us? I said, 'By His Spirit that he has given us.' They temptingly asked if any of us were Christ? I answered, 'Nay, we were nothing, Christ is all.'" Yet they found him guilty of blasphemy, confounding him with the fanatical, antinomian Ranters. But if he taught perfection, Oh! how he lived! Let those that reject his teaching excel, or at least equal, his living. In Derby, his jailer was converted, to strengthen and comfort him in his sufferings. Whilst in prison his busy pen poured forth many letters of advice to Friends, and "testimonies" against all forms of iniquity, including war and capital punishment.Before he was 27, Fox had passed through morevaried experience than many have in a long life-time. Honour and revilings, converts and imprisonments, love for the gospel's sake and cruel beatings by the mob, nearly ending in death—these had already been his portion. But his work was now bearing much fruit. In one twelve-months, 1650-1, he gained such staunch helpers as Richard Farnsworth, James Nayler, William Dewsbury, Justice Hotham, and Captain Purslow. Soon afterwards the Fells of Swarthmoor were led to Christ by his preaching and became the most devoted of adherents. Soon his followers could be numbered by thousands. It was not the strength of his arguments that gained them; the age was overdone with reasoning. Fox mocked their syllogisms with grim humour. There was a wonderful spiritual power about him. He spoke naturally, with simple, direct earnestness, and overwhelming vehemence, right to the conscience of the hearers. He made people both listen and understand him, and feel the power of the truth in a way which many did not like. He was a wonderful evangelist. What his cultured convert, Isaac Pennington, the Rutherford of Quakerism, said of Friends generally, is applicable to him. They might offend his taste and move him to contempt by their intellectual poverty, but they compelled him to respect their spiritual power and their deep acquaintance with the things of God.Then again the new Society was a real brotherhood. The members stood shoulder to shoulder as fellow servants of the one Master. Their only emulation was which should do most and suffer most cheerfully. Their great question was "Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do? Where wilt Thou have me to go?" The Jesuit was ready to go at an hour's notice wherever the Pope sent him. The Quaker was as ready in his obedience to the voice within. Not only Great Britain, but Italy, Turkey, Syria, and Egypt heard the truth before 1662. John Stubbs, "a remarkable Oriental scholar," andHenry Fell, who was also "well versed in Arabic and Hebrew," set out for the land of Prester John, but were stopped by the English Consul at Alexandria. Their leader was chief simply through gifts and devotedness. So strongly were Friends attached to him that when he was in Launceston gaol, one of them went to Cromwell and offered to lie in prison in his stead; which made the Protector turn to those around him and ask, "Which of you would do as much for me if I were in the same condition?" And Fox showed himself worthy of such devotion by always seeking the post of danger and the most arduous work. Urgent he might be, for he was tremendously in earnest, but to speak as Hepworth Dixon does of his "imperious instincts" simply shows ignorance of the man.For centuries no such zealous and noble-spirited evangelism had been seen. No wonder that it won its way. Many who had been rich, like Isaac Pennington, were content to become poor by fines and distraints for "the truth's sake." Most nobly did they help each other. If they did not insist on community of goods as a theory, they carried out the spirit of it in practice.There are two marked stages in Fox's work; first the Evangelistic Stage, and then the Organising Stage, which was, of course, overlapt by the other. Let us trace the salient points in his evangelistic work. In 1654 he was brought before Cromwell, and made a good impression on that keen judge of men. His sincerity stood testing, his zeal for God was manifestly genuine, and the grand, though not faultless Protector, learnt heartily to respect him. As he was turning to leave him, Cromwell caught him by the hand and said, "Come again to my house, for if thou and I were but an hour of a day together, we should be nearer one to the other." Next year he visited him again, to lay before him the ill-treatment to which Friends were subjected.The meetings now gathered, wherever "the man in leather breeches" went were immense. At one in Bristol, he tells us, 10,000 people were present, and often 2000 or 3000 are mentioned as collecting to hear him. The energetic evangelist often had periods of grudged but not useless interruption of his labours by imprisonment. Indeed, as Mr. W. E. Forster says, he "would have been qualified to draw up a report of the state of the gaols of the Island, so universal and experimental was his acquaintance with them." But his imprisonments did not make him cease from labour. He wrote innumerable letters and tracts, and he preached the gospel to those that came to see him with such effect, that one of Cromwell's Chaplains said they could not do him a greater service for spreading his principles in Cornwall, than to imprison him in Launceston gaol.In 1656 occurred the sad episode of James Nayler's fall. He had been one of the most popular of the Quaker preachers, and had enjoyed the warm friendship of Fox and other leaders. But extravagant praise turned his head so far that he listened to blasphemous songs and invocations addressed to him by excited women, allowed them to kneel before him, and even to welcome him to Bristol with a horrible parody of our Lord's triumphal entry into Jerusalem. These miserable proceedings he did not like, but he excused them as honors done, not to him, but to Christ his Lord. The way in which Fox and other Friends acted in this matter was most praiseworthy. Many of the enthusiasts who misled Nayler were not truly Friends at all, and yet the Society was credited with fanaticism on account of their proceedings. Their enemies exulted in a clear case against them, and the religious world seemed justified in regarding them with suspicion. But in spite of all this, the Friends clung to the deluded man, and tried every means to open his eyes. George Fox visited him in Exeter gaol, and used every power of reason and persuasion, and at last finding he could do nothing with him, sadly gave him to understand that their friendship was at an end, and that Friends could no longer regard him as one of them. Yet still they visited him, and tried hard to gain the Protector and Parliament to their humane view of the right way of dealing with the case, and they had their reward. The cloud that obscured his mental vision passed away, and he deeply and truly repented of his sad error. He published a full recantation, took upon himself the whole blame, absolving the Society from all share; and endeavoured in every way to undo the mischief he had done. But whilst their love and gentleness had thus conquered, the barbarous spirit of the age had vindicated orthodoxy, by passing and executing the horrible sentence of branding and tongue boring. And it is sad to think, that the man who endured this torture was already a repentant man, won by love, not by severity, to confess and renounce his sin. The Quakers at once received him into full confidence and esteem, and helped him, in truly Christian fashion, to bear the results of his fall. Thus early in their history, in the midst of an age of much persecution and bigotry, were established those habits of loving Christian discipline, which have so nobly distinguished the Society ever since. But the reclaimed wanderer was not long allowed to continue his resumed preaching. In the summer of 1660 he was taken ill, and died in his 44th year.In the same year 1656, Fox tells us that more than 1000 Friends were in prison for conscience sake. But though he had not been long out of prison, and was in continual danger of arrest, he would not relax his labours. He extended the range of his evangelistic efforts into Wales, and gained a rich harvest there, as he had before amongst the equally fiery-souled Cornish men. The style of his own preaching may be judged from his exhortation to his fellow-ministers, penned whilst inLaunceston gaol. "Dwell in the power, life, wisdom and dread of the Lord God of life and heaven and earth, spreading the truth abroad, awakening the witness, confounding the deceit, gathering up out of transgression into the life, the covenant of light and peace with God. Let all the nations hear the sound by word or writing. Spare no place, spare no tongue nor pen. Go through the work, and be valiant for the truth upon earth." How like Wesley's assertion that the world was his parish. Like him, Fox might have boasted that his followers wereallat work, andalwaysat it. Like Wesley, too, he wrote as he travelled, by which alone we can account for the wonderful amount that he wrote. He had no gift for literary composition; his spelling was erratic, and his sentences, like Paul's, were long and involved, probably because they both dictated their letters hastily to some secretary. But if his letters bear marks of haste, they are pithy, and pointed, and full of gracious unction. Any spiritually-minded Christian may greatly enjoy his fervent appeals and powerful statements of Gospel truth. His letters and tracts served the practical purpose for which they were intended, and he was satisfied.The year 1657 saw him enter Scotland, where he had a presentiment that a glorious vintage was to be gathered. He was met by determined opposition from ministers and others, who smelt heresy in his teachings, especially as he was an Arminian. What they hated in him may be seen from the following curses, which, in the fiery style of that age, were pronounced in kirk, the people pronouncing the response. "Cursed is he that saith, Every man hath a light within him sufficient to lead him to salvation: and let all the people say, Amen. Cursed is he that saith, Faith is without sin: and let all the people say, Amen. Cursed is he that denieth the Sabbath-day: and let all the people say, Amen." But for all this terrorism, within ten years there was a bodyof Friends in Scotland, that, by their earnest piety, and solid consecrated learning, gladdened the heart of the devoted leader.The troubled times after the death of Cromwell tried Friends in many ways. The Committee of Public Safety sought to induce them to join the army, many of them having been brave and efficient soldiers before their convincement, but they unanimously refused. Attempts were made to identify them with the Fifth Monarchy men, and other disturbers of the public peace, for they were disliked by almost every one; but the prudence and energy of Fox and others avoided these snares, and gained the confidence of the powers that were.When Charles II. ascended the throne he proved even more friendly than Cromwell had been. Dr. Stoughton says, "Charles had a sort of liking to the Quakers for their harmlessness and their oddity. He was not afraid of their taking up arms against the throne, and to quiz them in their queer dresses and with their quaint speech, was to him a piece of good fun." It suited the merry Monarch to have pretty Quakeresses like Sarah Fell coming with their petitions, enduring his bantering demurely, and going away delighted with the clemency he so often showed. In 1666 he granted the release of George Fox from the sentence of premunire. He had once before set him at liberty, only to fall again into the clutches of the law. In March, 1664, Fox had been brought before Justice Twisden, and after a sham trial that was an outrage on both law and humanity, the extreme sentence of the law in such cases, the sentence of premunire, was passed, and he languished in Lancaster gaol and Scarborough Castle for nearly three years. But at last the royal ear was gained, and Fox, ill with hard treatment in the foul cells at Scarborough, was restored to his liberty, his property, and his civil rights. In prison he had been busy writing in exposition of the views of Friends. After hisrelease, for some time he was principally engaged in modelling the discipline and church government of the Society.Before passing on to consider the organisation of the Quaker community into a compact and well regulated church, we must notice their conduct in the question of marriage. "Marriage," said Fox, "is God's ordinance," believing literally the common saying that marriages are made in heaven. But the solemn compact ought to be publicly ratified, and what more fitting than that public worship should attend that celebration. If Fox denied that ministers could marry, if he insisted that the ceremony should consist simply of a mutual pledge publicly given, he was very careful that all should be done in good order. The marriage customs which obtain amongst Quakers to-day represent his views. The young people must show that they are clear of other marriage engagements, and have the consent of their parents or guardians to their union. Sufficient public notice must be given of the coming event, so as to prevent all scandal and disorder. Then the marriage is celebrated during a week-day service. In the early days of the Society the publication of the intended marriage was no easy matter. "Many a joke must have passed through the merry crowd, when, from the market-cross of a country town, the expecting bridegroom proclaimed his forthcoming nuptials—but no arrangements of a loose or evasive character, would have saved the marriages of Friends from the double brand of public opinion and of national law." In 1661 the legality of Quaker marriages was tested in Nottingham before Justice Archer, and the point was forever set at rest.Now let us turn to the work of Fox in the organisation of the Society. That the organisation was principally planned and carried out by him is past all doubt. We will quote two out of numberless authorities. Marsden says—"To understand Quakerism the reader must comprehend the character of George Fox; for no institution ever carried more thoroughly impressed upon it the features of its chief."—Marsden's Christian Churches, p. 424.[5][5]For this quotation and other valuable matter the writer is indebted to the writings of Alderman Rowntree, of York, whose "Two Lectures on George Fox" and prize essay on "Quakerism, Past and Present" are standard works on Quakerism.T. Hancock says, in his prize essay on the causes of the decline of Quakerism—"The master spirit and chief builder of Quakerism was undoubtedly George Fox.... When we come to the second period, to the modelling of the Quaker constitution and discipline to the Society of Friends, to Quakerism as anism, the hand of George Fox is still more evident."—The Peculium, pp. 68, 69.The views of Fox as to the church polity were exceedingly simple. He had no intention of forming a sect; he only met the needs of his friends, as the exigences of the hour dictated. The less machinery the better; the simpler the arrangements the more they commended themselves to his judgment. His mind was not hampered by theories. His aim was to recognize the gifts of all, and not to have the life bound by man's rules.But there must be discipline in the church. The disorderly must be dealt with. The weak must be helped. Many were thrown into prison or even banished; they must be relieved or cared for in the best way their circumstances allowed. Many had lost all for conscience sake; they must not be allowed to want. None so full of pity for these sufferers, as he who suffered so readily himself. Almost his last words were, "Remember poor Friends in Ireland."The New Testament was his only conscious rule, prayerful waiting upon God for light his only expositorof it. He might ask his learned friends for side-lights from church history, might ask them about the practice of the early church, or the history of the corrupting influence of certain false doctrines. But he was emphatically a man of one book, and he read that book with his heart, more than with his penetrating mind.That competent authority in all matters concerning Quakerism, Mr. J. S. Rowntree, thus describes the origin and progress of the Quaker discipline. "With the rapid growth of the Society, George Fox increasingly perceived the necessity for taking steps to repress the outbursts of fanatical and misguided zeal, and for placing the government of the church on a more systematic basis. This decision was undoubtedly expedited by the occurrence of a heresy fomented by John Perrott.... He had the satisfaction of seeing most of Perrott's adherents make a public acknowledgment of their error, and immediately afterwards, he initiated a national system of disciplinary meetings, to be held monthly. They consisted of the most experienced Friends within a given district; and had the charge of the affairs of the body within such district. The Quarterly Meetings (many of which we have seen were already in existence) were gradually put on a different basis, and consisted henceforth of representativesfroma number of associated Monthly Meetings, whose decisions in some cases were liable to revision by the superior meeting. It was not till a somewhat later date that a central body—the 'Yearly Meeting' of London—consisting of representatives from all the Quarterly Meetings in the country, was established as the top stone of this elaborate disciplinary system.... To the settlement of these Monthly Meetings, George Fox most assiduously devoted himself in 1667-68; and ere long, wherever meetings for the worship of God were held after the manner of Friends, little church synods were also held, ministering to the wants of the poor, alleviating thesorrows of the prisoners, seeking to reclaim disorderly walkers, and when failing in this, disuniting them from the body." ("Two Lectures on Macaulay's Portraiture of George Fox," pp. 40-42.) It speaks volumes for the sagacity of Fox that so little has needed to be added to or altered in the Quaker polity since his day.In 1666 the Barclays joined the society, and in the next year William Penn was added to their number. The learning of Robert Barclay, and social position and administrative ability of William Penn, were soon appreciated by the leader with whom they worked so loyally.In 1669 Fox visited Ireland, and in the same year he was married to Margaret, widow of Judge Fell, of Swarthmoor Hall. She had been one of his early converts, and was one of his most vigorous helpers. She wrote almost as many letters, and printed almost as many appeals as her husband; she visited the imprisoned, and sent relief to their families. Her house was the home of all Quakers visiting the neighborhood, and her purse was at the service of all who needed money to serve the cause. Her judgment was reliable and her energy untiring; she was the Countess of Huntingdon of the Society. She even endured long imprisonments, and risked, and for a time endured, the loss of all her property by premunire for the truth's sake. She was therefore a fitting help-meet for George Fox. She had four daughters who were ministers in the Society, and the whole family regarded him with reverence, except the scapegrace elder son. He not only opposed the marriage, but with the basest ingratitude, he endeavoured, after it was accomplished, to turn his mother out of her own home; and he rests under at least grave suspicion of being a party to the plot to have her sentenced to premunire.[6][6]The penalties of this sentence were, to be put out of the King's protection, to forfeit lands and goods to the King, and to be liable to imprisonment for life or at the King's pleasure.Fox acted throughout this affair with the greatest prudence and magnanimity. He would not even be suspected of seeking worldly gain, but carefully secured to his wife and her family, the property which was hers before their marriage. No wedding could be more simple than his own. "Afterwards," he says in his journal, "a meeting being appointed on purpose for the accomplishing thereof, in the public meeting-house at Broadmead in Bristol, [the site cannot now be certainly determined,] we took each other in marriage.... Then was a certificate, relating both the proceedings and the marriage, openly read and signed by the relations, and by most of the ancient Friends of that city, besides many other Friends from divers parts of the nation." Evidently the ceremony caused considerable excitement. His wife was ten years his senior.But of home life they had little enough; in little more than a week they parted, that the husband might continue his labours, and soon after, the wife was cast into prison, where she remained until 1671. Then through the intercession of her daughters with the king she was released, and the premunire, which had rested on her for ten years, was removed. They had a few days together before Fox sailed for the West Indies, and again on his return, and so on.Men and women who give their most intense and sustained sympathies to Christian enterprises, often have to suffer for it in their home relations. "We were very willing both of us," says Mrs. Fox after her husband's death, "to live apart for some years upon God's account and His truth's service, and to deny ourselves of that comfort which we might have in being together, for the sake of the service of the Lord and His truth; and if any took occasion, or judged hard of us because of that, the Lord will judge them, for we were innocent."In the summer of 1671, George Fox and some other Friends visited the West Indies and the continent ofAmerica, to push the work of evangelisation and of organising the societies there. They landed in Barbadoes, after a voyage enlivened by constant dangers from the leakiness of the vessel, and once by an almost miraculous escape from capture by a Sallee man-of-war. Fox's son-in-law, John Rous, was in the company, and on landing he was at once taken to the house of Mr. Rous, senior, who was a wealthy sugar planter. Fox's health had been so injured by the ill-usage which he had endured at different times, and he suffered so keenly from the climate, that he had to remain at Mr. Rous's, whilst his friends held meetings all around. But though crippled in body his mind was vigorous. The marriage regulations and discipline of the Society, and the duty of giving Christian instruction to the negroes, engrossed his attention. The question of slavery stirred his heart to its depths; and his vigorous language and action not only did good then, but laid a right foundation for the future action of the society. When the time came that Friends had to consider the question of the abolition of slavery, few things exerted so much influence in the right direction, as Fox's clear statement of the issues involved. His words were quoted, his reasonings were expanded and enforced, and it was largely through his influence that abolitionist principles became identified with Quakerism.Here, as elsewhere, the doctrines of the society had been greatly misrepresented, so the famous letter to the governor of Barbadoes was drawn up to explain them. It is still often quoted as an admirable statement of the views of the society. It is as near an approach to a creed as anything can be, which originated from a society which recognises only the Bible as authoritative, and which objects to all human formularies.The society in Barbadoes gained greatly in numbers and strength by this visit. Jamaica, Maryland, North Carolina and Virginia were next visited in the samemanner and with similar results. Large numbers were won to a christian life. The Indians and negroes were recognised as having a claim to christian sympathy and religious instruction. The societies were weeded of unworthy members, and their organisation successfully accomplished. Then the party returned in safety to England after an absence of a year and a half.In 1677 Fox carried these operations into Holland, having with him his illustrious friends, Penn and Barclay. "This visit of the three great apostles of Quakerism," says Hepworth Dixon, "seems to have made a great sensation; scholars, merchants, government officers, and the general public crowded to hear them preach, and the houses of the most noble and learned men in the city of Van der Werf and Erasmus were thrown open to them freely.... Their journey through the country was like a prolonged ovation." The interesting episode of the interview with the enlightened and large-hearted Princess Elizabeth, granddaughter of James I., scarcely belongs to this sketch, as Fox did not join in it. But he wrote a lengthy epistle of Christian counsel, and sent it by his daughter-in-law, Mrs. Yeamans, and the Princess returned him this brief but kindly reply:—"Dear Friend, I cannot but have a tender love to those that love the Lord Jesus Christ, and to whom it is given, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for Him; therefore your letter, and your friend's visit, have been both very welcome to me. I shall follow their and your counsel as far as God will afford me light and unction; remaining still your loving friend, Elizabeth."He spent some time in Amsterdam "writing in truth's account," and then returned home by Harwich. In 1684 he paid another visit to Holland, the last of his longer missionary journeys.After this, finding his health shattered by his longimprisonment and arduous labours, he settled down in London, quietly, though not uselessly, awaiting the end. His correspondence was most extensive, and he wrote many tracts and pamphlets as was his habit. One of his last letters was written to the lately-bereaved widow of Barclay, the Apologist, and is a model of Christian consolation. He tells her:—"Thou and thy family may rejoice that thou hadst such an offering to offer up unto the Lord as thy dear husband; who, I know is well in the Lord in whom he died, and is at rest from his labours, and his works do follow him." He signs himself one "who had a great love and respect for thy dear husband, for his work and service in the Lord, who is content in the will of God, and all things that he doeth—and so thou must be." But besides this literary work, he laboured zealously in the pastoral work, visiting the sick and afflicted, and endeavouring to "bring into the way of truth such as had erred."He watched the passing of the Toleration Act with the deepest interest. It was a most welcome relief to Friends, especially those in Ireland. The losses sustained by the Irish Quakers were enormous. In one year (1689) they were estimated at £100,000, many being stripped of all they had (see Besse's Sufferings). George Fox not only collected such facts as these for publication, but, even in his last days of suffering and prostration, attended at the House of Commons to interest the members in the sufferings of his brethren, and to see that the Toleration Act was "done comprehensively and effectually."He was equally zealous in his attendance on public worship. When so infirm that he could hardly sit through a service, he would not desist, and often afterwards had to lie down on a bed until recruited. He was determined, if possible, to die in harness, and God gave him his heart's desire.He was especially anxious lest spiritual religionshould decline, now that persecution had ceased, and Friends began to prosper in business. He wrote them an epistle of loving, but earnest expostulation, warning the young against the fashions of the world, and the old against the deceitfulness of riches. To the latter he pointedly says, "Take heed that you are notmaking your graveswhile you are alive outwardly." To some ministers who had gone to America he writes similar stirring words of counsel:—"And all grow in the faith and grace of Christ,that ye may not be like dwarfs; for a dwarf shall not come near to offer upon God's altar, though he may eat of God's bread that he may grow by it."On the Sunday preceding his death, he preached with great power at the meeting in Gracechurch Street, but soon afterwards had to take to bed, complaining of cold and weakness. His wife had been to see him some little time before, and finding him enjoying better health than usual, was unprepared for his death, so that no near relative seems to have been with him at the time of his decease. It was indeed a consecrated chamber. Those who stood round him were struck with the triumph of faith over bodily weakness. He exulted in the power of Christ. "All is well—the Seed of God reigns over all, and over death itself." His thoughts were calmly fixed on the arrangement of Society affairs; his mind was clear, his habitual disregard of his bodily sufferings still marked him. Towards the last all pain left him. Feeling death coming, he closed his own eyes and extended his limbs; and in sweet composure, resting on Christ his Saviour, his spirit entered into rest on Tuesday, 13th December, 1690 (o.s.)Three days after, some 2000 persons (one witness says 4000) gathered to lay him in his grave. For two hours they worshipped in that same meeting-house in Gracechurch Street, in which he had preached only on the previous sabbath. William Penn, George Whitehead,Stephen Crisp, and other leaders amongst them, thanked God for the gifts and services of their departed leader, and exhorted and encouraged each other to faith in that Lord, who raised him up and sustained him in his work. Then the body was conveyed to Bunhill-fields, and interred in the Friends' Burial Ground there.On the day of his death, William Penn wrote to Swarthmoor to tell the news of his decease. His letter reminds us of the inscription of the Carthaginians on the tomb of Hannibal. "We vehemently desired him in the day of battle." He sadly says to Mrs. Fox, "I am to be the teller to thee of sorrowful tidings, which are these:—that thy dear husband and my beloved friend, George Fox, finished his glorious testimony this night about half-an-hour after 9 o'clock, being sensible to the last breath. Oh! he is gone, and has left us with a storm over our heads. Surely in mercy to Him, but an evidence to us of sorrows coming.... My soul is deeply affected with this sudden great loss. Surely it portends to us evils to come. A prince indeed is fallen in Israel to-day!" and in a postscript he adds, "He died as he lived, minding the things of God and His church to the last, in a universal spirit."Fox's Journal was published soon after his death, with a lengthy preface by his friend William Penn, containing a warm tribute to his personal worth and Christian labors. The Journal gives us a better and more vivid idea of the man than any biography that has been written. An intelligent and liberal-minded Baptist minister thus describes the impressions it left on his mind:—Rev. Wm. Rhodes to his wife:"'My dear heart in the truth and the life which are immortal and change not;'"So George Fox usually addressed his wife. I have finished his life of 650 folio pages since you have been gone. It afforded me much amusement, but its chiefimpression is that of the highest veneration and delight, for so holy and noble a servant of Christ. I have hitherto regarded Penn as the most beautiful character which that sect has produced, and perhaps it is the most beautiful, because his mind was more polished and cultivated than that of his friend; but Fox's character is by far the most venerable and magnificent. He reminds me of the inspired Tishbite in his stern majesty and fidelity, but he seems to have surpassed him in all the patient, gentle, compassionate, suffering, laborious virtues. If inspiration has been granted since the apostles departed from the world, I think he possessed it. I have read few things more truly sublime than some of his letters to Charles II."—Memoir of W. Rhodes, Jackson and Walford, p. 179.Ellwood, the friend of Milton, has left us a glowing testimony to the value of George Fox's Life and Work. But the eulogies of William Penn and Thomas Ellwood are not portraits. One of the best estimates of his character ever given to the world is that by J. C. Colquhoun in "Short Studies of some Notable Lives." In it he says (p. 88-90):—"The truth is that Fox's character had, like that of many others, two sides; and the contrast between these is so great that one can hardly believe them to belong to the same man. On the one side we have strange thoughts and words, fanciful imaginations, the illusions of an unlettered mind. But such things are not unusual. Dr. Johnson believed in second sight, in dreams and ghosts; and his case presents to us the credulity of a child, with the intellect of a giant."But if we turn to the other side of Fox's character, we find this man of fancies and visions confronted with controversialists, Jesuits, and lawyers, puzzling them with his subtlety, and with his logic beating down their fence. Now in a court of justice he confronts the judge, defies the bar, picks flaws in the indictment, quotesagainst them adverse statutes, and wrings from baffled judges a reluctant acquittal. Then he is in the Protector's court, to meet a man hard to dupe. There he plants himself, his hat on his head, at Oliver's dressing table, engages him in long discourse, sets before him his duty, presses on him the policy of toleration, till the iron-hearted soldier, first surprised, then attentive, at length interested, extends his hand to the Quaker, bids him repeat the visit, and tells him if they could meet oftener they would be firmer friends."No less remarkable are his courage and skill. As storms thicken, he is always in the front of the battle; wherever the strife is vehement there he is; now in Lancashire, now in Leicester, in Westmoreland or Cornwall; meeting magistrates and judges, braving them at Quarter Sessions, vanquishing officers, governors of castles, and judges. Then he sits down calmly to organise, with a forecast equal to that of Wesley, the scheme of Quaker polity which has lasted to our times. And if we smile at the oddity of his language, at the curious missives which he hurls at mayors and magistrates, jailors and judges, we find at times a caustic style worthy of Hudibras or Cobbett, in which he lashes the frippery of the court, or meets the casuistry of the Jesuits or Ultra-Calvinists; and as we dwell on those words of wisdom in which he tells us of his faith, and cheers the heart of Cromwell's daughter, we perceive that he is no common man, but one who, with strange training and singular notions, rose by the strength of genius and piety to a wide command over men."But though honoured by the Society which he founded, Fox has not received his due from the religious world in general, nor from the friends of civil and religious liberty. It is significant that whilst his friend, William Penn, has found at least three respectable biographers outside his own sect, Fox has found but one; and whilst Penn has been defended again and again from Macaulay'scharges, the only defence of George Fox against his groundless sneers that is well-known, is from the vigorous pen of Mr. J. S. Rowntree. Fox has received scant justice from all but "Friends;"theirloyalty, as we have seen, has been beautiful, unfaltering and enthusiastic. Most writers seem to have been too much afraid of his peculiar views, and repelled by his uncouth style, to be just to his large heart and mind, and to his wonderful services as an evangelist. The man who advocated general education, who was anxious that Philadelphia should have a botanical garden, who battled for perfect religious liberty, who pleaded for the rights of the negro and for the reform of prison discipline, who organised the polity of Quakerism, and associated philanthropy inseparably with its system, was a remarkable man, far in advance of his age, and worthy of more regard from the country that has been so greatly blessed by his labours.Lord Macaulay has thought fit to speak of George Fox as not mad enough for Bedlam, but too mad for liberty, as "not morally or intellectually superior to Ludovic Muggleton or Joanna Southcote," he has termed his journal "absurd" and his letters "crazy." Unfortunately, Hepworth Dixon, whilst correcting Macaulay's gross misrepresentations of Penn, has confirmed those concerning Fox. He speaks of his spiritual struggles with a sneer, credits him with "imperious instincts," and is evidently ashamed that Penn was in any way allied with him. It will, therefore, be simple justice to Fox, to ask the reader who may be prejudiced against him, by the vigorous epithets and dashing portraiture of the historian, to set against his caricature some opinions of men less biassed, and well worthy of confidence. Let him remember that if Macaulay speaks with unmeasured contempt, Kingsley, Carlyle, and a host of others speak of Fox with respect.And first, as to his Journal, listen to the words ofColeridge and Sir James Mackintosh. Coleridge in hisBiographia Literariaobserves:—"There exist folios on the human understanding and the nature of man which would have a far juster claim to the high rank and celebrity if in the whole huge volume there could be found as much fulness of heart and intellect as bursts forth in many a simple page of George Fox."Sir James Mackintosh describes his "absurd" book as "one of the most extraordinary and instructive narratives in the world, which no reader of competent judgment can peruse without revering the virtue of the writer, pardoning his self-delusion, and ceasing to smile at his peculiarities."—Miscell's Works, vol. II. p. 182.Is not the testimony of these witnesses preferable to the manifest prejudice of Macaulay?Now as to George Fox's powers of mind and high moral character, place against Macaulay's sarcasm the good opinion of other competent judges. We will not quote the elaborate eulogy of Ellwood, the friend of Milton; of William Penn's warm tribute we will only quote the saying that he had never seen him "out of his place, or not a match for every service or occasion." But these were personal friends. Let us hear others. Marsden in his "Later Puritans," speaks of his "penetrating intellect." The accomplished Alfred Vaughan speaks thus of Fox, in what Charles Kingsley calls his "fair and liberal chapters on Fox and the early Quakers," in his "Hours with the Mystics:"—"Oppression and imprisonment awakened the benevolent, never the malevolent impulses of his nature,—only adding fervour to his plea for the captive and the oppressed. His tender conscience could know no fellowship with the pleasures of the world; his tender heart could know no weariness in seeking to make less its sum of suffering. He is a Cato Howard.... In the prison experiences of George Fox are to be found the germs of that modern philanthropy in which his followers have distinguished themselves so nobly. In Derby gaol he is 'exceedingly exercised' about the proceedings of the judges and magistrates, concerning their putting men to death for cattle, money, and small matters,—and is moved to write to them, showing the sin of such severity, and, moreover, what a hurtful thing it was that prisoners should lie so long in gaol; how that they learned badness one of another in talking of their bad deeds; and therefore speedy justice should be done.... As to doctrine again, consider how much religious extravagance was then afloat, and let us set it down to the credit of Fox that his mystical excesses were no greater."The historian Bancroft says:—"His fame increased; crowds gathered like flocks of pigeons to hear him. His frame in prayer is described as the most awful, living, and reverent ever felt or seen; and his vigorous understanding, soon disciplined by clear convictions to natural dialectics, made him powerful in the public discussions to which he defied the world.... The mind of George Fox had the highest systematic sagacity."—Bancroft's History of the U. S., Vol. II. pp. 508-9.But finally let us appeal to the high authority of Carlyle, who estimated truly the spirit and aim of Fox's life. There was much in common between them in their sturdy love of truth and reality, leading to a hearty hatred of empty forms and mere conventionalities. Both had a striking directness of thought and purpose, going right to the heart of things; an intense earnestness that did not stop nicely to weigh words, but hit hard at all unrighteousness. There was in both a strong sense of personal responsibility that made them indifferent what others might think or do. Carlyle gives us in "Sartor Resartus" (Popular edition, pp. 144, 5) a striking eulogium on George Fox, from which we will select the following characteristic passage:—"Perhaps the most remarkable incident in modern history is not the diet ofWorms, still less the Battle of Austerlitz, Waterloo, Peterloo, or any other battle; but an incident passed carelessly over by most historians, and treated with some degree of ridicule by others; namely, George Fox making to himself a suit of leather. This man, the first of the Quakers, and by trade a shoemaker, was one of those to whom, under ruder or purer form, the divine idea of the universe is pleased to manifest itself; and across all the hulls of ignorance and earthly degradation, shine through in unspeakable awfulness, unspeakable beauty on their souls; who therefore are rightly accounted prophets, God-possessed, or even Gods, as in some periods it has chanced."The length of these quotations needs some apology; but the influence of the vigor and cleverness of Macaulay's caricature needs to be counteracted; and the confidence with which he pronounces judgment will doubtless lead many unwary readers to accept his opinion. It should at least be known that men equally able, and more competent to estimate a nature like Fox's, have admired his character and valued his work. But after all the best testimony to his worth is contained in the devoted life which we have been endeavouring to sketch.
"This man, the first of the Quakers, and by trade a Shoemaker, was one of those to whom, under ruder or purer form, the Divine Idea of the Universe is pleaded to manifest itself."—Carlyle."That nothing may be between you and God, but Christ."—George Fox.
"This man, the first of the Quakers, and by trade a Shoemaker, was one of those to whom, under ruder or purer form, the Divine Idea of the Universe is pleaded to manifest itself."—Carlyle.
"That nothing may be between you and God, but Christ."—George Fox.
The Author has long believed that a popular sketch of the Life and Work of George Fox was wanted. His noble labours in the Gospel, and the many excellences of his character are not known as they deserve to be. The story of his life is full of dramatic interest, and the author has endeavoured to tell it with sympathy and yet with faithfulness.
Too few outside the Society of Friends are aware of the great and happy change which has lately come over it. The cramping influence of custom and precedent is yielding to the free spirit which first made the Society a power. In the present remodelling of its "Practice and Discipline," the study of its early days is of great importance. And for a fervent and constraining piety, for free and large-hearted devotion to "the truth" wherever it leads, few men are more worthy of study and imitation at the present day than George Fox.
Should this effort prove a success, companion sketches of Penn and Barclay will shortly follow.
The Manse,Batheaston, near Bath;September, 1883.
That "a popular sketch of the Life and Work of George Fox was wanted," was proved by the sale of 1500 copies of this pamphlet within six months of its publication. The opinions expressed by competent judges made me feel that I had not laboured in vain. Ministers of various denominations wrote to thank me, and to confess that they had not understood George Fox before.
This Second Edition contains little that is new, but in the sketch of Barclay will be found several extracts from Fox's letters hitherto unpublished.
The Protestant Reformation was at once a revolt against the claims of Popery, and an assertion of the authority of the New Testament. In neither particular did it satisfy the early Quakers. In their opinion it retained some remnants of Popery to its great disfigurement, whilst it was timid and halting in its acceptance of some of the teachings of the Christian dispensation. They regarded it as their work to reject the forms and ceremonies and "priestly pretentions" that had been retained, in order to reproduce the spiritual worship and simple church life of the apostolic days. Especially they believed themselves raised up to assert the living presence of Christ with his church by his Holy Spirit. They protested that feeble life, however orthodox its creed, was as dishonouring to Christ, and as unworthy of these days of the large outpouring of the Holy Ghost, as was formalism itself. The first and chief exponent of these views was George Fox.
George Fox was born at Fenny Drayton, in Leicestershire, in 1624. His parents were pious members of the Church of England, and he tells with satisfaction that his father was generally denominated "righteous Christer," whilst his mother sprung from "the stock of the Martyrs."
His religious life seems to have commenced almost in infancy. His childhood and youth were marked by a sober bearing, a precocious thoughtfulness, and a loveof solitude, which made many notice him; and it was proposed to make him a clergyman. Accordingly, Nathaniel Stevens, the parish priest, seems to have regarded him hopefully, until his deepening experience made the youth aware how blind his guide was, when the former friend became a bitter persecutor. But as some of George's friends objected to his entering the church, he became, in the mingling of businesses so common in that day, shoemaker and shepherd, excelling in the latter contemplative employment, which his friend, William Penn, regards as a fit emblem of his future work. Though he had received only the plainest English education, yet the keen cravings of his strong mind, together with his earnest Bible-reading and much careful thought, soon made him at home in Christian truth, the great topic of conversation and theme of discussion in that age. A noble, severe truthfulness foreshadowed his future teachings, and indicated the stamp of the man. It "kept him to yea and nay," refusing all asseveration or other strengthening of his statements, excepting his favourite "verily." But people remarked that if George said "verily" it was impossible to move him. His own strict and pure life made him feel keenly the poor living of some who made great professions.
But his great preparation for his future work was soon to begin. In his 20th year, his soul began to be racked with conflicts, the nature and source of which he could not understand. This crisis in Fox's history is generally spoken of as his conversion. In some respects it resembles more the deepening and intensifying of a life which already existed. His spiritual nature was waking up to vigorous life. The slight and ill-grasped views which had satisfied the boy did not satisfy the man. They seemed to give no real and sufficient answer to his questionings. He wanted to understand the meaning of life, the plans of God, and his own part in them. In religionhe felt that there should be the clearest and strongest mental grasp, insight into the very heart and core of things. He had only seen as in a mist. Where was the seer that could show, by his apt and living words and his accent of conviction, that the veil had been lifted up for him, and that he had verily seen the Shekinah? To such a one he would listen reverently if he could find him; all others seemed mere triflers to his earnest mood. Then again, if God was a real Father, he felt that real and close relations with him must be possible, but he sadly owned that he did not enjoy those relations, and asked himself and others "Why am I thus?" He began to look facts intently in the face, to find out their meaning. He looked at himself and saw only sin; he looked into the professing church, and even there saw the same sad sight. It made him ask, was the gospel a mistake and Christ powerless? Or was he worse than others that his soul should be in such darkness and distress? Was he worse than in former days when he enjoyed comfort, and when the Lord shewed him some of his truth? Had he sinned too deeply to be allowed to enjoy peace? Had he sinned against the Holy Ghost?
In his anguish, like a good churchman he went to his vicar, and asked him to explain his condition to him, but he could not. Then he sought other clergymen, who had a name for strict living or wisdom, but they could give him no help, though he went as far as London in the quest. Some of the advice which he received, he mentions with a pity that is keener than the severest sarcasm. One bade him sing psalms and chew tobacco; another wished to bleed him, but his large frame had been brought into such a condition by his distress, that no drop of blood would flow from him. Such blindness was not peculiar to the clergy. His friends proposed to relieve his sorrows by excitement, and by diverting his attention. Some recommendedhim to marry, but he sadly replied he was but a lad and must gain wisdom. Others would have him enlist and seek diversion in the exciting events of the civil war; but says Marsden, the historian of the Puritans, "though the bravest man in England, perhaps, if moral courage is bravery, he detested the business of the soldier. Far other thoughts possessed his mind. He had been religiously educated by Puritan parents of the Church of England, and he was now awaking to the consideration of his eternal state."
Meanwhile he fasted often and searched the Scriptures with desperate earnestness. He wandered in solitary places, and spent hours in the trunks of hollow trees in meditation and prayer. Disappointed in the clergy, he turned to the dissenters with no better success. Evidently the thing was of God, for he missed men like Baxter, who could have given him at least good counsel and Christian sympathy. Fox was for some time in Coventry, in 1643, when Baxter was preaching there, one part of the day to the garrison, and the other to the civilians. But possibly if they had met, Baxter's hatred of heresy might have overborne his charity, and obscured his spiritual vision, and he might have branded Fox as a heretic, just as he afterwards dubbed his followers "malignants."[1]
[1]A similar experience is to be found in the unpublished memoir of that pious and accomplished Quakeress, Miss P. H. Gurney, p. 43. "I was painfully struck with the want of any sign of true devotion or spiritual mindedness in the several congregations I attended in London, both in preachers and hearers. Had I gone, as I once felt some inclination to do, to that called St. Mary Woolnoth, (Jno. Newton's) I might have found an exception to this description; but being accidently prevented, I have sometimes thought it was in the ordering of Providence that whatever of spiritual religion was then circulating in the national church, I was not permitted to find it, though I sought it with the most earnest desire of success." Miss Gurney took these facts as a proof that God intended that she should turn Quakeress; but surely the true explanation of these providences is that God will have us look to Him, and not rest unduly on any man or human system. He spoils our idols that we may worship only Him.
[1]A similar experience is to be found in the unpublished memoir of that pious and accomplished Quakeress, Miss P. H. Gurney, p. 43. "I was painfully struck with the want of any sign of true devotion or spiritual mindedness in the several congregations I attended in London, both in preachers and hearers. Had I gone, as I once felt some inclination to do, to that called St. Mary Woolnoth, (Jno. Newton's) I might have found an exception to this description; but being accidently prevented, I have sometimes thought it was in the ordering of Providence that whatever of spiritual religion was then circulating in the national church, I was not permitted to find it, though I sought it with the most earnest desire of success." Miss Gurney took these facts as a proof that God intended that she should turn Quakeress; but surely the true explanation of these providences is that God will have us look to Him, and not rest unduly on any man or human system. He spoils our idols that we may worship only Him.
Every experienced pastor must have met with such cases. Until God satisfies the soul the words of men are vain; when His hour has come, the truth which brings light and peace is often one that has been explained and urged before. George Fox had to learn that it is God's work to enlighten, that there is still to be enjoyed a real guidance of the Holy Spirit, resulting in the solution of difficulties and mysteries, in a clear apprehension of the truth, and a soul-satisfying sense of its power. And if the lesson was slowly and hardly learnt, it resulted in a clearer insight into the truth, and more fitness to deal with other tried souls.
At times during these days of trial the dark clouds broke, and for a time the sun shone through. But until he learnt that Christ was to be his Teacher and Comforter, it was but for a time. It was a short respite to gather strength, a brief foreshadowing of the coming joy. Hear his touching thanksgiving for the goodness that did not break the bruised reed. "As I cannot declare the misery I was in, it was so great and heavy upon me, so neither can I set forth the mercies of God to me in my misery. Oh! the everlasting love of God to my soul when I was in distress. When my torments and troubles were great, then was His love exceeding great. Thou, Lord, makest the fruitful field a wilderness, and a barren wilderness a fruitful field. Thou bringest down and settest up. Thou killest and makest alive. All honour and glory be to Thee, O Lord of Glory. The knowledge of Thee in the Spirit is life." But the clouds finally passed away, and abiding sunshine settled on him, when Christ revealed Himself to him as the Great Physician, for whom he had been longing so earnestly. His troubles had lasted three years, and, no doubt, had been aggravated by his morbid fears and mistaken loneliness. But through life his nature was keenly susceptible; for example, the sins of the nation at the Restoration made him blind and seriously ill withgrief, in spite of active work and much society. No wonder then that his anguish wore him out at the time when his soul was in the dark, and when that which appeared to him alone worth living for seemed denied him. But now that he was weaned from trusting in an arm of flesh, came the time of divine deliverance. "When all my hopes in them (the dissenters) and in all men were gone, so that I had nothing outwardly to help me, nor could I tell what to do, then, O! then, I heard a voice which said, 'There is one, even Jesus Christ, that can speak to thy condition,' and when I heard it my heart did leap for joy. Then the Lord did let me see why there was none upon the earth that could speak to my condition, namely, that I might give him all the glory. For all are concluded in sin and shut up in unbelief as I had been, that Jesus Christ might have the pre-eminence, who enlightens and gives grace, faith, and power. Thus when God doth work who shall let it? And this I knew experimentally. My desires after the Lord grew stronger, and zeal in the pure knowledge of God and of Christ alone, without the aid of any man, book, or writing. For though I read the Scriptures that spake of Christ and of God, yet I knew Him not but by revelation, as He who hath the key did open, and as the Father of Life drew me to His Son by His Spirit."
This discovery was to Fox what the unfolding of the great doctrine of justification by faith was to Luther. It was not only the commencement of a new life, it was the theme of his life-long ministry, and the special message which he was raised up to deliver to the world. In neither case was there the revelation of a new truth, only an old truth was to be emphasized, and to take its right place in the minds and hearts of men.
To this grand truth, that Christ is still with us to guide us by His Holy Spirit into all truth, Fox henceforth trusted to clear up all doubts, and to unfold alltruths, and to explain the Holy Scriptures. So in our day has Mr. Moody set forth prayer as the all-sufficient practical commentator on the Bible. Henceforth, Fox expected Divine prompting to every service and Divine guidance in its performance, and without these he would not move. He had already been convinced of several points afterwards prominent in Quakerism, especially that no place or building can properly be called "holy ground," and that a University training was not a sufficient qualification for the ministry. As to the last point, just as the modern Quaker apostle, Stephen Grellet, said he could no more make a sermon than he could make a world, so did Fox protest against a man-made minister. As he was ever the enlightened and persistent advocate of sound education, this contention must not be mistaken for a contempt of human learning in its right place. It was but an emphatic assertion that the only availing spiritual knowledge comes not through human teaching but through the teaching of the Holy Spirit; and that, on the other hand, where He calls a man to the office of the ministry, the absence of a scholastic training was an utterly insufficient reason for interfering with the call. The abundant blessing which attended the preaching of Fox, Bunyan and other "unlearned and ignorant men," gave emphasis to this doctrine in that age. To these views the other Quaker "testimonies" were speedily added, and soon the whole scheme of doctrine was complete in his mind.
Two points must here be insisted upon:—1st, neither George Fox nor any of the early Friends, though their language is sometimes hazy, ever claimed to be inspired. Says a recent authority, [Fielden Thorp, B. A., in the Friends' Quarterly Examiner for April, 1870,] "It has often been a cause of satisfaction to us that nowhere in the authorised documents of our society is the word (inspiration) applied to the ministry of Friends." Secondly, notice that Fox was most careful to note how his convictions corresponded with Holy Scripture. So he says, "When I had openings they answered one another, and answered the Scriptures, for I had great openings of the Scriptures."[2]Whilst, then, the fallibility of the ministry is acknowledged, and the infallibility of the Bible asserted, surely the doctrine of the Divine Guidance is not perverted through insufficient safeguards. But we are not prepared in all points to defend Fox's application of the doctrine. Possibly he sometimes mistook the workings of his own mind for the promptings of the Holy Spirit. Nor are his theology and his interpretations of Scripture beyond criticism. His ideas on the Divine In-dwelling took the form of the famous doctrine of the Seed or Light within. But though the teaching and guidance of the Holy Spirit are taught by Friends as distinctly as ever, it is questionable whether the doctrine of the Light withinin the precise form in which Fox preached it, and Barclay developed it theologically, has obtained the general acceptance of the Society. It certainly is not to be found in its authorised publications, such as the official "Doctrine, Practice and Discipline." It speaks well for the independence of thought in the society, that the pet-child of its great leaders should be abandoned when it failed to secure their conscientious assent.[3]
[2]The following passage from an American life of George Fox, coming from a reliable Quaker source, corroborates this assertion. Speaking of the early Friends the writer says:—"Their belief in a divine communication between the soul of man and its Almighty Creator, through the medium of the Holy Spirit, by which the Christian may be 'led into all truth,' did not at all lessen their regard for the authority of the Holy Scripturesas the test of doctrines. They constantly professed their willingness that all their principles and practices should be tried by them; and that whatsoever any, who pretended to the guidance of the Spirit, either said or did which was contrary to their testimony, ought to be rejected as a Satanic delusion; and also, that 'what is not read therein nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith.'" Page 357.
[2]The following passage from an American life of George Fox, coming from a reliable Quaker source, corroborates this assertion. Speaking of the early Friends the writer says:—"Their belief in a divine communication between the soul of man and its Almighty Creator, through the medium of the Holy Spirit, by which the Christian may be 'led into all truth,' did not at all lessen their regard for the authority of the Holy Scripturesas the test of doctrines. They constantly professed their willingness that all their principles and practices should be tried by them; and that whatsoever any, who pretended to the guidance of the Spirit, either said or did which was contrary to their testimony, ought to be rejected as a Satanic delusion; and also, that 'what is not read therein nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith.'" Page 357.
[3]The reader will not mistake this for an assertion that Friends have surrendered the doctrine of the Divine guidance and indwelling. For a fuller discussion of the question see the close of the sketch of Barclay.
[3]The reader will not mistake this for an assertion that Friends have surrendered the doctrine of the Divine guidance and indwelling. For a fuller discussion of the question see the close of the sketch of Barclay.
Since Macaulay so grossly caricatured Fox, it has been assumed that Penn and Barclay added to Fox's ideas whatever was meritorious in Quakerism. On the contrary, not only the theology of the society and its polity, but also its philanthropy and its enlightened views on religious liberty, must be ascribed to him as their chief exponent. If the Quakers object to call him their Founder, it is only because they wish to honour God, rather than the human instrument. They never hesitate to give him his due, nor do they falsify their own teachings by seeking to win favour for them by great names. There is no clearer testimony than that of Penn, that Fox's services received full recognition in the Society during his life-time. Indeed the position accorded him moved the envy of some, in spite of his own meekness and humble carriage.
Fox's personal spiritual experience may be regarded as the laying of the foundation-stone of Quakerism. Now let us turn to the rearing of the superstructure. Having learnt where to look for help and enlightenment, his heart soon found rest. His bodily strength returned, and his mind as well as his soul received a vast impulse. He seemed to have a sympathetic insight not only into the hearts of men, but also into the secrets of nature, so that at one time he questioned whether he ought not to practice medicine. To the end of his life he remained an ardent lover of nature and of science, so that his friend, William Penn, calls him "a divine and naturalist too, and all of God Almighty's making." But soon he settled down to his true life-work as an itinerant preacher of the gospel. His patrimony was sufficient to enable him to devote himself freely to the work. In his wanderings in search of light, he had made the acquaintance of many anxious seekers after truth. To these he naturally went in the joy and ardour of his heart, to tell them what God had taught him; and many of them received "the truth." His first convert was a woman,Elizabeth Hooton, who also became the first lady preacher in the new Society, and after much service died in the West Indies, whilst accompanying Fox and others on a preaching tour. Soon we find him preaching in ordinary congregations, and in the conferences common in that day, and gaining a name for spiritual discernment.
Though but a youth of 23 when he began to preach, there was a spiritual power attending his ministry that was remarkable. Macaulay speaks of his "chant" in preaching; many Welsh preachers now "chant" the gospel with great effect, and the recitative in Mrs. Fry's ministry was acknowledged to be wonderfully impressive. But it must not be supposed that it was deliberately chosen, it is probable that he fell into it unconsciously. The intensity of his emotion too added to the impression; his large frame quivered and shook with his strong feeling. Charles Lamb has given a vivid description of what he calls "The Foxian orgasm:" probably the description would accurately apply to Fox. We can judge from his Journal how keen and penetrating his appeals must have been, and how exultant his praises and thanksgivings.
Then again he preached, not metaphysics, nor formal theology, but a living, present Christ. He told his experience with pathos and power. No wonder that people wept and laughed for joy, for they felt it was true glad tidings that he brought. His word was literally "in power and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance," and many received it as the word of God to them. Soon his converts were numbered by hundreds. In 1647 he first began to preach publicly, and in that and the next year several "meetings" were gathered.
Any one who passes along the East Lancashire Railway from Colne to Burnley, must be struck by the towering grandeur of Pendle Hill; and if he climbs it, he will be rewarded by a glorious panorama. Whilst looking onthis magnificent view, George Fox tells us he had a vision, in which he saw that this region would be the home of thousands of Quakers; and certainly nowhere did Quakerism find such a stronghold, and receive such sturdy helpers and gifted preachers. Alas! the glory has departed! Partly as the result of extensive emigration, many of the meeting-houses then so full of devout worshippers are now empty, whilst in some others a formal few, whom Fox would hardly acknowledge as his followers, meet in cold silence sabbath by sabbath.
Fox did not long work single-handed; in a few years, especially from this district on and about the Penine Range, a band of preachers gathered round him whom Quakers still delight to honour. In 1654 he tells us there were sixty preaching in all parts of England and Wales. Some of his helpers had been ministers, like Francis Howgill and John Audland. But it was not taken for granted that they would still preach, unless there was the manifest call. Thus Thomas Lawson, a clergyman at Ramside near Ulverston, a man of considerable learning, seems to have relinquished preaching when he was converted by Fox. He was a great botanist, and saysSewel, "one of the most skilful herbalists in England," so he seems to have gained his livelihood by this skill and by tuition. Yet the authoress of "The Fells of Swarthmoor Hall" calls him a man of fervid eloquence, so that it was not lack of gifts that kept him from preaching, but it must have been the persuasion that he was not called to the work. So in our own day, that master of eloquence, John Bright, though a man of strong religious feeling, never preaches, in spite of the freedom which Quakerism allows.
Besides clergymen and other ministers, the converts included magistrates, like Justice Hotham and Anthony Pearson, author of "The Great Case of Tithes;" and officers in the army like Col. West and Capt. Pursloe, besides gentlemen of substance and standing like I.Pennington, and scholars like Samuel Fisher and Thomas Lawson just mentioned. But among them all Fox stood chief, not only as the father of the fathers among them, but also in his firm and clear grasp of the truth, his entire devotion, his gifts of leadership, his many labours and sufferings, and his God-given success. "I notice," says a contemporary letter, "that in any company when George is present all the rest are silent;" and a joint letter by Edward Burrough and Francis Howgill says, "Oh but for one hour of his company! what a treasure it would be to us!" Even those who had held similar views before they met with him, often gained from him more clearness of view and fulness of knowledge.
The manner of conducting the Quaker "meetings for worship," was the result of practical conviction rather than of theory. They thought that for Christians to meet together in order to go through a stated form of service, was at once to cramp the outpouring of the heart to God, and to interfere with the Holy Spirit in his direction of the utterances of Christ's ministers. When they met in silence, each could speak to God what was in his heart, and each could hear in his spirit "what God the Lord would speak;" and if any one was "moved" to declare any truth, the way was clear. Thus Christ was owned practically as a present Lord, and the Holy Spirit trusted as a real and practical guide. They read in their New Testaments that when the saints met together, all the gifted might prophesy one by one as anything was revealed to them; and that each might contribute to the service his psalm of thanksgiving, or hymn of adoration, or edifying doctrine. It seemed to them that in the "apostacy" of the churches not only the rights of private Christians, but the claims of the Holy Spirit had been interfered with by the "one-man ministry." And probably none of them, whatever his gift of discernment, imagined in those days of burningzeal and abundant labours, that the time would come when their simple system would prove a rigid bond, which would leave half their meetings without ministry of any kind. Encouragement of a true ministry is as needful as discouragement of the spurious.
Very early in the history of the Society, the distinguishing views of Friends on the Sacraments were clearly enunciated. In 1656, Fox sent out a manifesto clearly stating his views, especially on the Lord's Supper. He thought the outward rites were simply adaptations of Jewish customs, temporary condescensions to the weakness of the converts from Judaism until the destruction of Jerusalem, and even during that period, optional, not obligatory. If the early Christians kept up the old custom of sipping the wine and breaking the bread, then they must do it in remembrance of Christ's death, and not of the deliverance from the bondage of Egypt. But he believed the outward rite Jewish in its style, and foreign to the pure spirituality of Christianity. So also with regard to Baptism.[4]
[4]The other leading "testimonies" of Friends were against all war, and against oaths, even in a court of justice.
[4]The other leading "testimonies" of Friends were against all war, and against oaths, even in a court of justice.
There were two kinds of service which the devoted leader rendered to Christian truth—he preached it with zeal and unction, and he suffered for its sake. His sufferings were unquestionably often the result of his own unwisdom. Many Friends themselves now lament his want of a conciliatory spirit. He could not put himself in the place of others, so as to see how they viewed himself, his conduct and his claims. Thus he was constantly led to impute dishonest and impure motives to others if they did not agree with him. All but his own unpaid ministers were "priests" and "hirelings" and so on. But nothing can justify the treatment he received, often through the connivance, sometimes from the instigation, of clergymen and magistrates. Whitefield's hootings and peltings were nothing, in comparisonwith Fox's stonings, and brutal beatings, and horrible imprisonments. As Marsden says, "He rebuked sin with the authority of a prophet, and he met with a prophet's reward."
We must remember in extenuation of his admitted faults that he aimed to be a reformer, appealing afresh to first principles in conduct, and seeking to arouse others to feel their force. He purposely set himself against mere conventionalism, especially when it fostered pride or cloaked some rottenness in society. When persecuted, he never resorted to flattery or depended on wheedling, but appealed to conscience and to the humane or Christian feelings which ought to have been in the breast of the persecutor.
He proved to the full the power of passive endurance. Smitten on the one cheek, he literally turned the other. He believed that a large share of his work for the Master was in the testimony of suffering, and he was more anxious to be obedient than to avoid what seemed to him the pains and penalties of obedience. He would not walk out of prison unless he could do it not only honourably, but conscientiously, satisfied that he was not flinching from his appointed testimony. He truly gloried in afflictions for Christ's sake. While refusing to honour an unchristian statute by keeping it, he bore patiently and unresistingly the legal penalties, unshaken in his loyalty to the government and unsoured in his disposition towards mankind. But further, Fox clearly saw that endurance was sure to end in victory, and he inspired his friends with the same conviction. "The more they imprison me," he writes triumphantly, "the more the truth spreads." In the same spirit said William Penn at a later date, "I will weary out their malice. Neither great nor good things were ever attained without loss and hardship. The man that would reap and not labour must perish in disappointment." No wonder that men grew weary of punishingthose who endured in this spirit. No wonder that the lofty conscientiousness of the Quakers was felt to be the salt which had a large share in counteracting the corruption of the Stuart reigns, and in preserving our civil and religious liberties. Says Orme in his Life of Baxter, "The heroic and persevering conduct of the Quakers in withstanding the interferences of government with the rights of conscience, by which they finally secured those peculiar privileges they so richly deserve to enjoy, entitles them to the veneration of all the friends of civil and religious liberty." And again he says, "Had there been more of the same determined spirit among others which the Friends displayed, the sufferings of all parties would sooner have come to an end. The government must have given way, as the spirit of the country would have been effectually roused. The conduct of the Quakers was infinitely to their honour."
Meanwhile Fox abounded in labours, sparing no exertions to make known the truth and to plead for righteousness. He sought a purer life as much as a purer faith. He went into public houses to plead for temperance, and into fairs to plead for uprightness and honesty, and into courts to plead for justice, as well as into churches to plead for spiritual religion. We must not forget that in those fermenting times it was no uncommon thing for questions and remarks to be thrown at the preacher during divine service, and it was considered quite in order for any one to address the people after the clergyman had finished his sermon. Thus when Fox was speaking in the Ulverston Church, Justice Sawrey cried, "Take him away," but Margaret Fell interposed, "Let him alone; why may not he speakas well as any other?" So that these interruptions were not considered so strange and disorderly then as they seem to us now. But public feeling was against the man and against the truths he preached, and to that public feeling he could not and would not yield. He couldnot take off his hat before the great, for that was an honour which he reserved for God alone. He felt bound to protest against all flattering titles and speeches, which, though the world counts them harmless civilities, seemed to his sober spirit and delicate conscience such as should neither be given nor received by the followers of the lowly Nazarene. His "thee and thou," and plain speaking, and sober dress, and keen rebukes, brought on him a perfect storm of anger and abuse. He felt that he stood in the forefront of the battle against worldliness, and bore the brunt of it; and he was meekly thankful for such an honourable post.
His first imprisonment was at Nottingham, for interrupting divine service; but he had his triumph, the very Sheriff was converted, and compelled by his new-found zeal to go forth into the market-place, and take up the imprisoned preacher's work. His second term soon followed at Derby, on a charge of blasphemy. He believed in the doctrine of perfection, and told those who opposed him that they pleaded for sin. The Derby Magistrates asked him if he was sanctified, and he answered, "Yes." "Then they asked me if I had no sin? I answered 'Christ my Saviour has taken away my sin and in Him there is no sin.' They asked how we knew that Christ did abide in us? I said, 'By His Spirit that he has given us.' They temptingly asked if any of us were Christ? I answered, 'Nay, we were nothing, Christ is all.'" Yet they found him guilty of blasphemy, confounding him with the fanatical, antinomian Ranters. But if he taught perfection, Oh! how he lived! Let those that reject his teaching excel, or at least equal, his living. In Derby, his jailer was converted, to strengthen and comfort him in his sufferings. Whilst in prison his busy pen poured forth many letters of advice to Friends, and "testimonies" against all forms of iniquity, including war and capital punishment.
Before he was 27, Fox had passed through morevaried experience than many have in a long life-time. Honour and revilings, converts and imprisonments, love for the gospel's sake and cruel beatings by the mob, nearly ending in death—these had already been his portion. But his work was now bearing much fruit. In one twelve-months, 1650-1, he gained such staunch helpers as Richard Farnsworth, James Nayler, William Dewsbury, Justice Hotham, and Captain Purslow. Soon afterwards the Fells of Swarthmoor were led to Christ by his preaching and became the most devoted of adherents. Soon his followers could be numbered by thousands. It was not the strength of his arguments that gained them; the age was overdone with reasoning. Fox mocked their syllogisms with grim humour. There was a wonderful spiritual power about him. He spoke naturally, with simple, direct earnestness, and overwhelming vehemence, right to the conscience of the hearers. He made people both listen and understand him, and feel the power of the truth in a way which many did not like. He was a wonderful evangelist. What his cultured convert, Isaac Pennington, the Rutherford of Quakerism, said of Friends generally, is applicable to him. They might offend his taste and move him to contempt by their intellectual poverty, but they compelled him to respect their spiritual power and their deep acquaintance with the things of God.
Then again the new Society was a real brotherhood. The members stood shoulder to shoulder as fellow servants of the one Master. Their only emulation was which should do most and suffer most cheerfully. Their great question was "Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do? Where wilt Thou have me to go?" The Jesuit was ready to go at an hour's notice wherever the Pope sent him. The Quaker was as ready in his obedience to the voice within. Not only Great Britain, but Italy, Turkey, Syria, and Egypt heard the truth before 1662. John Stubbs, "a remarkable Oriental scholar," andHenry Fell, who was also "well versed in Arabic and Hebrew," set out for the land of Prester John, but were stopped by the English Consul at Alexandria. Their leader was chief simply through gifts and devotedness. So strongly were Friends attached to him that when he was in Launceston gaol, one of them went to Cromwell and offered to lie in prison in his stead; which made the Protector turn to those around him and ask, "Which of you would do as much for me if I were in the same condition?" And Fox showed himself worthy of such devotion by always seeking the post of danger and the most arduous work. Urgent he might be, for he was tremendously in earnest, but to speak as Hepworth Dixon does of his "imperious instincts" simply shows ignorance of the man.
For centuries no such zealous and noble-spirited evangelism had been seen. No wonder that it won its way. Many who had been rich, like Isaac Pennington, were content to become poor by fines and distraints for "the truth's sake." Most nobly did they help each other. If they did not insist on community of goods as a theory, they carried out the spirit of it in practice.
There are two marked stages in Fox's work; first the Evangelistic Stage, and then the Organising Stage, which was, of course, overlapt by the other. Let us trace the salient points in his evangelistic work. In 1654 he was brought before Cromwell, and made a good impression on that keen judge of men. His sincerity stood testing, his zeal for God was manifestly genuine, and the grand, though not faultless Protector, learnt heartily to respect him. As he was turning to leave him, Cromwell caught him by the hand and said, "Come again to my house, for if thou and I were but an hour of a day together, we should be nearer one to the other." Next year he visited him again, to lay before him the ill-treatment to which Friends were subjected.
The meetings now gathered, wherever "the man in leather breeches" went were immense. At one in Bristol, he tells us, 10,000 people were present, and often 2000 or 3000 are mentioned as collecting to hear him. The energetic evangelist often had periods of grudged but not useless interruption of his labours by imprisonment. Indeed, as Mr. W. E. Forster says, he "would have been qualified to draw up a report of the state of the gaols of the Island, so universal and experimental was his acquaintance with them." But his imprisonments did not make him cease from labour. He wrote innumerable letters and tracts, and he preached the gospel to those that came to see him with such effect, that one of Cromwell's Chaplains said they could not do him a greater service for spreading his principles in Cornwall, than to imprison him in Launceston gaol.
In 1656 occurred the sad episode of James Nayler's fall. He had been one of the most popular of the Quaker preachers, and had enjoyed the warm friendship of Fox and other leaders. But extravagant praise turned his head so far that he listened to blasphemous songs and invocations addressed to him by excited women, allowed them to kneel before him, and even to welcome him to Bristol with a horrible parody of our Lord's triumphal entry into Jerusalem. These miserable proceedings he did not like, but he excused them as honors done, not to him, but to Christ his Lord. The way in which Fox and other Friends acted in this matter was most praiseworthy. Many of the enthusiasts who misled Nayler were not truly Friends at all, and yet the Society was credited with fanaticism on account of their proceedings. Their enemies exulted in a clear case against them, and the religious world seemed justified in regarding them with suspicion. But in spite of all this, the Friends clung to the deluded man, and tried every means to open his eyes. George Fox visited him in Exeter gaol, and used every power of reason and persuasion, and at last finding he could do nothing with him, sadly gave him to understand that their friendship was at an end, and that Friends could no longer regard him as one of them. Yet still they visited him, and tried hard to gain the Protector and Parliament to their humane view of the right way of dealing with the case, and they had their reward. The cloud that obscured his mental vision passed away, and he deeply and truly repented of his sad error. He published a full recantation, took upon himself the whole blame, absolving the Society from all share; and endeavoured in every way to undo the mischief he had done. But whilst their love and gentleness had thus conquered, the barbarous spirit of the age had vindicated orthodoxy, by passing and executing the horrible sentence of branding and tongue boring. And it is sad to think, that the man who endured this torture was already a repentant man, won by love, not by severity, to confess and renounce his sin. The Quakers at once received him into full confidence and esteem, and helped him, in truly Christian fashion, to bear the results of his fall. Thus early in their history, in the midst of an age of much persecution and bigotry, were established those habits of loving Christian discipline, which have so nobly distinguished the Society ever since. But the reclaimed wanderer was not long allowed to continue his resumed preaching. In the summer of 1660 he was taken ill, and died in his 44th year.
In the same year 1656, Fox tells us that more than 1000 Friends were in prison for conscience sake. But though he had not been long out of prison, and was in continual danger of arrest, he would not relax his labours. He extended the range of his evangelistic efforts into Wales, and gained a rich harvest there, as he had before amongst the equally fiery-souled Cornish men. The style of his own preaching may be judged from his exhortation to his fellow-ministers, penned whilst inLaunceston gaol. "Dwell in the power, life, wisdom and dread of the Lord God of life and heaven and earth, spreading the truth abroad, awakening the witness, confounding the deceit, gathering up out of transgression into the life, the covenant of light and peace with God. Let all the nations hear the sound by word or writing. Spare no place, spare no tongue nor pen. Go through the work, and be valiant for the truth upon earth." How like Wesley's assertion that the world was his parish. Like him, Fox might have boasted that his followers wereallat work, andalwaysat it. Like Wesley, too, he wrote as he travelled, by which alone we can account for the wonderful amount that he wrote. He had no gift for literary composition; his spelling was erratic, and his sentences, like Paul's, were long and involved, probably because they both dictated their letters hastily to some secretary. But if his letters bear marks of haste, they are pithy, and pointed, and full of gracious unction. Any spiritually-minded Christian may greatly enjoy his fervent appeals and powerful statements of Gospel truth. His letters and tracts served the practical purpose for which they were intended, and he was satisfied.
The year 1657 saw him enter Scotland, where he had a presentiment that a glorious vintage was to be gathered. He was met by determined opposition from ministers and others, who smelt heresy in his teachings, especially as he was an Arminian. What they hated in him may be seen from the following curses, which, in the fiery style of that age, were pronounced in kirk, the people pronouncing the response. "Cursed is he that saith, Every man hath a light within him sufficient to lead him to salvation: and let all the people say, Amen. Cursed is he that saith, Faith is without sin: and let all the people say, Amen. Cursed is he that denieth the Sabbath-day: and let all the people say, Amen." But for all this terrorism, within ten years there was a bodyof Friends in Scotland, that, by their earnest piety, and solid consecrated learning, gladdened the heart of the devoted leader.
The troubled times after the death of Cromwell tried Friends in many ways. The Committee of Public Safety sought to induce them to join the army, many of them having been brave and efficient soldiers before their convincement, but they unanimously refused. Attempts were made to identify them with the Fifth Monarchy men, and other disturbers of the public peace, for they were disliked by almost every one; but the prudence and energy of Fox and others avoided these snares, and gained the confidence of the powers that were.
When Charles II. ascended the throne he proved even more friendly than Cromwell had been. Dr. Stoughton says, "Charles had a sort of liking to the Quakers for their harmlessness and their oddity. He was not afraid of their taking up arms against the throne, and to quiz them in their queer dresses and with their quaint speech, was to him a piece of good fun." It suited the merry Monarch to have pretty Quakeresses like Sarah Fell coming with their petitions, enduring his bantering demurely, and going away delighted with the clemency he so often showed. In 1666 he granted the release of George Fox from the sentence of premunire. He had once before set him at liberty, only to fall again into the clutches of the law. In March, 1664, Fox had been brought before Justice Twisden, and after a sham trial that was an outrage on both law and humanity, the extreme sentence of the law in such cases, the sentence of premunire, was passed, and he languished in Lancaster gaol and Scarborough Castle for nearly three years. But at last the royal ear was gained, and Fox, ill with hard treatment in the foul cells at Scarborough, was restored to his liberty, his property, and his civil rights. In prison he had been busy writing in exposition of the views of Friends. After hisrelease, for some time he was principally engaged in modelling the discipline and church government of the Society.
Before passing on to consider the organisation of the Quaker community into a compact and well regulated church, we must notice their conduct in the question of marriage. "Marriage," said Fox, "is God's ordinance," believing literally the common saying that marriages are made in heaven. But the solemn compact ought to be publicly ratified, and what more fitting than that public worship should attend that celebration. If Fox denied that ministers could marry, if he insisted that the ceremony should consist simply of a mutual pledge publicly given, he was very careful that all should be done in good order. The marriage customs which obtain amongst Quakers to-day represent his views. The young people must show that they are clear of other marriage engagements, and have the consent of their parents or guardians to their union. Sufficient public notice must be given of the coming event, so as to prevent all scandal and disorder. Then the marriage is celebrated during a week-day service. In the early days of the Society the publication of the intended marriage was no easy matter. "Many a joke must have passed through the merry crowd, when, from the market-cross of a country town, the expecting bridegroom proclaimed his forthcoming nuptials—but no arrangements of a loose or evasive character, would have saved the marriages of Friends from the double brand of public opinion and of national law." In 1661 the legality of Quaker marriages was tested in Nottingham before Justice Archer, and the point was forever set at rest.
Now let us turn to the work of Fox in the organisation of the Society. That the organisation was principally planned and carried out by him is past all doubt. We will quote two out of numberless authorities. Marsden says—
"To understand Quakerism the reader must comprehend the character of George Fox; for no institution ever carried more thoroughly impressed upon it the features of its chief."—Marsden's Christian Churches, p. 424.[5]
[5]For this quotation and other valuable matter the writer is indebted to the writings of Alderman Rowntree, of York, whose "Two Lectures on George Fox" and prize essay on "Quakerism, Past and Present" are standard works on Quakerism.
[5]For this quotation and other valuable matter the writer is indebted to the writings of Alderman Rowntree, of York, whose "Two Lectures on George Fox" and prize essay on "Quakerism, Past and Present" are standard works on Quakerism.
T. Hancock says, in his prize essay on the causes of the decline of Quakerism—
"The master spirit and chief builder of Quakerism was undoubtedly George Fox.... When we come to the second period, to the modelling of the Quaker constitution and discipline to the Society of Friends, to Quakerism as anism, the hand of George Fox is still more evident."—The Peculium, pp. 68, 69.
The views of Fox as to the church polity were exceedingly simple. He had no intention of forming a sect; he only met the needs of his friends, as the exigences of the hour dictated. The less machinery the better; the simpler the arrangements the more they commended themselves to his judgment. His mind was not hampered by theories. His aim was to recognize the gifts of all, and not to have the life bound by man's rules.
But there must be discipline in the church. The disorderly must be dealt with. The weak must be helped. Many were thrown into prison or even banished; they must be relieved or cared for in the best way their circumstances allowed. Many had lost all for conscience sake; they must not be allowed to want. None so full of pity for these sufferers, as he who suffered so readily himself. Almost his last words were, "Remember poor Friends in Ireland."
The New Testament was his only conscious rule, prayerful waiting upon God for light his only expositorof it. He might ask his learned friends for side-lights from church history, might ask them about the practice of the early church, or the history of the corrupting influence of certain false doctrines. But he was emphatically a man of one book, and he read that book with his heart, more than with his penetrating mind.
That competent authority in all matters concerning Quakerism, Mr. J. S. Rowntree, thus describes the origin and progress of the Quaker discipline. "With the rapid growth of the Society, George Fox increasingly perceived the necessity for taking steps to repress the outbursts of fanatical and misguided zeal, and for placing the government of the church on a more systematic basis. This decision was undoubtedly expedited by the occurrence of a heresy fomented by John Perrott.... He had the satisfaction of seeing most of Perrott's adherents make a public acknowledgment of their error, and immediately afterwards, he initiated a national system of disciplinary meetings, to be held monthly. They consisted of the most experienced Friends within a given district; and had the charge of the affairs of the body within such district. The Quarterly Meetings (many of which we have seen were already in existence) were gradually put on a different basis, and consisted henceforth of representativesfroma number of associated Monthly Meetings, whose decisions in some cases were liable to revision by the superior meeting. It was not till a somewhat later date that a central body—the 'Yearly Meeting' of London—consisting of representatives from all the Quarterly Meetings in the country, was established as the top stone of this elaborate disciplinary system.... To the settlement of these Monthly Meetings, George Fox most assiduously devoted himself in 1667-68; and ere long, wherever meetings for the worship of God were held after the manner of Friends, little church synods were also held, ministering to the wants of the poor, alleviating thesorrows of the prisoners, seeking to reclaim disorderly walkers, and when failing in this, disuniting them from the body." ("Two Lectures on Macaulay's Portraiture of George Fox," pp. 40-42.) It speaks volumes for the sagacity of Fox that so little has needed to be added to or altered in the Quaker polity since his day.
In 1666 the Barclays joined the society, and in the next year William Penn was added to their number. The learning of Robert Barclay, and social position and administrative ability of William Penn, were soon appreciated by the leader with whom they worked so loyally.
In 1669 Fox visited Ireland, and in the same year he was married to Margaret, widow of Judge Fell, of Swarthmoor Hall. She had been one of his early converts, and was one of his most vigorous helpers. She wrote almost as many letters, and printed almost as many appeals as her husband; she visited the imprisoned, and sent relief to their families. Her house was the home of all Quakers visiting the neighborhood, and her purse was at the service of all who needed money to serve the cause. Her judgment was reliable and her energy untiring; she was the Countess of Huntingdon of the Society. She even endured long imprisonments, and risked, and for a time endured, the loss of all her property by premunire for the truth's sake. She was therefore a fitting help-meet for George Fox. She had four daughters who were ministers in the Society, and the whole family regarded him with reverence, except the scapegrace elder son. He not only opposed the marriage, but with the basest ingratitude, he endeavoured, after it was accomplished, to turn his mother out of her own home; and he rests under at least grave suspicion of being a party to the plot to have her sentenced to premunire.[6]
[6]The penalties of this sentence were, to be put out of the King's protection, to forfeit lands and goods to the King, and to be liable to imprisonment for life or at the King's pleasure.
[6]The penalties of this sentence were, to be put out of the King's protection, to forfeit lands and goods to the King, and to be liable to imprisonment for life or at the King's pleasure.
Fox acted throughout this affair with the greatest prudence and magnanimity. He would not even be suspected of seeking worldly gain, but carefully secured to his wife and her family, the property which was hers before their marriage. No wedding could be more simple than his own. "Afterwards," he says in his journal, "a meeting being appointed on purpose for the accomplishing thereof, in the public meeting-house at Broadmead in Bristol, [the site cannot now be certainly determined,] we took each other in marriage.... Then was a certificate, relating both the proceedings and the marriage, openly read and signed by the relations, and by most of the ancient Friends of that city, besides many other Friends from divers parts of the nation." Evidently the ceremony caused considerable excitement. His wife was ten years his senior.
But of home life they had little enough; in little more than a week they parted, that the husband might continue his labours, and soon after, the wife was cast into prison, where she remained until 1671. Then through the intercession of her daughters with the king she was released, and the premunire, which had rested on her for ten years, was removed. They had a few days together before Fox sailed for the West Indies, and again on his return, and so on.
Men and women who give their most intense and sustained sympathies to Christian enterprises, often have to suffer for it in their home relations. "We were very willing both of us," says Mrs. Fox after her husband's death, "to live apart for some years upon God's account and His truth's service, and to deny ourselves of that comfort which we might have in being together, for the sake of the service of the Lord and His truth; and if any took occasion, or judged hard of us because of that, the Lord will judge them, for we were innocent."
In the summer of 1671, George Fox and some other Friends visited the West Indies and the continent ofAmerica, to push the work of evangelisation and of organising the societies there. They landed in Barbadoes, after a voyage enlivened by constant dangers from the leakiness of the vessel, and once by an almost miraculous escape from capture by a Sallee man-of-war. Fox's son-in-law, John Rous, was in the company, and on landing he was at once taken to the house of Mr. Rous, senior, who was a wealthy sugar planter. Fox's health had been so injured by the ill-usage which he had endured at different times, and he suffered so keenly from the climate, that he had to remain at Mr. Rous's, whilst his friends held meetings all around. But though crippled in body his mind was vigorous. The marriage regulations and discipline of the Society, and the duty of giving Christian instruction to the negroes, engrossed his attention. The question of slavery stirred his heart to its depths; and his vigorous language and action not only did good then, but laid a right foundation for the future action of the society. When the time came that Friends had to consider the question of the abolition of slavery, few things exerted so much influence in the right direction, as Fox's clear statement of the issues involved. His words were quoted, his reasonings were expanded and enforced, and it was largely through his influence that abolitionist principles became identified with Quakerism.
Here, as elsewhere, the doctrines of the society had been greatly misrepresented, so the famous letter to the governor of Barbadoes was drawn up to explain them. It is still often quoted as an admirable statement of the views of the society. It is as near an approach to a creed as anything can be, which originated from a society which recognises only the Bible as authoritative, and which objects to all human formularies.
The society in Barbadoes gained greatly in numbers and strength by this visit. Jamaica, Maryland, North Carolina and Virginia were next visited in the samemanner and with similar results. Large numbers were won to a christian life. The Indians and negroes were recognised as having a claim to christian sympathy and religious instruction. The societies were weeded of unworthy members, and their organisation successfully accomplished. Then the party returned in safety to England after an absence of a year and a half.
In 1677 Fox carried these operations into Holland, having with him his illustrious friends, Penn and Barclay. "This visit of the three great apostles of Quakerism," says Hepworth Dixon, "seems to have made a great sensation; scholars, merchants, government officers, and the general public crowded to hear them preach, and the houses of the most noble and learned men in the city of Van der Werf and Erasmus were thrown open to them freely.... Their journey through the country was like a prolonged ovation." The interesting episode of the interview with the enlightened and large-hearted Princess Elizabeth, granddaughter of James I., scarcely belongs to this sketch, as Fox did not join in it. But he wrote a lengthy epistle of Christian counsel, and sent it by his daughter-in-law, Mrs. Yeamans, and the Princess returned him this brief but kindly reply:—
"Dear Friend, I cannot but have a tender love to those that love the Lord Jesus Christ, and to whom it is given, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for Him; therefore your letter, and your friend's visit, have been both very welcome to me. I shall follow their and your counsel as far as God will afford me light and unction; remaining still your loving friend, Elizabeth."
"Dear Friend, I cannot but have a tender love to those that love the Lord Jesus Christ, and to whom it is given, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for Him; therefore your letter, and your friend's visit, have been both very welcome to me. I shall follow their and your counsel as far as God will afford me light and unction; remaining still your loving friend, Elizabeth."
He spent some time in Amsterdam "writing in truth's account," and then returned home by Harwich. In 1684 he paid another visit to Holland, the last of his longer missionary journeys.
After this, finding his health shattered by his longimprisonment and arduous labours, he settled down in London, quietly, though not uselessly, awaiting the end. His correspondence was most extensive, and he wrote many tracts and pamphlets as was his habit. One of his last letters was written to the lately-bereaved widow of Barclay, the Apologist, and is a model of Christian consolation. He tells her:—"Thou and thy family may rejoice that thou hadst such an offering to offer up unto the Lord as thy dear husband; who, I know is well in the Lord in whom he died, and is at rest from his labours, and his works do follow him." He signs himself one "who had a great love and respect for thy dear husband, for his work and service in the Lord, who is content in the will of God, and all things that he doeth—and so thou must be." But besides this literary work, he laboured zealously in the pastoral work, visiting the sick and afflicted, and endeavouring to "bring into the way of truth such as had erred."
He watched the passing of the Toleration Act with the deepest interest. It was a most welcome relief to Friends, especially those in Ireland. The losses sustained by the Irish Quakers were enormous. In one year (1689) they were estimated at £100,000, many being stripped of all they had (see Besse's Sufferings). George Fox not only collected such facts as these for publication, but, even in his last days of suffering and prostration, attended at the House of Commons to interest the members in the sufferings of his brethren, and to see that the Toleration Act was "done comprehensively and effectually."
He was equally zealous in his attendance on public worship. When so infirm that he could hardly sit through a service, he would not desist, and often afterwards had to lie down on a bed until recruited. He was determined, if possible, to die in harness, and God gave him his heart's desire.
He was especially anxious lest spiritual religionshould decline, now that persecution had ceased, and Friends began to prosper in business. He wrote them an epistle of loving, but earnest expostulation, warning the young against the fashions of the world, and the old against the deceitfulness of riches. To the latter he pointedly says, "Take heed that you are notmaking your graveswhile you are alive outwardly." To some ministers who had gone to America he writes similar stirring words of counsel:—"And all grow in the faith and grace of Christ,that ye may not be like dwarfs; for a dwarf shall not come near to offer upon God's altar, though he may eat of God's bread that he may grow by it."
On the Sunday preceding his death, he preached with great power at the meeting in Gracechurch Street, but soon afterwards had to take to bed, complaining of cold and weakness. His wife had been to see him some little time before, and finding him enjoying better health than usual, was unprepared for his death, so that no near relative seems to have been with him at the time of his decease. It was indeed a consecrated chamber. Those who stood round him were struck with the triumph of faith over bodily weakness. He exulted in the power of Christ. "All is well—the Seed of God reigns over all, and over death itself." His thoughts were calmly fixed on the arrangement of Society affairs; his mind was clear, his habitual disregard of his bodily sufferings still marked him. Towards the last all pain left him. Feeling death coming, he closed his own eyes and extended his limbs; and in sweet composure, resting on Christ his Saviour, his spirit entered into rest on Tuesday, 13th December, 1690 (o.s.)
Three days after, some 2000 persons (one witness says 4000) gathered to lay him in his grave. For two hours they worshipped in that same meeting-house in Gracechurch Street, in which he had preached only on the previous sabbath. William Penn, George Whitehead,Stephen Crisp, and other leaders amongst them, thanked God for the gifts and services of their departed leader, and exhorted and encouraged each other to faith in that Lord, who raised him up and sustained him in his work. Then the body was conveyed to Bunhill-fields, and interred in the Friends' Burial Ground there.
On the day of his death, William Penn wrote to Swarthmoor to tell the news of his decease. His letter reminds us of the inscription of the Carthaginians on the tomb of Hannibal. "We vehemently desired him in the day of battle." He sadly says to Mrs. Fox, "I am to be the teller to thee of sorrowful tidings, which are these:—that thy dear husband and my beloved friend, George Fox, finished his glorious testimony this night about half-an-hour after 9 o'clock, being sensible to the last breath. Oh! he is gone, and has left us with a storm over our heads. Surely in mercy to Him, but an evidence to us of sorrows coming.... My soul is deeply affected with this sudden great loss. Surely it portends to us evils to come. A prince indeed is fallen in Israel to-day!" and in a postscript he adds, "He died as he lived, minding the things of God and His church to the last, in a universal spirit."
Fox's Journal was published soon after his death, with a lengthy preface by his friend William Penn, containing a warm tribute to his personal worth and Christian labors. The Journal gives us a better and more vivid idea of the man than any biography that has been written. An intelligent and liberal-minded Baptist minister thus describes the impressions it left on his mind:—
Rev. Wm. Rhodes to his wife:
"'My dear heart in the truth and the life which are immortal and change not;'"So George Fox usually addressed his wife. I have finished his life of 650 folio pages since you have been gone. It afforded me much amusement, but its chiefimpression is that of the highest veneration and delight, for so holy and noble a servant of Christ. I have hitherto regarded Penn as the most beautiful character which that sect has produced, and perhaps it is the most beautiful, because his mind was more polished and cultivated than that of his friend; but Fox's character is by far the most venerable and magnificent. He reminds me of the inspired Tishbite in his stern majesty and fidelity, but he seems to have surpassed him in all the patient, gentle, compassionate, suffering, laborious virtues. If inspiration has been granted since the apostles departed from the world, I think he possessed it. I have read few things more truly sublime than some of his letters to Charles II."—Memoir of W. Rhodes, Jackson and Walford, p. 179.
"'My dear heart in the truth and the life which are immortal and change not;'
"So George Fox usually addressed his wife. I have finished his life of 650 folio pages since you have been gone. It afforded me much amusement, but its chiefimpression is that of the highest veneration and delight, for so holy and noble a servant of Christ. I have hitherto regarded Penn as the most beautiful character which that sect has produced, and perhaps it is the most beautiful, because his mind was more polished and cultivated than that of his friend; but Fox's character is by far the most venerable and magnificent. He reminds me of the inspired Tishbite in his stern majesty and fidelity, but he seems to have surpassed him in all the patient, gentle, compassionate, suffering, laborious virtues. If inspiration has been granted since the apostles departed from the world, I think he possessed it. I have read few things more truly sublime than some of his letters to Charles II."—Memoir of W. Rhodes, Jackson and Walford, p. 179.
Ellwood, the friend of Milton, has left us a glowing testimony to the value of George Fox's Life and Work. But the eulogies of William Penn and Thomas Ellwood are not portraits. One of the best estimates of his character ever given to the world is that by J. C. Colquhoun in "Short Studies of some Notable Lives." In it he says (p. 88-90):—
"The truth is that Fox's character had, like that of many others, two sides; and the contrast between these is so great that one can hardly believe them to belong to the same man. On the one side we have strange thoughts and words, fanciful imaginations, the illusions of an unlettered mind. But such things are not unusual. Dr. Johnson believed in second sight, in dreams and ghosts; and his case presents to us the credulity of a child, with the intellect of a giant.
"But if we turn to the other side of Fox's character, we find this man of fancies and visions confronted with controversialists, Jesuits, and lawyers, puzzling them with his subtlety, and with his logic beating down their fence. Now in a court of justice he confronts the judge, defies the bar, picks flaws in the indictment, quotesagainst them adverse statutes, and wrings from baffled judges a reluctant acquittal. Then he is in the Protector's court, to meet a man hard to dupe. There he plants himself, his hat on his head, at Oliver's dressing table, engages him in long discourse, sets before him his duty, presses on him the policy of toleration, till the iron-hearted soldier, first surprised, then attentive, at length interested, extends his hand to the Quaker, bids him repeat the visit, and tells him if they could meet oftener they would be firmer friends.
"No less remarkable are his courage and skill. As storms thicken, he is always in the front of the battle; wherever the strife is vehement there he is; now in Lancashire, now in Leicester, in Westmoreland or Cornwall; meeting magistrates and judges, braving them at Quarter Sessions, vanquishing officers, governors of castles, and judges. Then he sits down calmly to organise, with a forecast equal to that of Wesley, the scheme of Quaker polity which has lasted to our times. And if we smile at the oddity of his language, at the curious missives which he hurls at mayors and magistrates, jailors and judges, we find at times a caustic style worthy of Hudibras or Cobbett, in which he lashes the frippery of the court, or meets the casuistry of the Jesuits or Ultra-Calvinists; and as we dwell on those words of wisdom in which he tells us of his faith, and cheers the heart of Cromwell's daughter, we perceive that he is no common man, but one who, with strange training and singular notions, rose by the strength of genius and piety to a wide command over men."
But though honoured by the Society which he founded, Fox has not received his due from the religious world in general, nor from the friends of civil and religious liberty. It is significant that whilst his friend, William Penn, has found at least three respectable biographers outside his own sect, Fox has found but one; and whilst Penn has been defended again and again from Macaulay'scharges, the only defence of George Fox against his groundless sneers that is well-known, is from the vigorous pen of Mr. J. S. Rowntree. Fox has received scant justice from all but "Friends;"theirloyalty, as we have seen, has been beautiful, unfaltering and enthusiastic. Most writers seem to have been too much afraid of his peculiar views, and repelled by his uncouth style, to be just to his large heart and mind, and to his wonderful services as an evangelist. The man who advocated general education, who was anxious that Philadelphia should have a botanical garden, who battled for perfect religious liberty, who pleaded for the rights of the negro and for the reform of prison discipline, who organised the polity of Quakerism, and associated philanthropy inseparably with its system, was a remarkable man, far in advance of his age, and worthy of more regard from the country that has been so greatly blessed by his labours.
Lord Macaulay has thought fit to speak of George Fox as not mad enough for Bedlam, but too mad for liberty, as "not morally or intellectually superior to Ludovic Muggleton or Joanna Southcote," he has termed his journal "absurd" and his letters "crazy." Unfortunately, Hepworth Dixon, whilst correcting Macaulay's gross misrepresentations of Penn, has confirmed those concerning Fox. He speaks of his spiritual struggles with a sneer, credits him with "imperious instincts," and is evidently ashamed that Penn was in any way allied with him. It will, therefore, be simple justice to Fox, to ask the reader who may be prejudiced against him, by the vigorous epithets and dashing portraiture of the historian, to set against his caricature some opinions of men less biassed, and well worthy of confidence. Let him remember that if Macaulay speaks with unmeasured contempt, Kingsley, Carlyle, and a host of others speak of Fox with respect.
And first, as to his Journal, listen to the words ofColeridge and Sir James Mackintosh. Coleridge in hisBiographia Literariaobserves:—"There exist folios on the human understanding and the nature of man which would have a far juster claim to the high rank and celebrity if in the whole huge volume there could be found as much fulness of heart and intellect as bursts forth in many a simple page of George Fox."
Sir James Mackintosh describes his "absurd" book as "one of the most extraordinary and instructive narratives in the world, which no reader of competent judgment can peruse without revering the virtue of the writer, pardoning his self-delusion, and ceasing to smile at his peculiarities."—Miscell's Works, vol. II. p. 182.
Is not the testimony of these witnesses preferable to the manifest prejudice of Macaulay?
Now as to George Fox's powers of mind and high moral character, place against Macaulay's sarcasm the good opinion of other competent judges. We will not quote the elaborate eulogy of Ellwood, the friend of Milton; of William Penn's warm tribute we will only quote the saying that he had never seen him "out of his place, or not a match for every service or occasion." But these were personal friends. Let us hear others. Marsden in his "Later Puritans," speaks of his "penetrating intellect." The accomplished Alfred Vaughan speaks thus of Fox, in what Charles Kingsley calls his "fair and liberal chapters on Fox and the early Quakers," in his "Hours with the Mystics:"—
"Oppression and imprisonment awakened the benevolent, never the malevolent impulses of his nature,—only adding fervour to his plea for the captive and the oppressed. His tender conscience could know no fellowship with the pleasures of the world; his tender heart could know no weariness in seeking to make less its sum of suffering. He is a Cato Howard.... In the prison experiences of George Fox are to be found the germs of that modern philanthropy in which his followers have distinguished themselves so nobly. In Derby gaol he is 'exceedingly exercised' about the proceedings of the judges and magistrates, concerning their putting men to death for cattle, money, and small matters,—and is moved to write to them, showing the sin of such severity, and, moreover, what a hurtful thing it was that prisoners should lie so long in gaol; how that they learned badness one of another in talking of their bad deeds; and therefore speedy justice should be done.... As to doctrine again, consider how much religious extravagance was then afloat, and let us set it down to the credit of Fox that his mystical excesses were no greater."
The historian Bancroft says:—"His fame increased; crowds gathered like flocks of pigeons to hear him. His frame in prayer is described as the most awful, living, and reverent ever felt or seen; and his vigorous understanding, soon disciplined by clear convictions to natural dialectics, made him powerful in the public discussions to which he defied the world.... The mind of George Fox had the highest systematic sagacity."—Bancroft's History of the U. S., Vol. II. pp. 508-9.
But finally let us appeal to the high authority of Carlyle, who estimated truly the spirit and aim of Fox's life. There was much in common between them in their sturdy love of truth and reality, leading to a hearty hatred of empty forms and mere conventionalities. Both had a striking directness of thought and purpose, going right to the heart of things; an intense earnestness that did not stop nicely to weigh words, but hit hard at all unrighteousness. There was in both a strong sense of personal responsibility that made them indifferent what others might think or do. Carlyle gives us in "Sartor Resartus" (Popular edition, pp. 144, 5) a striking eulogium on George Fox, from which we will select the following characteristic passage:—"Perhaps the most remarkable incident in modern history is not the diet ofWorms, still less the Battle of Austerlitz, Waterloo, Peterloo, or any other battle; but an incident passed carelessly over by most historians, and treated with some degree of ridicule by others; namely, George Fox making to himself a suit of leather. This man, the first of the Quakers, and by trade a shoemaker, was one of those to whom, under ruder or purer form, the divine idea of the universe is pleased to manifest itself; and across all the hulls of ignorance and earthly degradation, shine through in unspeakable awfulness, unspeakable beauty on their souls; who therefore are rightly accounted prophets, God-possessed, or even Gods, as in some periods it has chanced."
The length of these quotations needs some apology; but the influence of the vigor and cleverness of Macaulay's caricature needs to be counteracted; and the confidence with which he pronounces judgment will doubtless lead many unwary readers to accept his opinion. It should at least be known that men equally able, and more competent to estimate a nature like Fox's, have admired his character and valued his work. But after all the best testimony to his worth is contained in the devoted life which we have been endeavouring to sketch.