The other friend speaks: Guest Post by Nick Thorne

To clarify my argument in response to the last post, my argument isn’t that we’re all Quakers or that Quakerism is some panacea to which we all unwittingly aspire. I wouldn’t call myself a Quaker. My argument is that in modern Britain, across all Christian denominations you find many people who identify with their Church, but don’t buy into it 100%. How many people who were baptised Catholic really believe in papal infallibility? How many Christians today really believe in the virgin birth, the Immaculate Conception and transubstantiation? Some do, but millions don’t. Similarly, there are many who don’t think of themselves as Christian, but who still believe in some form of higher power. In other words, there are many people who have some kind of spiritual belief, but who can’t fully identify with the church they attend or simply don’t go to any church at all. And the Christian denomination which best accommodates this widely held position is the Quakers.

What makes Quakerism so different from other Christian denominations and so distinctive, is its insistence on total equality. One of the key beliefs of George Fox, who founded Quakerism is that “there is that of God in every man”. The Quakers took this literally, arriving at the logical conclusion that there is no more of God in an aristocrat than there is in a peasant. On that basis the Quakers refused to acknowledge people’s titles, famously even the monarchy: they referred to everyone by their first names, something which they were persecuted and imprisoned for. Since their emergence in the 17th century Quakers have pursued this philosophy of egalitarianism in demanding human rights and social welfare. Thomas Paine, who was instrumental in the American Revolution and the philanthropic Rowntree Family who tackled poverty in England were all Quakers.

At the time of the Reformation the Catholic Church forbade its congregations from owning a Bible or reading it themselves on the basis that the priest must be the mediator between God and man. The Protestant Churches put a greater emphasis on education and participation, but none more so than the Quakers. Quaker meetings are not led by a priest at all. 

I am an atheist but have attended two Quaker meetings out of curiosity. A Quaker meeting is meditative and begins in silence, and the silence may continue for the entire duration of the meeting. There is that of God in every man. Therefore anybody can stand up and make a contribution. At the meeting in Brighton, this took place four or five times within the hour. One man brought up the problematic line in the Bible “no one comes to the father but by me”. He observed that he doesn’t want to go to heaven if his Jewish, Islamic and atheist friends can’t join him there. Another brought up the miraculous plane landing on the Hudson River which had happened recently, asserting her view that close encounters with death can be very instructive. Four years on I can still remember what they said. 

Inevitably some contributions are more interesting than others – I found the meeting in York very dull. But because there is no fixed programme, each meeting is different. Unlike any other Christian denomination, at no point do they say the creed. This has a huge impact in making everyone feel welcome. There is no pretence at homogeneity. Nobody is forced to repeat words they don’t understand or believe. Difference of belief isn’t viewed as a problem. Rather than being convinced that their belief is the one and only truth and that everyone else is going to hell, Quakers seem to be more interested in questioning and exploring their own beliefs and those of others further. 

At the end of the meeting everyone stands up and shakes hands. The guy sitting next to me remarked that he hadn’t seen me before, and we began a very open and frank discussion of each other’s beliefs. I was fascinated to hear that he considered himself a Quaker but not necessarily a Christian. He believed in a God but not a Biblical God, Jesus with caveats and not in the Holy Spirit. So Quakerism doesn’t even demand belief in the trinity. Given that only a couple hundred years ago Europe was torn apart by religious wars in which ‘heretics’ were slaughtered for holding the outrageous belief that Jesus paid for his sandals, this is amazing progress. After no other church service have I ever felt able to discuss religion with other members of the congregation. 

Given its openness it is perhaps surprising that Quakerism isn’t more popular. Why is there a Christian Union at Sussex University, which condemns homosexuality in the gay capital of Britain, and no Quaker society? Perhaps the answer is that unlike other sects, the Quakers weren’t trying to convert everyone else. 

As I said I would not call myself a Quaker and wouldn't want to go to a Quaker meeting every week. But if I had to join a Christian denomination I would chose Quakerism and I think you would too.

Picture by Agnonymous. CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.