Part I, Chapter 1: Friends Against a Kingdom
1. Religious Argument
This story begins with a true account of Quaker Prophetic Resistance—a confrontational, public form of nonviolent witness used in the early days of the movement. Unsurprisingly, these acts were often followed by severe punishment. If the goal was to shake up God’s people like Jeremiah parading around in a wooden yoke, they certainly achieved the goal. Consider that the scholars these women insulted were destined to become a part of the religious establishment that refused them religious freedom, and which sent out its Tithe Mongers to take a generous 10% of peoples’ earnings—sometimes leaving families destitute. When, if ever, is it appropriate to engage in religious argument?
2. Public Reproval
When the Quaker women were whipped, the local people of the village watched, and some would have said the women received their just punishment. According to Besse’s narrative, some of the public were “astonished to see the women enduring the torture patiently.” The women then continued to exhort the people to “fear God and not man.” Today when we see people exulting over harm caused to Christians who say things to reprove and even provoke their listeners, how can we respond?
3. Censorship
In the scene at the Blakeling’s house, James Parnell was preparing to engage in “pamphleteering.” This was unlicensed writing, printing, and distribution of pamphlets; newspaper-sized sheets of paper folded to make a booklet. Obtaining your own press was only possible after the government of Charles I was toppled and England fell into years of civil war. For the first time, people could self-publish and engage in promoting their own ideas, similar to the way anyone with a smart phone today can post their ideas online for the public to see. In some countries like China and Russia, there are strict rules about criticizing the government or spreading “fake news” which can be punished–even severely. For a time in the US, social media companies were closely monitoring and even censoring certain posts they flagged as “fake news.” What are the rules today about posting information online? What about posts that are clearly libelous?
3. Church Authority
The Quakers were opposed to…the Bible? Not quite. Consider the sequence of events: Previously, the Catholic Church taught that it was their institution through which God’s grace was dispensed. Then came the printing press and Protestant churches were busy putting Bibles into the hands of the Commonwealth. They preached the concept of “sola scriptura,” a belief that the Bible is the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith. George Fox argued, “You will say Christ saith this, and the apostles say this, but what canst thou say?” In other words, there was too much reliance on intellectual knowledge and theological arguments. There was also the issue of sermons that centered on misinterpreted scripture. Today anyone can be ordained online, and most churches welcome new members with few or no questions. What do you think should be “proof” of salvation? What should be “proof” that someone is fit to serve as a minister?
4. The Faith Journey
George Whitehead left his life as a Presbyterian scholar when he was 14 so he could locate various Dissenter movements (people with opposing views to the established Church) and sort out his own beliefs. In the same way, James Parnell who was weak in his body due to a childhood illness left his home and walked 100 miles to Yorkshire to meet George Fox. Recently, Kirk Cameron’s son James revealed on-camera that he too stepped away to determine his own beliefs. What do you think about teenagers finding their own faith? It’s obviously too dangerous to leave home and travel the countryside on foot these days, but what are other opportunities kids can use to begin their Faith Journey in an authentic way?
6. Acting on Conscience
In this story we see how Quakers believed that all men are created equal, and so refused to doff their hat or give “hat honor” to elders or people in authority. Also there was the matter of formal versus informal address. This exists today in many languages. For example in Germany if you ask for help from a friend you say “Kannst du mir helfen?” but to a boss or stranger you should say, “Können Sie mir helfen?” Imagine how odd you would look asking a police officer for help as if he’s your best bud! Back in the 1600’s you only said “thee” and “thou” for friends and family, and it was rude to address someone in authority with those words. Quakers called everybody “thee” and “thou” as a sign of equality—and took it even further by refusing to address judges as “Your Honor.” Not something you want to try in traffic court. Maybe you know someone who does something out of conscience that inconveniences you, such as refusing to go to your fave restaurant unless they have Vegan options. Have you ever felt led to do something that was different from others as a point of conscience?
Friends of Freedom 