What Quakers believe

Often when I would teach Quakerism 101 (consisting of six weekly one and a half to two hour sessions) at meetings (congregations) in the Philadelphia area (liberal meetings) I would ask the class what Quakers believe. The usual responses were "Quakers believe there is that of God in everyone," "Quakers believe in continuing revelation," "Quakers believe in peace," and "Quakers believe in the inward or inner light." There were others but these were most common.

I'm going to examine the "peace" statement first. Some years ago Philadelphia Yearly Meeting had produced banners which had the A.J. Musti quotation "There is no way to peace, peace is the way."  These were hung along 15th Street outside Friends Center, and along Arch Street outside the Arch Street Meeting House. I had some difficulty with this. Peace was Christ's gift to his disciples (John 14:27 "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you."). This is not to say God does not give us peace in other ways and through other intermediaries, but there is a way to peace. Liberal Quakers tend to orthopraxis (right practice or action) as more important that orthodoxy (right belief). Our testimonies (including peace, but also integrity, equality, simplicity and stewardship) testify to our beliefs; they are our beliefs only in the sense that we believe they are what God requires of us.

Almost always near the top of the list would be that "there is that of God in everyone." This has almost become a liberal Quaker creed. It comes from George Fox's admonition “Be patterns, be examples ... then you will come to walk cheerfully over the world, answering that of God in everyone; whereby in them you may be a blessing, and make the witness of God in them to bless you." It is what will happen when one does what Fox encourages them to do. It is not put forward as a belief to be ascribed to; yet that is what it has become. My main objection to it as a statement of Quaker belief is that it is misleading taken out of context. It could be taken to mean we all have a little piece of God in us while I take Fox to have meant we all have that in us capable of responding to God. It also fails to distinguish us from many other belief systems (I remember a Sikh saying namaste means "that of God in me greets that of God in you."

The point about continuing revelation is valid, and important, but also dangerous. It ties in with the testing of a leading which has been an issue for us since James Nayler rode into Bristol on the back of a colt much as Jesus rode into Jerusalem, and we know the trouble that brought on him and the society. It does distinguish us from other Christians who believe revelation ended with the last apostle.

The light is, to my mind, the most to the point. We ask Friends to hold us in the light. But also, the light is identified with the eternal logos made man in Jesus in the prologue to the Gospel of John, particularly verse 9, "The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world" <NRSV> cited by Robert Barclay as the Quaker verse. It has the advantage (and disadvantage) of being used without the Christian baggage for those who have trouble with that. Above I mentioned the alternate "inner light" or "inward light." This distinction parallels that of "that of God" suggesting we all have a little piece of God (inner light); inward light is light coming from outside. Do we own this light of does the light enlighten us? It also goes back to the writings of early Friends where it was an important image, particularly in exposing out shortcomings.  

Many people are used to seeing a religion in terms of beliefs. Beliefs have to be primary, but liberal Quakers don't quibble over what those beliefs are (within reason) as long as they lead to right action, orthopraxis.