Quakers

In 1661, George Fox, leader of the Society of Friends, or Quakers, issued a Declaration “against all plotters and fighters in the world.” Fox declared that the sect, formed in England some eight years earlier, rejected all “war and fighting,” which, he maintained, originated “from the lusts of men” (Brock, 25). Thereafter, pacifism became the distinguishing characteristic of the Friends—prior to the 20th century all members were required to renounce personal violence or face disownment. At base, the Quakers’ rejection of violence arose from their conviction that all people possessed an “Inner Light” through which they could receive God's grace. The “light within,” Friends believed, enabled everyone to respond to spiritual appeals rather than to the use of force.

Quakers carried these pacifist ideals with them to North America in the 1660s, but the most notable example of early Quaker pacifism was in the colony of Pennsylvania, established by Quaker William Penn in 1682 as a “Holy Experiment.” In contrast to their colonial neighbors, Pennsylvania's Quaker leadership established generally peaceful relations with the local Delaware and Shawnee. Holding political power also required Friends to exercise the police functions of the state, requiring that Quaker leaders distinguish between coercion necessary to maintain a peaceful society and violence perpetrated on neighboring peoples. More problematic for Quakers was the colony's increasing entanglement in the imperial wars of the 18th century. Though Friends refused personal military service (and Pennsylvania under Quaker leadership lacked a militia), they faced a dilemma when called upon to support financially the military efforts of the British Crown. Moreover, the growing non-Quaker population of the colony—particularly on the frontier—sought military protection from Native Americans and their European allies. During the Seven Years’ War, the conflict between the sect's principles and its exercise of power led Quakers to resign from the colonial assembly and abandon their Holy Experiment. Thereafter, Quaker influence in Pennsylvania declined sharply. Indeed, during the American Revolution, Friends throughout America faced outright hostility and repression (including the 1777 arrest and detention in Virginia without trial of 17 leading Philadelphia Quakers) for their refusal to support the revolutionary cause. Still, out of sympathy for the American cause, a smaller group of Quakers—most notably the “Free Quakers” of Philadelphia—abandoned their pacifist beliefs and supported the armed effort of the revolutionaries; they faced disownment from their church as a result.

By the end of the 18th century, Quakers had largely turned inward; they sought to reform the sect and ensure that members adhered strictly to the various tenets of the faith (“testimonies”) rather than seek to change the wider world. This “quietism” led Quakers to eliminate slaveholding by members, but it also promoted widespread factionalism. In the process, the peace testimony lost much of its vitality. Indeed, Quaker quietism even led most Friends to eschew cooperation with non-Quaker pacifist reform groups in the 1830s and 1840s, despite their common goals. The fragility of the peace testimony became clear during the Civil War, when large numbers of northern Quakers—particularly after the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863—joined Union forces to end slavery. Caught between their pacifist heritage and a passionate opposition to slavery, a significant minority of Quakers abandoned the former, and many members escaped church disciplinary action for their activities that supported the war. Yet most Friends remained faithful to the [Page 688]peace testimony during the war, refusing to serve in the military or to pay war taxes and facing imprisonment or seizure of property as a result. The situation was particularly bleak for the small number of Quakers in the South, many of whom agreed to pay commutation fines to the Confederate government in lieu of military service—a measure that Friends had rejected during previous 19th-century wars as a violation of religious freedom.

...