The Good Quaker in French Legend [Reprint 2016 ed.] 9781512805895

Citation preview

THE GOOD QUAKER IN FRENCH LEGEND

The LANDING

of the QUAKERS

at

Philadelphia

The Good Quaker in French Legend

By EDITH PHILIPS

Philadelphia

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS

London / Humphrey Milford Oxford University Press

1932

Copyright 1932 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS Printed in the United States of

America

To My Father whose interest in history and literature has been a constant stimulus to my worl\

PREFACE

T

H E present study has been made in the hope of throwing some light on an important undercurrent in French thought, particu-

larly in respect to the eighteenth century. Students of literature have come to realize in recent years that influences, particularly foreign influences, cannot be sufficiently understood by merely analyzing the imitation of one author by another. Nor can we penetrate the thought of a period through a knowledge, however complete, of its major writers. Often great writers merely give expression to ideas which are traditional, to influences which are "in the air." In order to find the popular roots of such ideas we must look in literary byways, in gazettes, travel works, theological writings, and other media through which ideas circulate before they find artistic expression. T h e importance of travel works in forming the thought of the eighteenth century is now generally recognized, and the origins of the romantic attraction of the exotic have been thoroughly studied. Other equally interesting undercurrents of the period remain to be examined. When they are more completely understood, they will explain many of the popular influences at work and will give a clearer idea of the trends of thought and the enthusiasms of which they are an expression. T h e eighteenth century in France was a period of popular philosophies rather than of great systems. It was characterized by a breakdown of confidence in old authorities, and by a change of emphasis from the preoccupation with man's relation to God and the universe to the study of man's relation to society. Diderot and Voltaire

attacked

metaphysics

and systematic

philosophy

both

satirically and seriously. Diderot says in his definition of a philosopher in the encyclopedia, "Ordinary philosophers who meditate too much are unjust to everyone. They flee men and men avoid them; but our philosopher, who knows how to divide his time between retreat and the commerce of men, is full of humanity. H e

[vii]

Preface is the Cremes of Terence who feels that he is a man and that only humanity interests him in good fortune and in bad. Homo sum, humani a me nihil alienum puto." Rousseau also, in spite of his sentimental concern with himself, was chiefly absorbed by social problems. These tendencies resulted in a search for models and examples to prove the truth of new ideas. The new interest in man as a social being brought as a consequence a desire to know more about the origins of society; hence many accounts, often more imaginary than scientific, about man in a state of nature. Much attention has been given by scholars to the belief in the "noble savage," a faith which seemed to justify the conviction that natural man was essentially good, and capable of producing a "natural" religion which could be favorably compared with revealed religion. But the apparent goodness of the savage was not the only evidence to be found which gave some hope that society could be saved. Parallel to this enthusiasm for man in an undeveloped state was an interest in certain organized social groups, an interest which has been too long overlooked by scholars. The Chinese and the Quakers seemed to offer an excellent proof that even organized society is not necessarily corrupt. If the good savage proved that man had not been corrupt in the beginning, the wise Chinaman was an example of a type of man who had reached a high degree of civilization and who had remained spiritually unspoiled. The Quakers, on the other hand, were a people who had voluntarily and consciously renounced the evils of modern society, and had regained simplicity and the primitive virtues in the midst of worldliness. These are two examples of the search for a justification of a new hope for the future of society. This study is concerned with the latter group, the Quakers, as they were conceived to be by the French and as they appeared in French literature. It cannot but be evident, even to the casual observer, that there are frequent references to the Quakers in French literature. The case of Voltaire is of course well known, and has been frequently discussed. Voltaire's Letters on the Quakers gain added significance when it becomes apparent that they were part of a series, that French comments on Quakers were common as early as 1656, and [viii]

Preface that they continued with increasing frequency throughout the eighteenth century. There was scarcely a French traveler to England who did not report that the Quakers were the most curious and interesting group of people to be seen there, and Voltaire was only following a tradition when he discussed them. Almost from the very inception of the movement in England, information about Quakers had already reached France. From that time until the French Revolution the Quakers were an object of great interest to the French people. On studying the reasons for this interest and the nature of it, it soon becomes clear that a definite literary legend is involved whose development can be clearly traced, and that a traditional Quaker was evolved in the French mind who resembled but little the real Quaker of history. The development of this legend or tradition has been traced in the following chapters. F r o m the first idle curiosity aroused by the strange fanatics of 1656, to the belief, which reached its height in 1785, that a Quaker could do no wrong, there was a clear progression which can be followed. T h e documents explain themselves and explain the legend. Since many of them are from books which are now rather rare I have quoted freely and with a minimum of interpretative material. I have indicated, whenever the evidence is clear, which writers copied verbatim from previous sourccs, or whether they merely repeated with new emphasis and amplification the ideas of their predecessors. In a century characterized by free plagiarism this has been a difficult task, but it is, after all, of minor importance. Whether the successive Frenchmen who wrote of Quakers imitated earlier writers in the spirit or the letter, each added something of his own until gradually the traditional Quaker lost all traces of his early fanaticism, and stood out as the symbol of wisdom and virtue. Proper allowance must of course be made for the rhetorical exaggerations of a period which was gradually throwing off the restraints of classicism and could exclaim with an enthusiasm in which the flow of words is stronger than the good sense, " O tyrants of the earth! what have you gained by your bloodthirstiness ? Think on William Penn, tremble, and weep!" It is not within the province of this study to discuss the degree [ix]

Preface in which the French conception of the Quaker differed from the historical Quaker. I have called the conception a legend because it became a fixed idea which was based on a minimum of observation, and because it was defended with a heat rarely shown for any but religious convictions whenever the unbelieving scoffed. N o Quaker, however proud of his ancestors he may be, will hesitate to agree that the Quaker who emerges from these documents bears all the marks of a legend. All people honor the Quakers for their high ideals and admirable achievements, but even Friends themselves admit that they are human and that they have not all been saints. But according to the French legend they must be saints or hypocrites. They were not permitted to be human. I am only too conscious that the documentation of such a study as this can never be complete. However, the discovery of more references to Quakers in French literature will merely give added evidence of the extraordinary curiosity which was manifested by the French for a sect which never took root on their soil. I believe that the material presented in the following chapters is already sufficiently convincing proof that such a curiosity existed. It would be impossible to make a personal acknowledgment to all the friends on whose time and patience I have imposed and to whom I owe valuable suggestions both in the pursuit of documents and in the arrangement of material. I feel however an especial debt to Professor Chinard of Johns Hopkins University, whose original suggestion led to the pursuit of this study, and to the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation whose generosity made possible its completion. EDITH

Swarthmore, 1932

M

PHILIPS

CONTENTS PAGB

Preface I

Origin of the French Interest in Quakers

vii .

II The Quakers Seen by Voltaire

i 43

III The Legend Takes Form

68

IV

91

V VI

The Utopia of Penn Quaker Ideas and the French Revolution . . . .

133

Persistence of the Legend in the Nineteenth Century . 166 Summary and Conclusion

198

Appendix I: A List of Quaker Publications in French Translations 213 Appendix II: Text of the description of Quakerism in LaGrue's Translation of Ross' History of the Religions of the World—Les Religions du monde, 1666 216 Bibliographical Notes

223

Index of Names

231

ILLUSTRATIONS The Landing of the Quakers at Philadelphia from Raynal, Histoire philosophique Etablissements et du Commerce des Deux Indes, 1 7 7 0

frontispiece

et politique des Européens dans les

FACING

PAGE

Quaker Meeting in London in the Seventeenth Century .

14

f r o m Misson's Mémoires,

1698

Quakeress Preaching f r o m Bernard, Cérémonies

26 et Coutumes

religieuses,

1737

Quaker Meeting in London in the Eighteenth Century

50

f r o m Bernard

Quaker Meeting in Amsterdam

76

f r o m Bernard

Quakers Giving Alms

98

from Raynal

A Quaker f r o m Bernard

180

Chapter I ORIGIN OF THE FRENCH INTEREST IN QUAKERS

T

H E choice of the title, The Good Quaker in French

Legend,

implies the conclusion that there exists or has existed in

France a traditional notion of the nature of the Quaker and his religion. Such legends tend to grow whenever frequent references are made in literature to a certain people or group, and when the accuracy of the references is not constantly checked by an impartial presentation of facts. This was the fate of the Quakers and Quakerism in France. There is a general impression that Voltaire was the first Frenchman to discover the Quakers and that his remarks about them were meaningless pleasantries. Voltaire, however, rarely

indulged

in meaningless

discover the Quakers for the French.

pleasantries,

nor did

H e undoubtedly

he

greatly

stimulated French curiosity in regard to them, but he himself, in describing the Quakers, was merely following n tradition created by many other French visitors to England. Editors of Voltaire have traced many of the sources of information about Quakers which Voltaire used in the Lettres

PhilosophiquesOne

prede-

cessor of Voltaire, Samuel Sorbiere, who described the Quakers in his Voyage en Angleterre

(1664) has already received some notice

from scholars. 2 But Sorbiere was not an isolated instance. L o n g before 1733 when Voltaire wrote, any Frenchman who knew no language but his own could have read many descriptions and discussions of this English sect. T h e existence of such a great number of works indicates that interest in the Quakers existed in France in the seventeenth century and that almost every writer on England or on religion tried to satisfy or increase that interest. 1 2

See Lettres Philosophiques, ed. Lanson, Paris, 1924, notes to Lettres sur les Quakers. See Morize in R. H. L„ 1907, XIV, 231.

[I]

The Good Quaker in French Legend Quakerism was written of and defined in France almost before it was defined by its own people. Other independent sects were passed by or classed without distinction among the Anabaptists, but Quakers were always mentioned as the most interesting sect in England, and after the established church and the Presbyterians, the most important. The same Sorbiere just mentioned says in 1664: "Je vois bien que vous attendez en cet endroit que je vous parle des Quakers ou des Trembleurs et de toutes les sectes que Ton dit qu'il y a en Angleterre." He goes on to say that these sects are not unified nor so well defined as people imagine. His attitude is not that of one telling of a great novelty, but of one writing to satisfy popular curiosity and to correct a common misconception. Clearly Sorbiere was not the first to write in French about the "Quakers or Trembleurs and all the sects which are said to exist in England." There were many reasons why seventeenth-century Quakerism, apparently a purely local religious manifestation in England, gained rapid notoriety abroad. Fox, 3 although he was in some respects a fanatic, was not spectacular enough to attract wide attention abroad. If all the early Quakers had been like him it is probable that the Quakers would have received as brief and as casual mention in France as the many other sects which flourished in seventeenthcentury England. But his doctrine of direct revelation and the indwelling Christ had in it possibilities for extravagant and fantastic actions. Some of his followers, notably Naylor, lacking the common sense of Fox and misinterpreting the spiritual significance of his doctrine, set themselves up as "prophets" and were justly regarded by their contemporaries as unbalanced fanatics. Whether modern Quakers care to claim them or not, hostile contemporaries classed them with the movement and their extravagances were better known abroad than the teachings of Fox. A few Quaker missionaries came to France in 1656, arousing interest by their dress, manners, and doctrine and by their audacity in seeking an interview with Louis X I V . During the Civil Wars in England reports were circulated in France associating the Quakers with all the plots and conspiracies of the time. Many of these were in3

George Fox, 1624-1690, founder of the Quaker movement.

[2]

French Interest in Quakers spired by the official Cromwellian gazettes and were quickly taken up in France with consequent exaggeration of the numerical importance of the Quakers and of their activities as conspirators. It is therefore not surprising that Sorbiere and other travelers as well as Protestant refugees in England took a primary interest in Quakers, often to find as Sorbiere said, that they were not as important as the French believed them to be. French histories of England discussed the Quakers at greater length than did English historians who saw them in a different perspective. French theologians, both Catholic and Protestant, feared them. In the gazettes and popular dictionaries which flourished from 1685 to 1730, usually printed in Holland but written in French, Quakers were frequently mentioned. Efforts were made to define their doctrines and to explain their peculiarities. Quaker publications were reviewed and analyzed. Opinions about them had an important place in the discussions of universal toleration and Protestant unity which characterized the period. Finally, William Penn, seeking setders for his colony among the French Protestant refugees, published tracts which gave information about Pennsylvania, praising its constitution, its tolerance, and the virtue and industry of the Quaker settlers. Frequent reviews in the gazettes prove that all of these publications were read and that Quakers and Quakerism had been discussed in French, one might even say exhaustively, before Voltaire knew of their existence. The most notorious fanatic of the period which produced Quakerism in England was James Naylor. Whether the more conservative followers of Fox wished to acknowledge him or not, he was indelibly associated in the popular mind with the Quaker movement. Taking quite literally the doctrine that Christ dwells in us, he made a triumphant entry into Bristol in imitation of Christ's entry into Jerusalem, riding on an ass, followed by a crowd of barefoot admirers throwing branches before him. He was arrested, tried, and condemned for blasphemy before a special committee of Parliament. The account of his trial was immediately published in France by the official news gazette of Cromwell, known as Les Nouvelles Ordinaires (November and December 1656). The story was immediately copied and recounted with considerable charm by Loret

[3]

The Good Quaker in Trench

Legend

in the rhymed gazette which he wrote for the Duchesse de Longueville. 4 Loret laid the foundation for the creation of the traditional Quaker in his account of the adventures of Naylor. Naylor claims according to Loret's report that he has been sent directly by God, whose Son he is. H e is very disdainful of the wise and the worldly; he is reserved and modest in his language; he is gende as a lamb, wears very simple clothing and no shoes. Claiming to be the Messiah, he preaches very moral doctrines and is always surrounded by ten or twelve disciples. Loret, embroidering on his theme and having his own bit of f u n at the expense of the English, reports that the magistrates of that country are so terrified of this new Messiah that they have shut him up in a prison with triple doors, and set an army of guards over him. Our chronicler tells us that there is much discussion concerning the true nature of this prophet. A very intelligent friend of his has suggested many explanations for Naylor's actions; he might be simply a madman, he might be an agent of Satan, he might be a queer sort of charlatan or only a ridiculous atheist. In any case, he is a sophistical wretch and a monster of extravagance, and in the private opinion of the chronicler he is running a great risk of being hanged. It was thus that the first Quaker was described to the French. H e already had some of the elements which went to form the idealized Quaker more than a century later: simplicity, modesty, and gentleness with more than a touch of madness and fanaticism. But, as Loret concludes philosophically, "Everyone to his own taste; that is the way of the world."

5

Loret evidently found that stories of these fanatics entertained his readers, for a few months after the Naylor case (in June 1657) he told of two Anglois Trembleurs who came to Paris. They tried first to preach to the Protestants in their church at Charenton, where they were very coldly received because, as Loret expresses it, "Calvin never believed anything like that." Then, with characteristic naive courage, one of them entered the cathedral of Notre Dame, 4

Loret, La Muse Hisloriquc, edited by Ch. Livet. Paris, 1 8 5 7 - 1 8 9 1 . Naylor was not forgotten in France after this seventeenth-century account. He forms the subject of a chapter in a Choix de Causes Célebres Anciennes et Modernes, Paris, 1 8 1 3 . 5

W

French Interest in Quakers where his doctrine caused no excitement but his refusal to remove his hat was a crime. " H e came into our church," says Loret, "as if it were any market place." Whereupon a pious worshipper said to him, "Are you drunk or only mad to have your hat on your head in this venerable and holy place during the service? Whoever you are, get right down on your knees, or at least take your hat off!" The Trembleur made an absurd reply to this Christian remonstrance, and spoke quite insolently. At this the people who overheard became furious and fell upon him. As he was very stubborn, he was, they say, thoroughly beaten. Charles II continued the practice which Cromwell had instituted, of issuing a gazette in Paris. Like its predecessor, the Nouvelles Ordinaires, the new gazette, called the Journal de tout ce qui s'est passé au rétablissement du Roi, informed the French public of the actions of the Quakers Trembleurs. In 1660 the French thus learned of the arrest of two of them, named George Fox and Robert Greenham, who were taken in Essex and whom the court ordered to be brought to London. Loret did not recount this arrest of George Fox, but throughout the year 1661 he made frequent references to plots and conspirators in England. The name of Trembleur evidently appealed to his imagination and he rarely missed an opportunity to credit the Quakers with most of the plots even when they were not named in the English reports. The Quakers as people or as a sect were of no special interest to him, but stories of more plots in England added a sensational element to his gazette. If these plots were carried on under cover of religion the stories became even more interesting. On February 5, 1661, he reported that the "Tremblers in England who are said to be great talkers and who are in any case great fanatics, have in the name of religion excited seditions and enterprises against the government so that it has been necessary to take arms against them. Some were killed, some taken prisoner and others fled." It is a good lesson, according to this chronicler to royal ladies, for all those who stir up trouble. The English report on which this story was based 6 made no mention of Quakers or Trembleurs. The conspirators were called 6 Relation contenant les particularités du combat en janvier ¡661, uary 17, 1 6 6 1 .

[5]

Londres, Jan-

The Good Quaker in French Legend variously, Lutins, Sectaires, Fanatiques, Mutins, Diables enragez, but not Trembleurs. The latter, however, were known to Loret as fanatics and they were known to his readers by his previous stories of them. Therefore it made his accounts of the English troubles more consistent to blame them all on the Quakers. He did the same thing in December 1663, when the English gazette reported that certain Mutins and Conspirateurs were again causing trouble in England. Trembleurs fitted Loret's rhyme better than Conspirateurs, so once again they were held responsible. "England is still having trouble," he said, "with these Trembleurs who are great talkers against the government. In spite of all efforts to teach them better ways or to destroy them these good-for-nothing people are becoming more numerous every day." Loret, it will be noticed, always used the translation trembleur which was used in the French edition of the official English gazette to explain the English word Quaker. The first French attempt to reproduce the English word itself was by Robinet, who continued the Muse Historique after 1665. In 1667 Robinet told the story of Le Quaquer Amoureux, which may be considered to be the first Quaker in French fiction. The conspirators have been forgotten and for the first time the Quaker appears as a real person, not however a very admirable one. The story goes as follows: The trouble started with one of these fellows, more sallow and solemn than a Lenten faster, called a Quaquer or Trembleur because these gentlemen, usually deliberate in their speech, tremble when they gather to worship in their temples. He was much affected by a gentle creature, who was, it seems, simple in mind as well as in heart, and he easily convinced her that it was the will of heaven that she should be his without further ceremony. She made no resistance. "Let us do the will of Heaven," said she. But as the results of her submission soon became evident her parents became excited and the immoral Quaker was driven out. This story, which is of English origin, is apparently the only case in which the French copied or imitated the many English satires which were designed to bring opprobrium to the Quakers. But the French version does not, after all, show particular scorn for Quakers. Its intention was not hostile, for the author concludes

[6]

Trench Interest in Quakers with a sigh that all the hypocrites who seduce young ladies are not to be found among the Quakers, nor even, alas, in England. 7 French historians as well as chroniclers gave considerable importance to the Quakers when recounting recent events in England. Naylor was largely responsible for the belief that Quakers were extreme fanatics, capable of the most extravagant actions. The story of his arrest and trial was told at great length in the edition of 1660 of he Monde. This work, by Rocoles, was a revision, with many additions, of one of the early world histories.8 Among the additions by Rocoles is the story of Naylor in detail; his origins, his fanaticism, and his trial: "The sect which has caused the greatest disturbance in these last few years is that of the Quakers or Trembleurs. I thought it would gratify my readers if I gave at length a relation of certain information that has come into my hands from England concerning these new heretics and their principal chief, named Jacques Nailor." It is not surprising that Rocoles thought Naylor to be the chef principal of the sect, in view of the notoriety of the case. His source was obviously the same official gazette from which Loret had also drawn his information. His account, according to his own statement, was written in 1657 when the story was new and when, as he said, his readers would be gratified to learn the details. Although Rocoles gave undue importance to Naylor and ignored George Fox and other more authentic leaders of the Quaker movement, he evidently had other information than the news gazettes concerning the Trembleurs. His was the first attempt in French to analyze in detail the Quaker doctrines. Although he wrote before Barclay's famous Apology for the Qua\er Religion of 1675 and although Croesius' less partisan history of the Quaker movement was not to appear for thirty years, Rocoles' account was remarkably fair and accurate. Nevertheless the repetition of the Naylor story helped to confirm the impression that the Quakers were extremely fanatic. Rocoles also gave as authentic Quaker dogmas some of the most heretical of their early doctrines. Because of the 7

La Muse Historique, Sept. 18, 1667. d'Avity, Les Estats, empires et principautez du monde, Paris, 1 6 1 4 ; Paris, 1625; Geneve, 1648. Rocoles, Le Monde, Paris, 1643; Paris, 1666. 8

[7]

The Good Quaker in French Legend unorganized nature of the movement many doctrines were preached by early Quaker leaders which were later repudiated after Barclay wrote his Apology, which was designed to modify Quaker teachings in order to make them more acceptable to Protestants in general. Although Barclay's work appeared in Latin in 1675 and in French in 1705, most of the French accounts of the Quakers up to the time of Voltaire continued to repeat the early extravagant stories. Rocoles was not the only historian who considered the Quakers to be of sufficient importance to have a place in history. Isaac de Larrey 9 expresses the popular idea that they were conspirators, ready for any plot against any government. He said in connection with plots against the government of William III: "All kinds of people were concerned in them. Even the famous Penn, chief of the Quakers, was party to them. He was convicted of having received letters from James II after his flight to France and he did not deny it, but he escaped condemnation, or rather the lenient government wished to be deceived and accepted as a defense his claim that he had not been able to prevent King James from writing to him but that he had not replied to his letters. He was none the less implicated again in 1690 in two conspiracies, and the clemency of the King and Queen was so great that they continued to pardon him." These stories of the Quakers as plotters seem to have had even greater credence in France than in England. The French, who understood but vaguely the complications of English politics at the end of the seventeenth century, were chiefly interested in any sensational stories which came out of the English revolution. Since the Quakers were known to refuse to do homage to worldly power the logical conclusion was that they were ready to plot to overthrow any government. This attitude probably explains the fact that French accounts rarely failed to repeat English rumors of Quakers as conspirators and even, as we have seen, added Quakers to the stories when the English original did not mention them. It is true that the Quakers did have some dealings with the exiled James II. Being persecuted themselves by the Protestant party they had more to hope from the persecuted Catholics than 8

Histoire de I'Angleterre, 1689.

[8]

Trench Interest in Quakers from William and Mary. But their part in whatever conspiracies there may have been was less important than the reader would judge from French sources. An important source of information about England which circulated in France in the seventeenth century was Chamberlayne. 1 0 According to him the Couaicres

were simply an unfortunate result

of the recent disorders in England and should not be taken too seriously: " T h e Church of England considers them merely as bastard children and takes no more account of them than of vermin or insects which spring up in the foulest refuse." This extreme view, written in the midst of those same disorders, was greatly changed in the new edition of Chamberlayne published by G u y Miège in 1702. 1 1

When Miège revised Neuville's translation of

Chamberlayne and brought this very popular work up to date, the Quakers had attained the dignity of an established sect, worthy of a careful analysis, which although critical is not wholly unsympathetic: " T h e Quakers or Trembleurs called Trembleurs

are Enthusiasts; they are

because they are accustomed to tremble when

they are awaiting the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, although the Spirit of God is a spirit of repose and peace which is not found in earthquakes or storms, but in gentleness and peace. They reject absolutely all kinds of ministers or orders, they mock at premeditated prcaching. Even the Holy Scripturcs are not a rule to them, only the inspiration and the light which they claim to have guides them everywhere, so that the men and even the women who feel themselves seized by this Spirit and illumined by the Light, preach in their meetings and tell whatever comes into their minds, be it good or bad. They have no sacraments and consequently are only half Christians; one of their principles is that all men are equal, so they pay no more respect to a Lord or even to the K i n g than to a shoemaker, although they do not condemn others who do so; they say thou to everyone without distinction, and take off their hats to no one, not even to the King when they talk to him. They 10

French translation by de Neuville, L'Etat présent de l'Angleterre, Amsterdam, 1 6 6 9 - 1 6 7 2 (2 vols.); Amsterdam, 1 6 7 1 - 1 6 7 2 (1 v.); Paris, 1 6 7 1 ; Amsterdam, 1688; 1692; 1698. 11 Guy Miège, L'Etat Présent de l'Angleterre, Amsterdam, 1702, 1708, 1 7 2 3 ; La Haye, 1728.

[9]

The Good Quaker in French Legend affect great simplicity in their speech, in their clothes and in their manners; they reply ordinarily by Yes or No. It is a crime among them to wear ribbons and laces. I admit that this simplicity is very praiseworthy when it is not mixed with pride. They have a reputation for being frank and honest in their dealings and in their commerce. The relations I have had with some of them make me think so too, although some are of the opinion that they are crafty and deceitful." The accusation of hypocrisy was frequently made against the Quakers. It apparently had no basis in fact. At least the French writers who repeat it never give any proofs or even anecdotes to substantiate the rumor. It seems rather to be an assumption based on the logical possibilities of the doctrine of direct revelation and the Quaker dependence on the inner light as sufficient moral guide. It seemed incredible that any morality could come from individual responsibility without the control of organized authority. As a matter of fact the moral conduct of Quakers has always been controlled by the judgment of their fellow members of the meeting, but to the Calvinist or Catholic observer this seemed vague and often passed quite unnoticed. Most critics, especially the early French critics of Quakerism, were more interested in the logical conclusions to which their doctrines might lead them than in the actual practice of Quakers in matters of discipline. The vogue for English travel which reached its height in the eighteenth century was well begun before the end of the seventeenth. Sorbiere (see above, p. i ) was not the only Frenchman to visit England and to record his impressions. Many of these travelers were Protestants who had special reasons to study sympathetically the conditions in a country where the question of religious liberty had played such a large part in the civil wars and revolution. Sorbiere himself was one of these, and he was surprised to find fewer independent sects than he had expected. Payen, whose travels 1 2 were published a year before those of Sorbiere, and who was the first to mention the Trembleurs, was a Catholic. T o Payen it seemed that the only solution of England's religious troubles 12 Voyage de Payen en Angleterre, Flandre, Brabant, Hollande, Danemarck., Suede, Pologne, Allemagne, ltalie, Paris, 1663; 2nd ed., 1668.

[XO]

Trench Interest in Quakers would be found in a return to the Church of Rome, but that the English are unwilling to do: "When the Catholics left England the kingdom embraced so many different religions that one may say that it no longer had any. Calvinists, Lutherans, Anabaptists, Arians and Trembleitrs have occupied its pulpits in succession, each trying to gain more influence than the others. All these miserable sects could only be brought together by one look from the Pope whom they reject and curse with a common voice." Sorbière on the other hand was criticized in a Response aux faussetés dans la Relation de Sorbière (Amsterdam, 1675) for being too tolerant toward Protestants; he was "more infamous than Milton," says this critic. But his interest in Protestantism is confined to the established church. The "Quakers and all the others," as he calls them, are classed indiscriminately as visionnaires who have degenerated from the Presbyterians. They are not as numerous as people think, he says; "I found myself deceived in the same way when formerly I visited Holland and expected to find a hundred varieties of Anabaptists, or visionaries, as if they were people who were organized and lived under some discipline, and who had some regularity in their plans. These are people everywhere who profess extraordinary zeal and who are noticed among the others for particular opinions. . . . But to tell the truth there have never been but two kinds of religion in England which have been practised publicly; the Presbyterian and the Episcopal. The former has degenerated into Arminians, Mennonites, and Socinians, with subdivisions of these sects who all tried to join together during the war by the invention of Independence." Although Payen and Sorbière dismissed the Quakers with some disdain as a mushroom growth which would soon disappear, Chappuzeau 1 3 a few years later devoted several pages to them. His attitude is scarcely more tolerant, but he pays them the compliment of making a detailed analysis of their doctrine. His conclusion, dismissing them as a sect which has quite disappeared and whose members dare not show themselves, is quite inconsistent with the importance he himself had given them in his discussion of English religions. Chappuzeau who was, like Sorbière, a Protestant, 13

Chappuzeau, L'Europe vivante, Geneve, 1669.

The Good Quaher in French Legend would probably have accepted Sorbiere's opinion of English sects had it not been for the appearance of a work called Les Religions du monde translated from the English of Alexander Ross by Thomas La Grue (Amsterdam, 1666; 1669; 1686). 14 Ross evidently had a particular grudge against the Quakers, for, although he dismissed most of the other sects with a page or less, the Quakers received ten pages of vituperation. After the appearance of this work in French the Quakers were never again classed as merely one group of visionnaires, but were always distinguished from the others both by their friends and their enemies. Chappuzeau tells us that England has practically regained religious unity, for the rather astonishing reason that all the various kinds of independents have become Quaqners. It is no longer true as has been said by "a modern writer, a very clever historian but somewhat passionate" (possibly Sorbiere), that there are many sects in England, even as many as two hundred dogmas, which could in no way be considered orthodox. Following the statements of Ross, Chappuzeau sums up what seem to him the most important points in Quakerism. First, they recognize no ecclesiastical commands nor any knowledge acquired by study, since knowledge which comes from our industry is carnal and to be despised. They have no appointed prayers; they reject the baptism of children. They teach that the soul is a part of God; that there is no Trinity; that Christ has no body but his church; that all men have a light in them sufficient for salvation; that we are not justified by Christ but by our own justification; that there is no life but in this world, no Heaven nor Hell nor resurrection. They teach that Christ came to overthrow all property and that everything should be owned in common; that no man should be called Master or Lord or even saluted in passing. This leads them to scorn sovereign powers and ecclesiastical order, without which the world would be a chaos, and these opinions come from their stupidity and the scorn they have for Academies. "I shall mention no more of their blasphemies," he says, "which would cause horror, and shall conclude by saying 14

See appendix II for complete French text of Ross-La Grue which served as

source for many writers on Quakers and which was copied almost verbatim by Chappuzeau. Voltaire, however, does not appear to have used it.

[12]

French Interest in Quakers that their numbers are decreasing every day in the Three Kingdoms, and that they do not dare to show themselves." The selfcontradictory attitude of Chappuzeau may be explained by the horrified pleasure which he took in reading Ross' description of the Quakers. He would have preferred to pass them by with a scornful word like Payen and Sorbière, but these "blasphemies" were too interesting. Misson, another Protestant, wrote of Quakers again in 1698. 15 Ross, he says, is quite wrong to accuse the Quakers of atheism and impiety. Barclay is equally wrong in writing their Apology and in trying to pass them off as the "best theologians in Christendom." There is nothing to be said either for or against them, and they should be treated as people who are beside themselves, having no other guide than their visionary spirit. They neither know what they believe nor what they say, nor what they will say or believe tomorrow. "This is the conclusion I have been forced to make after having read many of their writings and after having talked with many of them. It is absolutely impossible to have any reasonable discussion with them. If our objections press on them they have two doors of escape: 'carnal grossness' and 'the Spirit of Evil.'" In spite of his views of their dogma, Misson is not unsympathetic to the Quakers as a people. "Although they are great fanatics, there is something praiseworthy about them; they seem to be gentle, simple in all respects, sober, modest, and peaceful. They even have a reputation for being faithful and it is often true that they are. But do not be deceived, there is much affectation in this exterior." Once more we note the accusation of hypocrisy. Heresy is already in their midst, for they have been seen to lower the chin a little in a kind of salutation. Not that they ever remove their hats! That horrible sin has not yet appeared among them. In this tone of raillery, not wholly hostile, Misson describes their peculiar manners and the custom of permitting women to speak in meeting. "The best way to inspire one of their women preachers is to take a Lady to meeting. At the sight of a ribbon the Spirit seizes upon the Couacresse and after many sighs and groans she bursts out in 15 H. Mission, Mémoires et observations faites par un voyageur en La Haye, 1698. Another edition undated.

[13]

Angleterre,

The Good Quaker in Trench Legend an incomprehensible torrent of words." The scene is illustrated by an engraving (on the opposite page) in which the worldly curiosity seekers appear in the foreground and the Couacresse is about to break out in invective against them. Soon after Misson another account of England appeared in Holland, that of Beeverell, translated into French from the Dutch. 16 Beeverell was chiefly interested in the physical aspects of the country, particularly the great country houses and palaces, of which there are interesting engravings in his book. His discussion of English religious and social conditions is very summary, and all but the Anglican and Presbyterian churches are called "des Sectes folies et fanatiques, ayant des dogmes monstrueux." Of these the Quakers or Trembleurs are the most important to his mind and their peculiarities are attributed to all: "The Presbyterians have nothing to distinguish them from the French Reformed; it is therefore not necessary to speak of them. The fanatical sects are not worth discussing, as they have no other principle to their religion but their esprit intérieur it is impossible to distinguish any articles of faith, except that they agree in rejecting orders and ministers of the church, and that they profess great integrity and a simplicity in their manners which goes to the point of vulgarity, as for example the use of thou to everyone without distinction, the refusal to salute anyone and such things." One has the impression that Beeverell had not meant to be merely rhetorical in saying that these fanatics merited no attention, but that he could not resist the temptation to recount some of the horrors of which they were guilty, such as the belief in the "inner spirit" and the disrespectful use of "thou." Lesage 1 7 adds a new suggestion to the catalogue of qualities which had by this time become inevitable whenever Quakers were mentioned. On visiting a Quaker meeting he observed that while many of the speeches were meaningless discourses of ignorant people who thought that the Spirit had come upon them, many others were well prepared and not un-learned. Lesage says: "This makes one believe that although they profess to have no ecclesiastics, they support in the guise of charity certain men of letters who concern 16 17

J. Beeverell, Les Détices de la Grande Bretagne, Leide, 1702, 7 v. G. Lesage, Remarques sur l'Angleterre, Paris, 1 7 1 5 .

[14]

French Interest in Quakers themselves exclusively with the study of religion. Those who are distinguished as preachers often earn more money than if they held a regular Benefice." Most of the critics whom we have been discussing thought that the lack of any body of doctrine was one of the greatest weaknesses of the Quakers. Lesage, on the contrary, considered that this was a great advantage to them. It makes it difficult for outsiders to understand their religion, but as he says, "It prevents a great number of disputes and contributes much to keeping them together. . . . They have perfect liberty to believe what they wish and to take their own imagination for inspiration. This is what makes most of those who know them doubt whether they are Christians. In talking with one of them who was learned and wise, I pointed out the difficulties presented by giving no other proof of the truth of religion than that of inner feelings {sentiments

intérieurs).

H e gave me to understand that there could

be Quakers in all religions, not excepting Turks and Pagans. There are indeed few Quakers who refuse to admit that one can be saved in almost any religion." Lesage pointed out many other peculiarities of Quakerism which either escaped the notice of other foreign observers or aroused their scorn. In the same tolerant manner he discussed their marriage. Their custom of marriage, which is merely a verbal and written promise sanctified by no sacrament, is officially illegal, and yet, says Lesage, no court of law has dared to annul any marriage contracted according to their forms. A less sympathetic traveler was the Duc de Luynes. 18 H e was not intolerant but amused. Doctrine or dogma had no interest for him, but the idea of a woman preaching was merely ludicrous to him. "I observed a religion," he says, "which permits women to preach and the women of this extraordinary religion are all pretty. (It is the religion of the Quakers or Trembleurs.)

A simple dress

and modest headdress give them a charm, which art sometimes imitates but never attains. Could anything be more appealing than a sermon pronounced by a pretty mouth and accompanied by those graces which it inspires? T h e heart is touched, although the mind may not be convinced, for unfortunately the eloquence of the Eng18 B o u r e a u Deslandes, Nouveau voyage en Angleterre, Villefranche, 1 7 1 7 . tributed by Barbier to the Duc Louis-Charles de Luynes.)

[15]

(At-

The Good Quaker in French Legend lish charmer is only inspired by fanaticism. Her bearing, her postures, her tone of voice, all is comic and burlesque. She resembles an ancient Sibyl raised on an altar and about to pronounce oracles. Elle s'anime, elle s'agite; Puis avec un air hypocrite Masquant sa voix, roulant ses yeux, Pousse au Ciel des cris furieux." Of all the pre-Voltairian travelers La Mottraye

19

was the only

one who really understood the point of view of the Quakers. H e shows himself indeed much more sympathetic than Voltaire. Writing from Holland he dared to say things which Voltaire, who wished to publish his English

Letters

in France, might have said

but could not. He says: The Trembleurs seem to be those who have most nearly spiritualized the Christian religion, since they allow no priests nor altars nor sacraments, and reject all external cult and all sorts of ceremonies, even those which are called Civil in human society, like salutations and the giving of tides. They quote, to justify their conduct, many passages of the sacred Books which they recognize in common with other Christians as being of divine inspiration. They claim that these scriptures cannot be understood or explained without the help of a supernatural light infused in the heart of all men, and that this light is Jesus Christ. They say that each man can find in himself a certain portion of the Divine Spirit which dictates to him what he should say and do. They meet in silence and meditation, then they begin to groan and to tremble, The first man or woman whom the Spirit moves mounts on a bench. This Enthusiast then talks a great deal, but disconnectedly, against corruption and vice. For the past few years there have been among them some preachers whose eloquence and erudition are generally esteemed. Their faces have an expression of modesty and gayety. They are very reserved in their speech and have a simplicity which they carry to the point of affectation in their dress. They are never heard to swear. They could in fact be called Quietists on account of their tranquillity and peacefulness, both with regard to temporal and spiritual government, for they never trouble the church with controversy nor the government with faction. I have known many of them personally who seemed to observe the conventions of polite society quite exactly, taking off their hats, replying you to those who say it. . . . Neither courtesans, nor thieves, nor public beggars have ever been heard of among them. 18

Aubrey dc Le Mottraye, Voyages, La Haye, 1727.

[16]

French Interest in Quakers This account, which amounts to a panegyric, bears little resemblance to the stories of blasphemy and horror which had been recounted by some of L a Mottraye's predecessors, and suggests already the idealization through which the Quakers were to pass at the hands of the French until they appeared to some enthusiasts at the end of the eighteenth century as a model of all the virtues. L a Mottraye was one of the few who pointed out a resemblance between Quakerism and Quietism. T h e Quakers themselves were eager to claim the resemblance but were not encouraged by the Quietists who wished to remain in the church and who already had enough trouble without being associated even in the most indirect way with these heretics. Other French commentators on Quakerism as well as L a Mottraye also called attention to the resemblance, as will be noted later. Thus far we have considered only accounts of Quakers by historians or travelers who, although obviously curious about the new sect, were not deeply concerned with it nor troubled by its heresies. T o most of them the Quakers seem to be more or less harmless fanatics. T h e y were considered to be a result of the Civil Wars and the lack of consistent religious authority in England. N o n e of these writers showed any fear that the heresy might spread in France. It was quite otherwise with theologians, both Catholic and Protestant, w h o were horrified at the "blasphemies" taught by these fanatics. In order to follow the attitude of the theologians as compared with the purely secular historians and travelers it is necessary to retrace the chronology of publications about Quakers from a new point of view. Theological works at the turn of the eighteenth century reached a far wider audience than such literature would have today. T h e gazettes of the time show a preponderance of theological matter in the publications reviewed and the reviews themselves show the extent of the general interest in the subject. Prévost said in 1733

20

"It is clear that religion has

always had a great deal of influence on the Republic of Letters, not only because it is itself the subject of an infinite number of good works, but even more because whatever subject an author undertakes to treat, it is rare that his work is not connected in 20

Le Pour et Contre, 1733, X, 218.

[17]

The Good Quaker in Trench Legend some way with his religious principles." Catalogues of private libraries of the time always show a large proportion of contemporaneous religious works, which next to the classics usually formed the largest number of volumes in such libraries. Therefore by contemporary evidence we are justified in considering theological literature as an important medium for the circulation of ideas, not only among philosophers and theologians but among the general public as well. T h e attitude of the theologians toward the Quakers is, with few exceptions, bitterly hostile. Their hostility has none of the amiable mockery which colored even the most scornful accounts of the historians and travelers. It is in fact, so bitter that it can be explained only as the result of fear, and it seems necessary to find a reason why Bossuet on one hand and Jurieu on the other should fear a small English sect which showed but little tendency to spread on the continent. T h e accounts of the travelers discussed above could not have aroused the fear and hatred which are evidenced in some of the writings which we shall quote from theological sources. Quakerism as an organized religion never attained to sufficient numbers on the continent to disturb the peace of Catholic or Calvinist leaders. But Quaker ideas did gain much prominence and were discussed with heat far beyond the small organization of the Friends themselves. T h e source of this dissemination of heretical literature was in Holland, and it came through two channels to the attention of French theologians; the publications of the Quakers themselves and the frequent discussion of books by them or about them in the numerous French gazettes of Holland. French translations of Quaker tracts were circulated in Holland, as M. Gilbert Chinard has already pointed out, 2 1 in the hope of converting French Protestants to Quaker doctrines and of attracting them to the colony of Pennsylvania. T o a certain extent they were successful and some Huguenots did settle in Pennsylvania. But the conversions were not numerous enough to disturb even so extreme a Calvinist as Jurieu. T h e mere circulation of this doctrinal literature, however, served to arouse the antagonism of both Protestant and Catholic writers. Even if their followers did not become Quak21

G. Chinard, Les Refugies Huguenots en Ambique,

[l8]

Paris, 1926.

French Interest in Quakers ers they could learn dangerous ideas from the extreme individualism of the new sect. Direct revelation, Inner Light, the interpretation of Christ as a symbol: these heresies could grow within the churches. It was therefore the ideas and not the number of converts which caused fear and brought violent attacks from great churchmen of Rome or of Calvin. The Quaker tracts gained a particular prominence through the activity of one man. Benjamin Furly of Rotterdam had much to do with attracting the serious attention of philosophers to the Quakers. He was an English merchant, exiled in 1677 because of his religion, who had settled in Rotterdam, made a large fortune and won a reputation for himself as a man of wisdom and learning. His library, of which the catalogue can be seen in the British Museum, was celebrated, and his house was a shelter and meeting place for many exiles, both French and English. John Locke lived at his house from 1684 to 1688. It is well known that Locke was always a defender of Quakers and had many friends who were members of the sect. Other exiles who received his hospitality were Jean Leclerc, Shaftesbury, and Algernon Sidney. Limbourch, Leibnitz, and Van Helmont are known to have frequented his house. This rich and learned man, the friend and protector of some of the most brilliant men of his time, remained all his life a faithful Quaker. He wrote many Quaker tracts himself, translated others into Dutch and French, and was actively engaged in procuring emigrants for William Penn's colony. The influence of such a man could hardly be negligible. It is undoubtedly due to it in part that the philosophers who frequented his house showed such sympathy and respect for Quakerism. The Apology of Barclay also gained for the Quakers more serious attention than they had received when they could be despised because of Fox's lack of education or Naylor's extravagances. This penetration of the Quakers into the more intellectual classes had a definite influence on those who respected their tolerance and independence while it at the same time enraged such narrow Calvinists as Jurieu and Naude and called forth a warning from Bossuet himself. 22 22

For Furly see: Bastide, John hoc\e.

[19]

The Good Quaker in French Legend T h e Quakers themselves were not actively concerned in the theological disputes nor the political intrigues in which the French refugees in Holland were involved. 2 3 But tolerance and independence of thought were two of the chief issues at stake. T o w a r d these the Quakers had always had a consistent attitude and all the disputants had something to say about them. In this three-cornered quarrel Bossuet may be called the Catholic champion, to whom the Protestants opposed Jurieu, while Bayle was the chief of the moderates. 24 Bayle made a note of the opposition of Lutherans and Calvinists to Barclay's Quakerism

in

1684 with rather

typical

Baylian scorn for both: The author of the apology uses all his wit and learning (which are, indeed, above the ordinary) to prove not only by the Scriptures but by the Fathers that the true theology is that of the Quakers. He arranges his proofs, his replies, and his objections according to the customary form of the schools; in a word he constructs his system very much as other scholars do, not forgetting any more than they do, to speak evil of other sects. He has something to say of Catholics, Reformed, Socinians, Remonstrants, and those of the Confession of Augsburg. The latter have been very sensitive to the attacks made on them. The Antibarclaius is the work of a Lutheran minister of Hamburg who could not digest what the apologist of the Quakers said about his party, who undertook to refute it and has done it in a very vigorous manner. He had already been preceded in the combat by another Lutheran and by a Calvinist. Barclay answered them and is now working against the Hamburg minister.25 It was through Aubert de Versé that Quakerism became involved in the disputes of the theologians. His enthusiastic defense of the sect and his optimistic plan to unite all Christendom could not have gone unanswered even if party feeling had not been already strong. Le Protestant

pacifique

(Amst., 1689) is described

Bastide, Anglais et Français au XVII' siècle, Paris, 1912. King, Life of Loc\e. Fox-Bourne, Life of John Loc^e, London, 1876. Forster, Original Letters of hocke, London, 1830. Sachse, J., Furly and Emigration to Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1895. 23 See Dedieu, Le Rôle politique des protestants français, Paris, 1920. 24 Bastide, Français et Anglais au XVII« siècle. Ch. VIII. 25 Bayle, République des Lettres, 1684. Œuvres, I, 42-43.

[20]

French Interest in Quakers by its author as f o l l o w s : " A treatise to prove that all sects can live without contradiction in the Catholic C h u r c h ; that schism is not necessary, even with all the apparently contradictory doctrines. W i t h a little tolerance all can live together, even the Q u a k e r s . " Calvinists, Lutherans, Socinians, Anabaptists and Quakers are discussed and their differences smoothed a w a y w i t h a m a g i c w a n d . D e Verse's interpretation of Q u a k e r i s m is almost that of a partisan f o r the doctrines of Barclay: " T h e s e poor people have been taken f o r complete fools instead of good and true Christians. T h e y have been considered as fanatics w h e n all their teachings are the essential truths of Christianity, and they have been scorned for certain trifles, which are not worth mentioning or correcting." T h e i r

doctrines

according to Aubert de V e r s e are the f o l l o w i n g : 1. T o permit to all, even w o m e n , the privilege of preaching w h e n the Spirit moves them. 2. T o teach that nothing must be done in religious matters without the m o v i n g of the Spirit of G o d . 3. T o believe that the inspirations of the elect are as holy and infallible as those of the Prophets and Apostles. 4. T h a t there is a universal Reason d w e l l i n g in all m e n , emanating f r o m G o d , which gives them a k n o w l e d g e of good and evil and leads them to G o d . 7. T h a t ministers of the C h u r c h should live f r o m the voluntary gifts of the faithful. 8. T h a t Jesus Christ did not c o m m a n d Baptism nor the Eucharist for all ages. 9. T h a t it is w r o n g to take off the hat or b o w the knee to moral man. Is that anything to make such a commotion about and to persecute these poor people who suffer all the indignities which have been put upon them with angelic patience. . . . Even if they have been foolish and stubborn, at least their folly is innocent and outrages no one. Their belief in the Inner Light which is the eternal Word conforms to the truth. Can anyone contest the doctrine of the moving of the Spirit? They are probably wrong not to baptize, but even in that the commands of Christ are vague. He seems to leave it to the discretion of his disciples. Neither do I blame them for not celebrating the Communion. T h e most serious reproach which is brought against them is for not remov-

[21]

The Good Quaker in Trench Legend ing their hats, but that is a mere trifle. And if they say thee and thou it is not from scorn, as I know very well from their books and themselves. Their candor, their simplicity, their gallant courage, their great charity are all qualities of a true Christian and should convince us. Besides St. Paul said always thee and thou. I shall be accused of being a Quaere myself, I have taken their defense so much to heart. I answer with all of them, if a Trembleur is one who trembles at the word of God then I would glory in being a Quaere or Trembleur. All the Saints have been Trembleurs. Bossuet hoped like Aubert de Versé to see the Church reunited, but not by his too universal tolerance. Authority must be upheld and heresy must be wiped out. The extent of Bossuet's tolerance was in wishing to use reason instead of force to bring back the heretics. But he feared that fanatics, such as the Quakers, could not be reached by his arguments which might reach rationally minded Protestants. The Troisième Avertissement aux Protestants, 1689, was written in answer to Jurieu's Lettres against the Histoire des variations. Bossuet accuses Jurieu himself of having introduced fanaticism into the Reform and of declaring a right to independence of judgment in theological matters which could only be compared to the doctrine of the Quakers. Under the leadership of such men as Jurieu and Claude, the Protestants no longer base their faith on the Scriptures, but on direct revelation. "That," says Bossuet, "is exactly what the Quakers or Trembleurs, that is to say the most extreme fanatics, have been teaching and have translated into French. They have expressed it in the following words, 'Divine and inner revelations we believe to be absolutely necessary to form the true faith, since they do not contradict the external evidence of the Scriptures nor that of sane reason; nor can they ever contradict them. It does not follow from this that these divine revelations should be submitted to the test of external evidence of the Scriptures nor to natural human reason, as if it were the noblest and surest rule and measure; for divine revelation and inner illumination are evident and clear in matters of faith and force us by this very evidence and clarity to an understanding well disposed to accept them, an understanding which is moved and swayed without any resistance just as natural principles move and sway

[22]

French Interest in Quakers the mind to the acceptance of natural truths, such as: the whole is greater than its parts, or two contradictions cannot both be at the same time true or false.' From this they draw another thesis: that from these holy revelations of the Spirit of God have emanated the Scriptures. Since the Scriptures are only an expression of the sources from which they come and not the source itself, they must not be considered as the principal foundation of truth and knowledge, nor as a primary and perfect rule of faith and action (mœurs). Although they render faithful evidence of primary truth they must be considered themselves as secondary to the Spirit from which they draw all the excellence and certainty that they have." This, says Bossuet, is the heart of the heresy: "When they say that the Scripture is only a secondary rule, conforming to the first, which is a faith already formed in the inner mind, drawing its certainty from a revelation which takes precedence over the Scriptures, they are only saying in other terms what certain Ministers have been saying." 2 6 It is not in the province of this study to follow the intricacies of the disputes of Bossuet and Jurieu nor of Jurieu and Bayle. In tracing the knowledge of Quakers which spread to France it is, however, of particular interest to note that Bossuet knew something of Quaker doctrines. If they were the "most extreme heretics" to him, it was not because of any current stories of trembling in places of worship but because they were in danger of communicating the heresy of direct revelation to the rest of Christianity. Bossuet might have some hope of bringing back to the Church those Protestants who gave primary importance to the Scriptures, for many have been thus converted. But if an uncontrolled inner conviction were the criterion of truth, the Protestants were going the way of the Quakers and must be warned. In 1687 Jean Leclerc selected a significant group of books to discuss in the Bibliothèque Universelle under the title Livres Mystiques. Leclerc chose three Quietist works and one by a Quaker, and his article is a discussion of mysticism in general and a com26 Bossuet drew his statement of Quaker doctrine, according to his own note, from Les Principes de la Vérité et Thèses Théoiogiques, Rotterdam, 1675. The italics in the quoted passage are Bossuet's.

[23]

The Good Quaker in French Legend parison of Quietism and Quakerism. 27 T h e reviewer seems to feel that an explanation is necessary to account for the listing of William Penn with the Quietists: " W e have put this author among the mystics (although he is anything but a Catholic) because his doctrine is rather like theirs. Still there are considerable differences, which we will point out." After a five-page analysis of Penn's No Cross, no Crown the editor says : As for the conformity and difference which is to be found between the Mystics and the Quackers, it will be observed: 1. That their doctrine is chiefly concerned with morality and they are little troubled by the speculative dogmas which unfortunately divide Christians. 2. That both of them believe that the purity demanded by the Gospel goes much farther than is ordinarily supposed, and that it implies nothing less than complete self-renunciation. 3. That they speak emphatically of the necessity of Grace, of its effects and of the operation of the Holy Spirit in their souls, but say nothing of Predestination. 4. That they believe that the best prayer is not that learned by heart or in words methodically arranged, but that it consists in keeping silence, in waiting on God with a heart fired by love. 5. That they are extremely scornful of external worship. 6. That they have been accused of boasting of visions which they have had. A d d to that, that just as there are visionary Mystics, there are also extravagant Quakers, and that all are not as reasonable as Malavol and Molinos, nor as Penn and Barclay. After thus summing up the resemblances, Leclerc proceeds to the differences: 1. T h e Quac\ers

have shown less moderation and they have

formed a sect apart from other Protestants. 2. T h e Mystics have compromised

with the Roman

Church,

while the Quackers have broken with Protestantism, introducing 27

T h e following books arc discussed: De la Paix de l'Ame et du bonheur d'un cœur qui meurt à lui-même pour vivre à Dieu, Paris, 1 6 8 7 . Le Quiétiste, Paris, 1 6 8 7 . Recueil de diverses pièces concernant le Quiétisme et les Quiétistes, Amsterdam, 1686. Nulle Couronne sans Croix, Guillaume Penn, Amsterdam, 1 6 8 7 .

N]

French Interest in Quakers into their public assemblies what the Quietists practise in private meetings. 3. T h e Mystics have distinguished themselves from other Roman Catholics only by their exemplary piety, and by their manner of devotion and the obscure terms which they have apparently invented to hide from people their extreme scorn of external forms of worship. T h e Quackers

speak much more clearly, having no in-

terest in hiding what they believe, but on the other hand they are marked by peculiarities so that they can be immediately

recog-

nized: saying thou instead of you, not saluting, and calling each other by their Christian names. 2 8 T h e modern reader cannot fail to be struck with the resemblance between Quietism and Quakerism. Because of the extreme caution of the Quietists after their doctrines had been declared heretical it is impossible for us even to surmise how much association with Quakerism they would otherwise have welcomed. A commentator writing somewhat later, but no less a contemporary, 2 9 said: The Quaquers (Keith, for example) talk about the quietude of the faithful during the influence and operation of God, the perseverance tn quietude before passing into activity, so that by this means the spirit acquires in a short time a divine and holy life. Before understanding anything at all we must be convinced that the Spirit is moving and acting m us. It should make us feel that liberty to act is given to us, that it orders or permits the action. This mystical jargon is also that of the Quietists. (The italics are Bernard's.) The terrible persecutions of the Quakers occurred from 1670-1672 and in 1675 the Apology of Barclay was published. Almost at the same time Michel Molinos appeared in Italy. This Spanish priest wrote in Italian the Spiritual Guide which contains the mystical doctrine of the Quietists. The time of the appearance of Quietism and the similarity of its dogmas and those of the Quakers have caused them to be considered as children of the same

28 This is the only mention I have seen in French of this Quaker custom. The use of the Christian name, the abhorrence of music, and the use of numbers for names of days, seem to have attracted no notice in France. The same peculiarities are repeatedly mentioned: the use of thou, the wearing of the hat, the refusal to bow. These had a symbolic meaning which aroused interest in French observers. 29 Bernard, Ceremonies et Coutumes religieuses, Amsterdam, 1736. Bernard was associated with Bayle in the Nouvelles de la République des Lettres and continued it after Bayle's death in 1706.

[25]

The Good Quaker in Trench Legend sect, and it is true that the words of Keith are so like the language of Molinos that it is scarcely possible to find any difference between them.30 Leclerc, who belonged to the group of free-thinking Protestants (he was, in fact, closely associated with Limbourch and Arminianism), took pleasure in finding comparisons between Roman Catholics and that most hated sect, the Quakers. In 1688 it is Loyola and not the Quietists whom he discusses in the review of the English work The Enthusiasm of the Church of Rome (by Wake). We can imagine Leclerc with ironical pleasure selecting for translation and quotation the Englishman's opinion that Loyola was more fanatical and more "rustic" than the Quakers, since he even refused to use the superlative! It is unfortunate that Leclerc has been so far outshadowed by his famous contemporary Bayle, that he has passed into undeserved oblivion. N o less a contemporary than La Fontaine classed them as equals. If Leclerc, he says, lacks a little the wit and satire of Bayle, he makes up for it in learning, exactitude, and perspicacity.31 Leclerc was possibly more receptive than Bayle to English influences. Therefore he cannot be overlooked in any study of the dissemination of English ideas on the continent. It must not be forgotten that he published the first translations of Locke in his Bibliothèque, and that he and Locke were both friends of the Quaker Furly. That books and opinions passed between them cannot be doubted. For example, mention has just been made of Leclerc's review of a number of Quietist books, including the Recueil de diverses pièces concernant le Quiétisme. On December 26, 1686, Locke wrote to Furly: "The booke called Recueil des diverses pièces concernant le Quiétisme, etc., I have got for you." Leclerc's review appeared the following month. It is perhaps a justifiable use of the imagination to assume that Furly 30 Bossuet's Histoire du Quiétisme was translated into English with the following title: Quakerism à la Mode or a History of Quietism, particularly that of the Lord Archbishop of Cambray and Madame Guyone. Containing an account of her Life, her Prophecies and Visions, her way of communicating Grace by Effusion to those about her at silent meetings. London, John Harris, 1698. Bossuet himself did not accuse the Quietists of Quakerism. He reserved that accusation for his Protestant adversaries. It is not possible that he failed to see the resemblance, but as he wished to stamp out the heresy and save the individuals for the church, his attitude is easily explicable. 81

Lettre à M. Simon de Troye ( 1 6 9 3 ) ,

e
93. 94. 95. 96, 99. 100, 102, 104, 107, 108, n o , i n , 1 1 8 , 1 1 9 , 1 2 2 , 124, 126, 1 3 1 , 1 3 2 , 1 3 3 , 136, 147. 150, 1 5 1 , 153, 156, 1 6 1 , 164, 165, 166, 172, 177, 187, 189, 193, 194. 196, 202, 203, 205, 206, 208, 2 1 0 , 211 Pepys, 208 Philadelphia, 56, 75, 78, 94, 106, 107, 108, 109, n o , 120, 132, 134, 1 4 1 , 142, 146, 147, 149, 150, 160, 189, 202 Philidor, 89 Phillips, 138 Piggot, 134, 1 3 5 Pitt, 43, 49, 50, 5 1 , 207 Planche, 180 Poinsinet, 89 Pompignan, 56, 206 Préville, 84 Prévost, 17, 3 1 , 54, 55, 68, 69, Prynne, 192

101, 112, 143, 171,

104, 115, 145, 172,

104, 169

Rabaud, 138 Raynal, 72, 84, 85, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 1 0 1 , 102, 104, 105, 108, 109, m , 1 1 2 , 1 1 3 , 123, 124, 126, 132, ' 4 3 . >45. '46, 150, 168, 1 7 1 , 177, 1 9 1 , 203, 206 Ritter, 62, 83 Robert, 157 Robert, Madame, 157 Robin, 107, 108, 109, 1 1 7 , 1 1 8 Robinet, 6 Rochambeau, 107, 108 Rocoles, 7 Roland, 122, 133, 139, 1 4 1 , 164 Roosbroeck, 105 Ross, 12, 27, 32, 39, 70, 207 Roubaud, 103, 104 Rousseau, 44, 58, 59, 60, 61, 82, 83, 93, 96, m , 1 1 3 , 1 1 8 , 1 2 1 , 1 3 1 , 143, 183, 203 Rutledge, 83 Sainte Aulaire, 134 Sainte-Foix, 1 3 1 Saint Martin, 155, 161 Sand, 177, 185 Saussure, 73 Schérer, 97 Scribe, 177, 179, i83n. Ségur, 170, 1 7 1 Shaftesbury, 19 Sidney, 19 Siéyès, 138 Simon, 61 Smith, Adam, 195 Smith, Patrick, 38, 39, 72 Smith, William, 92 Sorbière, 1, 3, 10, 199 Sterne, 209 Surgy, 93, 95, 99 Temple, 48 Thon, 1 7 2 , 1 7 3 , 175, 176, 1 7 7 Tilly, 141 Tocqueville, 172 Tuke, 1 7 5 Turretin, 36

[234]

Index ( Valady,

Names

132

Histoire d e Jenni, 64

Van Helmont,

19

Lettres

Vergennes, 1 3 8

d'un

Quaker

à

Lefranc

Vernet, 5 2 , 88

Lettres Philosophiques, 43, 44, 49, 5 0 ,

Versé, 2on., 2 2 , 27, 3 2 , 1 9 9

5 1 , 5 2 , 5 3 , 54, 5 5 , 56, 5 7

V i g n y , 90, 1 6 6 , 1 7 7 , 1 8 0 , 1 8 1 , 1 8 2 ,

183,

Olympic,

184, 2 1 0

58

P o è m e sur la loi naturelle, 58

Villette, 1 3 9

T r a i t é sur la Tolérance, 44, 58, 6 1 , 66

Voltaire, 1 , 8, I 2 n . , 3 1 , 3 3 , 40, 4 2 , 4 3 , 47-49. 68, 70, 7 1 , 7 3 , 7 7 , 7 8 , 8 i n . , 82, 8 3 , 85, 87, 88, 9 1 , 92, 95, 9 7 ,

Washington, 105, 1 1 2 ,

98,

102,

149, 1 5 1 ,

de

P o m p i g n a n , 56

114,

123,

131,

Waugh,

156, 169, 177,

189,

191,

West, 1 8 7 ,

188

Wilkinson,

146

104,

105,

1 9 7 , 2 0 3 , 205, 2 0 6 , 2 0 7 , 2 0 8 , 209 Voltairc's w o r k s :

W i l l i a m III, 8, 1 8 9

Dictionnaire Philosophique, 5 8 , 6 3 , 64, 66

190

Williams, Woolman,

170 173

l'Ecossaise, 64, 65, 86

Wordsworth,

Essai sur les moeurs, 6 5 , 66, 67

Wyeth, 72

[235]

195

139,

148