CONTENTS
| I | Origin of the Quakers | [1-13] |
| II | Meeting Organization: Its Connection with Education | [14-25] |
| III | Educational Ideals of the Quakers | [26-40] |
| IV | Education in Philadelphia | [41-84] |
| V | Schools of Bucks County | [85-104] |
| VI | Schools of Montgomery County | [105-121] |
| VII | Schools of Chester County | [122-146] |
| VIII | Schools of Delaware County | [147-166] |
| IX | School Support, Organization, and Curriculum | [167-203] |
| X | Masters and Mistresses | [204-227] |
| XI | Education of Negroes and Indians | [228-267] |
| XII | Conclusion | [268-271] |
| Bibliography | [272-282] | |
| Abbreviations | [283] | |
| Index | [285-287] |
EARLY QUAKER EDUCATION
IN PENNSYLVANIA
CHAPTER I
ORIGIN OF THE QUAKERS
An essential in leaders
Reforms, discoveries and inventions are, at the outset, conceived by individual minds; seldom, if ever, are they the simultaneous product of several. The original connection is seen and made by an individual, and afterwards may be accepted by his fellows, who may appropriate the new idea to themselves and make its applications manifold. The novel idea or relationship, once seen, thoroughly comprehended and expressed becomes either the common property of many, extending far afield from its original source, or is rejected because it fails to prove attractive to human interests or necessary for the satisfaction of human needs. By this means changes are wrought in a group or society of individuals, and the belief or the contribution of one individual becomes the faith or the possession of a nation. The meaning of the above statement is at once made clear by mere mention of a few names, such as Luther, Bacon, Pestalozzi, Confucius, Whitefield, Gœthe and Fox. It is with the ideas and the formally stated doctrines of the last mentioned that we are in this connection chiefly concerned.
Brief study of Quaker beliefs necessary
In a study of education among the Quakers it is desirable, if not absolutely imperative, to go back to the origin of the society and note, at least in part, the tenets of the society and the reasons for its foundation. For this purpose the best materials are to be found in the life and works of George Fox, the founder of the Society of Quakers. It would, perhaps, be unnecessary at present to make any considerable study of beliefs or tenets, if it were not for the fact that, in times past, some of the expressions of their belief have been misconstrued. For instance, reference may be made here to the so-called doctrine of inner light which was promulgated by George Fox at the very beginning of his work in 1647.[1] It will be of advantage to first sketch briefly the early life of this exponent of Quakerism.
Fox’s youth and early education
George Fox was born July, 1624 (old style), at Drayton-in-the-clay,[2] in Leicestershire, England. His father, Christopher Fox, otherwise known as “Righteous Christer,” was a weaver by trade and “an honest man.” His mother, he says, was of the stock of martyrs.[3]
His earliest life was spent in the home of his parents, under whose tutelage he received a careful religious training. He says of himself that he was unusually grave for a youth of his age and that his thought constantly turned to subjects of religious nature. This characteristic religious disposition, noticed by his mother, was the cause of a more indulgent attitude toward him than was granted the other children in the family, especially in regard to their religious instruction. Of his school education we have but a meagre account; according to Sewell, his only education was received in the home and consisted of the bare necessaries such as reading and writing.[4] The essence of his religious education seems to be adequately summarized in his own words as follows:
The Lord taught me to be faithful in all things, and to act faithfully two ways, viz., inwardly to God, and outwardly to man; and to keep to yea and nay in all things.[5]
As he advanced in years some of his people, being aware of his religious tendencies, would gladly have had him enter the priesthood, but others dissenting, he was placed with a man who was a shoemaker, grazier and dealer in wool.[6] In this employment he seems to have given much satisfaction to his employer, and, as for himself, he too enjoyed the work of shepherd, affording, as it did, ample opportunity for close communion with nature and limiting his connections with the corrupt society of mankind, from which he sought to free himself.[7]
Beginning of his travels
About the age of nineteen, his dissatisfaction with the world and the people about him caused him to leave his relations and acquaintances and to seek out a more lonely existence in some place where he was quite unknown. This decision being made, he journeyed “at the command of God,” first to Lutterworth, Northampton, Newport-Pagnell, and came finally, in 1644, to Barnet. During these days he was often in great despair and questioned whether he had done rightly in leaving his parents and friends. In these periods of misgiving he consulted often with priests concerning his condition and sought thereby a remedy, which, however, he did not find. Driven by sheer desperation he continued to travel, and, after leaving Barnet, came to London where he remained for a short time only, having come now to a decision that he should return again to the home of his parents.[8]
His return home
The return to his native village, however, was no cure for his mental ill, though his conscience was thereby somewhat stilled. He continued his visits to various priests, especially one Nathaniel Stevens, with whom he was wont to argue religious questions, and who, after Fox had enunciated certain beliefs, which will be mentioned later, became one of his most cruel persecutors.[9] Each succeeding experience with the priests was but a repetition of a former and it became clear to him that they saw nothing but the externals of his condition and had not the power to penetrate to the innermost complexities of his situation. According to his view their recommendations met only the demands of the ecclesiastics; his need was genuine and he was enabled to see the narrow limitations which hamper the activity of one man who attempts to parcel out salvation to another.
Three of Fox’s conclusions; fundamental
George Fox was now in his twenty-second year. It is pertinent that mention be made at this place of three fundamental beliefs or principles, whose truth, up to this time, had made itself manifest in his mind. The second of these is the one which, being so often misquoted, has become the basis for the belief on the part of many, that the Society was opposed to education.
1. And the Lord opened to me that, if all were believers, then they were all born of God, and passed from death unto life, and that none were true believers but such; and though others said they were believers, yet they were not.
2. The Lord opened unto me, that being bred at Oxford or Cambridge was not enough to fit and qualify men to be ministers of Christ; and I wondered at it, because it was the common belief of the people.
3. At another time it was opened to me, that God, who made the world, did not dwell in temples made with hands.... But the Lord showed me clearly that he did not dwell in these temples which men had commanded and set up, but in people’s hearts; for both Stephen and the apostle Paul bore testimony that he did not dwell in temples made with hands, not even in that which he had once commanded to be built, since he put an end to it; but that his people were his temple, and he dwelt in them.[10]
These doctrines which he began to promulgate in 1647 were recognized as fundamental, and their influence is plainly to be seen in the organization and discipline of the society which finally resulted.[11]
But not untried
It may well be mentioned here that though these tenets were incorporated in the foundation principles of the Quakers, they were by no means new, in the sense that they had never been accepted, in part, at least, by any other group of people. J. Brown, writing concerning the Quakers, states that Caspar Schwenkfeld, a Silesian of high birth, had promulgated the same doctrines of inner light, direct revelation and the inadequacy of the sacraments at least two centuries before the time of Fox in England.[12] The dispersion of Schwenkfeld’s adherents in 1547 led to the spread of their doctrines outside of Silesia, being embraced by a part of the Mennonite Church of Amsterdam, whence their entrance was made into England, and found acceptance in the minds of the Quakers.[13] This view is held also by other students of Quaker history,[14] and the similarity of doctrine is clearly seen in the statement of the Mennonite creed, as given by B. L. Wicks, a student of Mennonite history.[15] Further, it is known that some of the earliest preachers among Quakers went to Amsterdam and vicinity and found there a kindly reception by a part of the people, making converts among both the Baptists[16] and the Mennonites.[17] An instance of their kindly attitude toward Quakers and also of the recognition given their belief on the part of the Quakers, is shown in the account by Thomas Chalkley, concerning his journey of some nine hundred miles in Holland, Friesland and Germany.[18]
Kindly reception given to Quaker ministers
As I have had great peace and satisfaction in my travels in Holland and Germany, so, for inciting others under the like exercise, I may truly say that there is encouragement for faithful ministers to labor in the work of the gospel. I know not that I ever met with more tenderness and openness in people than in those parts of the world. There is a great people whom they call Mennonites, who are very near to truth, and the fields are white unto the harvest among divers of them, spiritually speaking.[19]
At Kriegsheim in the Palatinate Quaker exhorters like Ames and Rolfe, who had been sent out by the direction of George Fox, 1657, succeeded in winning converts among the Mennonites, though they were received unfavorably by the magistrates who fined those who offered to give them any entertainment.[20] It is from this same district that both Quakers and Mennonites made their voluntary departure and came to settle in Pennsylvania. Their prompt attention to school affairs on their first arrival is very similar to that of the Quakers, though in their case it was often the work of the laity, and not through the church organization.[21]
Journey of Fox, Penn, Furly, Barclay and Keith
A still more extensive missionary journey was undertaken at a later date, 1677, by several Quakers, among them Fox, Penn, Furly, Barclay and Keith. They visited Brill, Leyden and Haarlem where they held meetings, preaching to both Quakers and Mennonites.[22] The tour continued up into the Rhine region where Penn and his party came into touch with members of the Pietist group. It is doubtless true that this journey and the impression which was made by Penn must have played an important part a few years later when he opened his colony to settlers on the well known liberal principles.
In the presentation of the foregoing material it has been pointed out: (1) how the doctrines of the Quakers were rapidly spread broadcast by the itinerant preachers; and (2) that there was a great similarity between Quaker and Mennonite in doctrine and belief.
Increased number of ministers
The number of adherents estimated
The work of spreading the new gospel, as instanced by the work of Ames and Rolfe in 1657, was carried rapidly forward; as early as 1654, seven years after George Fox had begun to preach, he had enlisted the services of some sixty preachers who travelled continually up and down the country.[23] Such a number of leaders bespeaks a considerable following, though we have no record of a census of the followers made during Fox’s lifetime. Brown is apparently willing to accept Barclay’s statement that by 1675 they numbered ten thousand in London and by the end of the century, sixty thousand.[24] It does not seem that this is too large an estimate. It can be estimated from the work of Besse on Sufferings that between 1650 and 1689 there were approximately fifteen thousand individual cases of “sufferings.”[25] Since his work is compiled from “authentic records” it may be considered to be fairly accurate, though the errors, if any, would likely be to make the number too small rather than too large. As a matter of fact his collection includes some cases between 1689 and 1700, but the vast majority of them are from the period above stated. Certainly we must suppose that if such a large number actually came under the hand of English tolerance, then the total number of adherents very probably equalled or exceeded the estimate previously mentioned. Whatever objection may be made to the accuracy of these figures they may certainly be taken as fairly indicative of the growth of the sect; for that purpose they are intended.
Fox’s doctrine the basis in their educational practice
Just as the church discipline and organization are traceable to the hand of Fox, so also is the attitude on educational affairs. It has been said that the doctrine of the inner light made all education unnecessary, and this perverted idea has doubtless possessed even some members of Quakers to the extent that they came to regard learning as an instrument of Satan, a thing to be carefully avoided. However true this statement may have been of some members of the group, it certainly is not representative of the belief and practice of the Quakers as a whole. Some of the more ignorant may have interpreted the inner light to mean just that thing; but it is certainly true that such an idea was never expressed by George Fox, nor did it become the accepted belief of the organization, as is shown by their practices. The actual practice, educational, among Quakers is to be followed in this monograph. A later chapter will be devoted to a consideration of the views on education held by various individuals who have left some tangible monuments to their beliefs. In the present chapter, however, it is intended to indicate merely the position assumed by Fox in regard to the question at the outset of his labors.
As has been previously mentioned (page [2]) George Fox had the advantage of only a limited education. Opposition to the higher education, if he exhibited such, might find an explanation in this fact, assuming that not having shared its delights and advantages, he chose to deprecate it altogether. From a study of his utterances and his actions throughout his career it seems, however, that the facts point rather to a true appreciation rather than deprecation of education. The evidence appears to support, in a very satisfactory manner, the following points:
Fox’s educational creed
1. That he placed a great emphasis on moral and religious training.
2. Education should be of practical value; apprenticeship education recommended.
3. That the establishment of schools was believed to be necessary.
4. The objection to classical training was its inadequacy to prepare for a minister of the gospel.
5. That the scope of education was not limited to Quakers alone, nor even to the Whites, but should include also Negroes, Indians and the poorer classes of society as well as the rich. The remainder of this chapter will be devoted to a brief consideration of the foregoing statements.
First, in regard to moral and religious instruction, it seems hardly necessary to do more than state simply that he did urge moral education at all times. His whole life being permeated with the desire to propagate his newly founded society, it certainly is to be expected that he would recommend and insist on instruction of that nature. If proof be desired, however, it may be found in statements made from time to time, which are quoted below. The system of moral education based on the utterances of Fox was chiefly a prohibitory one, and it might well be questioned whether the result would not be passive rather than active virtues.
Prohibitions, moral, social and educational
... in warning such as kept public houses for entertainment, that they should not let people have more drink than would do them good; and in testifying against their wakes and feasts, May games, sports, plays and shows, which trained up people to vanity and looseness and led them from the fear of God: ... in fairs also, and in markets I was made to declare against their deceitful merchandise, cheating and cozening; warning all to deal justly, to speak the truth, to let their yea be yea and their nay be nay: ... I was moved also to cry against all sorts of music, and against the mountebanks playing tricks on their stages, for they burdened the pure life and stained the people’s mind to vanity. I was much exercised, too, with schoolmasters and schoolmistresses, warning them to teach their children sobriety in the fear of the Lord, that they might not be nursed and trained up in lightness, vanity and wantonness. Likewise I was made to warn masters and mistresses, fathers and mothers in private families, to take care that their children and servants might be trained up in the fear of the Lord; and that they themselves should be therein examples and patterns of sobriety and virtue to them.[26]
I was to bring them off from all the world’s fellowship and prayings and singings, which stood in forms without power: ...[27]
Kept prominent place in the church
These prohibitions and many others that were enunciated from time to time in his speaking and writing, were to be in time a part of the discipline of the organization, and were as religiously imposed on all members as the ardor of the meeting and the difficulty of the task would permit. The cases coming up before the monthly meetings for discipline are largely composed of infringements of the regulations, which grew out of Fox’s recommendations. These are, without question, of very ascetic nature. One instance which illustrates the incorporation of these ideals in the discipline of the organization may be cited in this connection.
All Friends, train up your children in the fear of God; and as they are capable, they may be instructed and kept employed in some lawful calling; that they may be diligent, serving the Lord in the things that are good; that none may live idle and be destroyers of the creation, and thereby become burdensome to others, and to the just witness in themselves.[28]
Apprenticeship education recommended
Second, the emphasis placed on the values to be derived from a practical education, to be gotten, to a large degree, through a careful system of apprenticing the children of members to people, members if possible, who would also be careful in regard to their moral instruction, is unmistakable. The practice as recommended, indicated below, became the general rule in Quaker communities, as is adequately evidenced in the meeting records. In this connection, however, it should be kept in mind that apprenticeship education could be legally enforced.
Being in London, it came upon me to write to Friends throughout the nation, about putting out poor children to trades. Wherefore I sent the following epistle to the quarterly meetings of friends in all counties:
My Dear Friends,
Let every quarterly meeting make inquiry through all the monthly and other meetings, to know all Friends that are widows, or others that have children fit to put out to apprenticeship; so that once a quarter you may set forth an apprentice from your quarterly meeting; and so you may set forth four in a year in each county, or more, if there be occasion. This apprentice, when out of his time, may help his father or mother, and support the family that is decayed; and in so doing all may come to live comfortably. This being done in your quarterly meetings you will have knowledge through the county in the monthly and particular meetings, of masters fit for them, and of such trades as their parents or the children are most inclinable to. Thus, being placed out with Friends, they may be trained up in truth; and by this means in the wisdom of God, you may preserve Friends’ children in the truth, and enable them to be strength and help to their families, and nurses, and preservers of their relations in their ancient days.... For in the country you know, you may set forth an apprentice for a little to several trades, as bricklayers, masons, carpenters, wheelwrights, ploughwrights, tailors, tanners, curriers, blacksmiths, shoemakers, nailers, butchers, weavers of linen and woolen stuffs and serges, etc., and you may do well to have a stock in your quarterly meetings for that purpose. All that is given by any Friends at their decease (except it be given to some particular use, person or meeting) may be brought to the public stock for that purpose. This will be the way for the preserving of many that are poor among you, and it will be the way of making up poor families. In several counties it is practised already. Some quarterlies set forth two apprentices; and sometimes the children of others that are laid on the parish. You may bind them for fewer or more years, according to their capacities....[29]
G. F.
London, 1st of 11th month, 1669.
The following lines, taken from the meeting records, are sufficient proof of the working out of this recommendation concerning apprenticeship education.
And executed in various meetings
It is agreed and concluded upon by this meeting, that the meeting take care of all Friends’ children that are left as orphans and unsettled, to inspect and see that all such be taken care of and settled in the best and suitablest manner, according to their capacity, that thereby they may discharge their duty and all such be eased by taking such due care.[30]
Third, the establishment of schools was believed to be necessary; for a proof of this attitude may be cited his action in regard to the establishment of schools at Waltham and Shacklewell.
Establishment of school advised
Then returning towards London by Waltham, I advised the setting up of a school there for teaching boys; and also a girls’ school at Shacklewell, for instructing them in whatsoever things were civil and useful.[31]
This statement would certainly indicate a liberal attitude towards education. Fox himself makes no further comment on what the nature of the school was to be. His interest in these schools, it is asserted, never flagged, and many visits were made in behalf of their prosperity.[32]
But classical education not the first essential for ministers
Fourth, the popular idea that has at times prevailed, that Quakers objected to giving an education such as was enjoyed by other sects, was probably founded on a misunderstanding of certain statements made by Fox with regard to education. Let us examine some of these statements, and seek to learn his intended meaning.
I saw that to be a true believer was another thing than they looked on it to be; and I saw that being bred at Oxford or Cambridge did not qualify or fit a man to be a minister of Christ; what then should I follow such for? So neither these, nor any of the dissenting peoples could I join with, but was a stranger to all, relying wholly upon the Lord Jesus Christ.[33]
I was to bring people off from Jewish ceremonies and from heathenish fables, and from men’s inventions and worldly doctrines, by which they blew the people about this way and the other way, from sect to sect; and from all their beggarly rudiments, with their schools and colleges for making ministers of Christ, who are indeed ministers of their own making but not of Christ; ...[34]
They could not know the spiritual meaning of Moses; the prophets and John’s words, nor see their paths and travels, much less see through them, and to the end of them into the kingdom, unless they had the spirit of Jesus; nor could they know the words of Christ and of his apostles without his Spirit.[35]
Then we came to Durham, where was a man come from London to set up a college there, to make ministers of Christ, as they said. I went, with some others, to reason with him and to let him see that to teach men Hebrew, Greek and Latin, and the seven arts, which were all but the teachings of the natural man, was not the way to make them ministers of Christ.[36]
These statements represent a small selection from many similar ones, and may be fairly taken as indicative of his position concerning this one point. They are the most drastic prohibitory statements made on the subject in all of his works. But even here we fail to find either (1) a condemnation of general or ordinary education or (2) a wholesale condemnation of classical education; indeed we read no objection to a minister’s possessing a knowledge of classical authors, such as was the case of both Penn and Barclay, provided he possess also the “light.” His statements may be summarized as follows:
Summary of educational statements
1. Classical training is inadequate as a preparation for ministers of the gospel.
2. Divine guidance is the one requisite for their preparation.
3. There is no objection to the classical learning if it be added to the qualification under (2).
Education not limited to Friends
Fifth, their conception of the scope of education did not limit it to their own people alone, but extended it rather to all peoples, Negroes and Indians, the rich and the poor. This is made perfectly plain in his address sent to the Governor of the Barbados in 1671.
Consider, Friends, it is no transgression for a master of a family to instruct his family himself, or for some others to do it in his behalf; but rather it is a very great duty incumbent upon them.... We declare that we esteem it a duty incumbent on us to pray with and for those in and belonging to our families; ... and to teach, instruct and admonish them; ... now Negroes, Tawnies and Indians make up a very great part of the families in this island; for whom an account will be required by him who comes to judge both quick and dead, at the great day of judgment, when every one shall be rewarded according to the deeds done in the body, whether they be good or whether they be evil.[37]
The effect of the above statements must tend to convince even the skeptical that any statement or belief, to the effect that the founder of Quakerism was opposed to education, is chiefly a myth based on either ignorance or gross misunderstanding.