‘Members of the Society today should consider how we use our networks.’ Photo: Egbert Van Hemskerck, The Quaker Meeting, c.1685
More business with history: Andy Fincham has lessons from the Quaker past
‘This reputation remains the single greatest asset of the Society.’
Last week in ‘Business with history’, we looked at how early Quakers achieved success in their commercial ventures, along with a reputation for probity and straight dealing. It is significant that this reputation followed the success, because what really enabled early Friends to achieve prominence was their highly-integrated community, founded on values that all Friends shared.
The community became highly effective because each member agreed on its fundamentals. Over just two generations, Friends agreed on a set of priorities. The process of agreement was not always easy, which we can see from the prevalence of much local discipline. Friends in different regions coalesced into groups of like-minded individuals, all of whom agreed on two main points.
The first was the right of every individual to be free from ‘oppressions’, whether these came from the state or from the ecclesiastical laws of the Church of England. To this idea was joined a second one of mutual help – a willingness to support members in need. With these simple tenets, Friends soon attracted sufficient numbers to make a written statement of their values advisable, and so was created the agreement of the Elders at Balby in 1656. These dozen advices became the first basic rulebook for what would become the Religious Society of Friends.
Agreement on what amounted to an ‘oppression’, however, varied from place to place. For example, while all Quakers opposed the burden of tithes, London Friends wanted to focus on attaining the right to ‘affirm’. Without it, it was necessary to take an oath to engage in trades, which involved fees to lawyers and the exchequer. Friends in Devon and Cornwall, on the other hand, concentrated on discipline around smuggled goods, the trading of which was a perfectly usual way to earn a living in that part of the country. These local variations meant that the Society refrained from any central book of discipline for over seventy years, preferring instead to rely on annual ‘epistles’, which summarised the mood of the Yearly Meeting – a tradition that has been maintained.
This continuity can help us discern how we might learn from Quakers in the past. There are useful – if surprising – points of similarity between then and now. Early Friends were flexible, with a willingness to accommodate a range of opinions. This was not always exercised (there was a schism over whether to wear a hat at prayer, which seems absurd now), but generally there was a tradition of tolerance.
This tradition seems to have been forgotten in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when Friends pursued an imaginary ‘ancient purity’ in discipline. But in more recent times it has resurfaced, and the desire for unity in the Society once more prevails. Early Friends set aside internal differences to present a united front to the world, albeit from behind a protective ‘hedge’. Within the Society, community solidarity required each member to help supply the wants of their Quaker neighbours, who in turn were expected to ensure they were not a burden on the Society. This is perhaps the key to understanding how we might use the lessons of the past to inform Quakerism today.
The research I’ve done suggests four factors that helped Quakers achieve success: promotion of education and access to apprenticeships, which helped ensure employability; shared finance, which acted as seed capital for small businesses; shared opportunities and cooperation through the Quaker network, which stretched across the Atlantic; and the acceptance of Quaker discipline, which provided a framework for behaviour and for the resolution of disputes, to maintain the reputation of the Society.
This reputation remains the single greatest asset of the Society. Education today is largely the province of the state, but the unique ethos of Quaker schools still attracts parents. The use of apprenticeships by early Friends offered the equivalent of a university education – an opportunity to acquire the knowledge and skills that would support someone in later life. Once in business, alongside an obligation to the relevant guild or company, Friends were answerable to their Meetings, many of which had helped the business get off the ground in the first place.
Just as the early Quaker network could help find occupations for their young people, members of the Society today should consider how we use our networks. It is very easy now to share information on job opportunities or internships. More visibility of both would make excellent use of the Society’s resources, while mentoring and early-career support might prove a profitable form of outreach in a Society where most attenders appear to be in mid-life or older.
Engaging in shared funding offers multiple opportunities. Quaker Area Meetings have a variety of needs, and an even bigger diversity in funds. It makes sense for Quakers to finance other Quakers, just as they did in the past. Early on, when legacies became surplus to a Meeting’s needs, the money was loaned on very favourable terms to individuals and the Yearly Meeting itself. Loans were both commercial and for projects of common interest – today’s Area Meeting trustees would perhaps be surprised (if not entirely reassured) to discover the number of seventeenth-century minutes devoted to Quaker finances!
Finally, it’s worth looking at how much time early Quaker Meetings spent on the propagation of Friends’ common values. The query ‘How does the Truth prosper amongst you?’ was not an esoteric or theological question, but a practical one. It should be interpreted along the lines of ‘How’s your Meeting’s membership coming along?’ Friends were never in a hurry to convert, but the expansion of the Society – in terms of people and geography – was always a goal.
The Toleration Act of 1689 established that Quaker beliefs were no danger to the state. After this, Friends enjoyed growing reputation and influence. This was exploited unapologetically on both sides of the Atlantic: the founding of what was effectively a new country in Pennsylvania shows how early Friends ‘thought big’ and ‘acted big’.
To put that in today’s context, imagine Quakers across Britain deciding to invest collectively in Woodbrooke. It could be made a centre of excellence, devoted to promoting ethics in public and commercial life, to students across the world. It could become an accredited UK university, offering degree courses in two years through continuous education, and at half the fees of the alternatives. To a Fox or a Penn, that would be simple, practical Quakerism, helping to mend the world.
Andy is an associate tutor at Woodbrooke. His research was sponsored by the Quakers and Business group, which will discern a response at its spring gathering on May 20.
