The Quakers are a Protestant sect that different from the majority of Christianity in that they do not observe the sacraments or ordinances in the traditional way.
To the Quakers, the baptism by the Holy Spirit is the most important baptism and the one that saves you. They see baptism as an inward act. The sacrament is the way a person lives their life.
The Quakers see the Lord's Supper as a spiritual communion with God through silence and meditation. Eating the Bread could be symbolic for studying the word and being joined in with Christ.
Here are some verses that could defend the Quaker view.
-John 1: 29-33
- Matthew 3:11-17
- Ephesians 4:4-6
- Mark 16:16
- Luke 3:16
- Acts 22:16
- 1 Peter 3:21
- 1 Corinthians 12:13
Thoughts?
Yes i find the Quakers very interesting and Robert Barclays apology is one of the most in-depth theological books ever written and I have seen. He gets so deep into the great mystery and other aspects of spiritual life it is profound.
I agree that water baptism is not for believers today and the Lords supper is an inward supper where Christ comes into us and sups with us. Although I don't fully agree with the supper argument as Barclay teaches fully. I also see water baptism very similar to them, but i would say that the saving baptism is not water baptism or the boats with the Holy Ghost, but the baptism into Christ by the Spirit. I see a distinction here.
The silent workship I also see many strong points on, especially the waiting on the Lord for all things and gifts and all work and ministry . This inward leading is so needed today as well. But i believe they went a bit to far in this and seemed to stress prophetic utterances and prophecy and the teaching gifts and exhortation etc seemed to be lacking in the gatherings. A teacher also need the anointing to teach him all things but the teaching may not be immediate as they gather. The leading to share the teaching must be immediate and waited upon (Romans 12, 1 Cor 14 etc) , but when they are led to speak as the oracles of God according to the gift they are given, that can be from things the Lord has already shown them, and not only prophecy.
But I particularly like the early Quakers around the time of George Fox, barclay etc, not so much the Rufus Jones and on ideas and the changes that took place.
The view of scripture is also a bit concerning at times, even though they often quoted many scriptures. Also I am a bit concerned that they did not speak of the Tri Unity or trinity. I know they liked to stick with words of truth and from scripture and not to say things that were not in scripture. But the concept is taught clearly in scripture.
I also would slightly disagree with them on women roles in the meeting. While i agree that women can prophesy and speak in this way and as led by the Spirit in gatherings. They should not judge their husbands and men and teach over men usurping their authority over the woman as we read clearly in scripture.
But the Quakers are a very interesting group of people I speak about the early Quakers. Some of the arguments that Fox gave in defence of Christ in men and other truths are amazing and profound. Few seemed to be able to withstand the wisdom he spoke.
