Origin of the Quaker SPICES testimonies

December 20, 2025

If you ask about Quak­er beliefs these days, one of the com­mon answers you’ll get is SPICE, a handy acronym that holds togeth­er a hodge­podge of val­ues, name­ly: sim­plic­i­ty, peace, integri­ty, com­mu­ni­ty and equal­i­ty (and lat­er sus­tain­abil­i­ty to become SPICES). One Quak­er school defin­i­tive­ly puts it, “Quak­ers agree to a core set of val­ues, known as tes­ti­monies.” I’ve not found SPICES list­ed before 2000 and even many of the indi­vid­ual com­po­nents are absent from old­er books of Faith and Practice.

The ques­tion of where this ubiq­ui­tous acronym came from, and when, reg­u­lar­ly comes up in Quak­er dis­course (most­ly recent­ly on Red­dit here). I some­times answer with the bits I’ve dug up but rather than rein­vent­ing the wheel each time, I thought I’d write it all down. I invite peo­ple to add what they know in com­ments and I’ll edit this.

1940s

Howard Brin­ton was the inven­tor of our mod­ern idea of a “tes­ti­mo­ny” in the 1940s, and his orig­i­nal list was com­mu­ni­ty, har­mo­ny, equal­i­ty, and sim­plic­i­ty. He was the Philadelphia-area born Friend who helped orga­nize unpro­grammed Friends on the U.S. West Coast in the ear­ly part of the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry. Brin­ton had a knack for sim­ple expla­na­tions that expressed the emerg­ing con­sen­sus of a new gen­er­a­tion of Friends who were heal­ing from the nineteenth-century schisms. Find­ing new ways of talk­ing about our com­mon­al­i­ties was a cen­tral part of the work of rec­on­cil­i­a­tion. From his tour de force 1952 mas­ter­piece, Friends for 300 Years:

The mean­ing of the group in Quak­er prac­tice can be sug­gest­ed by a dia­gram. Light from God streams down into the wait­ing group. This Light, if the way is open for it, pro­duces three results: uni­ty, knowl­edge, and pow­er. As a result we have the kind of behav­ior which exists as an ide­al in a meet­ing for wor­ship and a meet­ing for busi­ness. Because of the char­ac­ter­is­tics of the Light of Christ, the result­ing behav­ior can be described in a gen­er­al way by the four words Com­mu­ni­ty, Har­mo­ny, Equal­i­ty, and Sim­plic­i­ty.…

He includ­ed a chart, which hon­est­ly does­n’t help much with my under­stand­ing of the meta­physics of it all.

1975

Read­er Tomas Mario Kalmar sent me a paper called Learn­ing Com­mu­ni­ty pre­pared by the Edu­ca­tion Com­mis­sion of Aus­tralian Year­ly Meet­ing that lists six “char­ac­ter­is­tics that dis­tin­guished Quak­er edu­ca­tion”: a reli­gious­ly guard­ed edu­ca­tion, com­mu­ni­ty, non-violence, equal­i­ty, sim­plic­i­ty, and an expe­ri­en­tial cur­ricu­lum. The list is large­ly based on Howard Brin­ton’s work but I include it here because it shows how Friends were remix­ing and repur­pos­ing his list. Learn­ing Com­mu­ni­ty actu­al­ly looks pret­ty good and fair­ly time­less and Tomas gave me per­mis­sion to repost the PDF here.

1980 – 90s

In a Red­dit thread a few years ago, macoafi wrote: “My in-laws were chil­dren in first day school in the 1980s and 1990s, and they learned 4 tes­ti­monies, no acronym. (Peace, truth, sim­plic­i­ty, equal­i­ty).” At some point Brin­ton’s har­mo­ny start­ed being called peace so this is most­ly his list except for truth being swapped for com­mu­ni­ty.

1981

Com­menter Sharon writes:

I first heard SPICE at the 1981 FGC gath­er­ing in Berea KY! At the time it didn’t sit well with me as I found it too glib. I was still work­ing out what God want­ed my life to tes­ti­fy too.

This would put it near­ly two decades before from any doc­u­ment­ed instance I’ve seen. It is also well before any instance I’ve seen that includ­ed an I for integri­ty. I admit I’ll remain skep­ti­cal until I see fur­ther evi­dence, though it is pos­si­ble that some­one remem­bered it from the Berea gath­er­ing and start­ed reusing it in the last 1990s.1

1990

Wilmer Coop­er was an Ohio Wilbu­rite Friend who went on to become first dean of Earl­ham School of Reli­gion upon its found­ing in 1960. Thir­ty years lat­er he pub­lished A Liv­ing Faith, which was built on an ESR course called Basic Quak­er Beliefs. In the pref­ace he writes: “It is my hope that this work will help Friends gain a fuller under­stand­ing of their Quak­er her­itage and the­o­log­i­cal roots, while pro­vid­ing for non-Quakers a com­pre­hen­sive answer to the ques­tions: ‘Who are the Quak­ers?’ and “What is Quak­erism?’ ” In its final chap­ter Coop­er has two lists, which each have four tes­ti­monies. His reli­gious tes­ti­monies are:

  • belief that we can have direct and imme­di­ate access to the liv­ing God;
  • we can no only know the will of God but can, by God’s grace, be enabled to do the will of God.
  • the Quak­er expe­ri­ence of of com­mu­ni­ty as expressed in the “gath­ered meeting.”
  • the sacra­men­tal view of life.

His social tes­ti­monies are:

  • Peace Tes­ti­mo­ny
  • sim­plic­i­ty
  • equal­i­ty
  • integri­ty

He expands to give a para­graph to each of his eight tes­ti­monies but obvi­ous­ly the sec­ond list is much pithi­er.2. He does say that this isn’t a canon­i­cal list, that dif­fer­ent Friends will have dif­fer­ent lists, and con­cludes the sec­tion on tes­ti­monies by, well, tes­ti­fy­ing: “Friends believe deeply that if they sub­mit them­selves to God and live by the Light of Christ they will be enabled to live by the truth of the Gospel.” It’s worth not­ing that the lat­er SPICE/S for­mu­la­tion did­n’t include any of the reli­gious ones (you could per­haps try to claim com­mu­ni­ty der­vices from his reli­gious tes­ti­monies list but I don’t gen­er­al­ly hear the SPICES C described in the kind of spir­i­tu­al lan­guage Coop­er used).

The next year Coop­er wrote a Pen­dle Hill pam­phlet that focused on integri­ty. As far as I’ve seen Coop­er is the first to include an I for integri­ty, set­ting the stage for our famil­iar acronym.

Mid-1990s

My wife Julie insists that she remem­bers talk of SPICE/S back when she was in high school start­ing to get involved with Friends (cir­ca 1994). She did­n’t attend a Quak­er school so this would have been in Philadel­phia Year­ly Meet­ing cir­cles, prob­a­bly specif­i­cal­ly South Jersey.

Late 1990s

In a com­ment to this very post, Pen­dle Hill edi­tor Jana­ki Spickard Keel­er says that when she was work­ing a 2023 pam­phlet with Paul Buck­ley, they tracked SPICE/S to a Friends Coun­cil for Edu­ca­tion list­serv for edu­ca­tors (per­haps E‑Quakes, which was start­ed in 1996 accord­ing to a FCE his­to­ry). Jana­ki writes: “No one came for­ward as being the first to come up with the idea, but they shared it along them­selves and it spread. They esti­mate this hap­pened around 1998.” The pam­phlet quotes Tom Hoopes, who start­ed as direc­tor of edu­ca­tion for Philadel­phia Year­ly Meet­ing in 1998: “I encoun­tered it in use by one of the month­ly meet­ings of Philadel­phia Year­ly Meet­ing, and I thought to myself, ‘what a great mnemon­ic device for help­ing peo­ple to remem­ber what we Quak­ers claim to pri­or­i­tize, and to try to prac­tice!’” Tom told Jana­ki and Paul that he did­n’t remem­ber the iden­ti­ty of the Friends meeting.

1999

The Sum­mer 1999 edi­tion of Salem Quar­ter (N.J.) News reports that Wood­stown Meet­ing cre­at­ed a SPICE rap in for a First-day School pro­gram which also includ­ed songs from Spice Girls. Yes it’s as unique as it sounds:

What’s the word? SPICE!!!! What’s the word? SPICE IS THE WAY TO GO!!!!
Sim­plic­i­ty is sim­ple, and you know it’s right. Squan­derin’ mon­ey gets ya into a fight.
Peace, it rules, and you know that it’s true. It’s the thing I need to get along with you. Don’t yell and sing those fight­in’ songs, when you can help oth­ers and right their wrongs.
Integri­ty is always bein’ true to your word. It’s the most hon­est tes­ti­mo­ny I’ve ever heard.
Livin’ and a‑sharin’ all together’s real­ly fun. Com­mu­ni­ty is helpin’, workin’, playin’ all in one.
Equal­i­ty means every­one is equal, and that’s cool.
Respect­ing oth­er is what’s right and is the gold­en rule!!

Note that the arti­cle gives a clue on source: “After read­ing a short arti­cle in Philadel­phia Year­ly Meet­ing News with the acronym SPICE high­light­ing the tes­ti­monies… [we] were inspired to incor­po­rate this into our First Day School Pro­gram at Wood­stown MM.” The old­est copy of PYM News avail­able via Archive​.org is tan­ta­liz­ing­ly close — Nov/December 1999. That seems to be when PYM start­ed post­ing its newslet­ter.3

2003

Google finds a PDF of a 2003 talk giv­en to a Uni­tar­i­an Uni­ver­sal­ist church by Salt Lake City Friend Diana Lee Hirschi in 2003 talk­ing about SPICE. 

2004

I myself first com­plained about SPICE in 2004 (note it had­n’t got­ten a sec­ond S yet). I com­plained that this kind of list of sec­u­lar tes­ti­monies were too restric­tive. I real­ly was a Quak­er Ranter back then; also I was real­ly kind of hard on Brin­ton, who I appre­ci­ate more now.

2006

I like to search the Friends Jour­nal archives to see when new terms show up. New terms are often bandied about by par­tic­u­lar Friends or with­in sub-groups, where they might cir­cu­late for a few years with­out get­ting into wider usage. As far as I’ve been able to deter­mine, the first ref­er­ence to SPICES in Friends Jour­nal is a 2006 arti­cle by Har­ri­ett Heath titled “The Quak­er Par­ent­ing Project: A Report.” She’s lays it out as an attempt to teach Quak­er chil­dren with­out resort­ing to dogma:

There are sev­er­al dif­fer­ent lists of tes­ti­monies. We start­ed with one com­mon­ly referred to by the acronym SPICES: Sim­plic­i­ty, Peace, Integri­ty, Com­mu­ni­ty, Equal­i­ty, and Stew­ard­ship — but we found that there were oth­er issues not addressed by this list. Ser­vice is an inte­gral part of Quak­erism in our efforts to live our faith; should it be a tes­ti­mo­ny? Edu­ca­tion has been his­tor­i­cal­ly an inte­gral part of Quak­er­sim; should it, too, be includ­ed? Where does wor­ship — time set apart — fit in?

Her project even­tu­al­ly picked a dif­fer­ent list because they did­n’t want to be bound by the dic­tates of fit­ting into an acronym. They includ­ed con­flict and growth and ser­vice (which some­times is list­ed as the final S).

2007/2008 videos

In 2007, British Friends could pro­duce a video called “The Quak­er Tes­ti­monies” that did­n’t men­tion SPICE/S and ranged over oth­er non-acronymed tes­ti­monies such as one for respect and anoth­er against oath-taking. If you lis­ten care­ful­ly, I think at least one of the speak­ers must have heard of SPICE because he seemed to be orga­niz­ing thoughts around it. 

In 2008 I talked about SPICE and spir­i­tu­al­ly get­ting deep­er with tes­ti­monies in a YouTube video and accom­pa­ny­ing blog post.

2009

Brin­ton schol­ar Antho­ny Manousos did a deep dive on SPICES. Although Antho­ny claims Briton invent­ed SPICES per se, I think he just invent­ed the idea of tes­ti­monies and the ini­tial list that includ­ed three of them (four if you count the harmony/peace change).

2011

Less than two years after Heath’s arti­cle, Mark Dansereau and Kim Tso­canos, the co-heads of Con­necti­cut Friends School in Wilton, Conn., pub­lished an anno­tat­ed list of SPICES in Friends Jour­nal, explain­ing that their school was built on these “Six Quak­er Val­ues” (yes, ital­i­cized and cap­i­tal­ized) and that they applied and wove them into each activ­i­ty in their cur­ric­u­la. This might be one of the old­est fully-intact list­ings still eas­i­ly avail­able on the web. This has become one of the most vis­it­ed pages on Friends Jour­nal website.

2012

By this time SPICE/S was becom­ing ubiq­ui­tous. See this blog post from North­west Year­ly Meet­ing and a video Brent Bill put togeth­er to pro­mote an upcom­ing intro­duc­to­ry work­shop at his meet­ing in Indiana.

Paul Buck­ley gave a talk in 2012 that high­light­ed the role of Wilmer Coop­er, an Ohio Friend per­haps most well remem­bered for found­ing Earl­ham School of Reli­gion in 1960. In 2023, Paul Buck­ley wrote a pam­phlet from Pen­dle Hill, Quak­er Tes­ti­mo­ny: What We Wit­ness to the World, edit­ed by Jana­ki Spickard Keel­er, dur­ing which they deter­mined the late 1990s date.

2013

Some­one around 2006 I was stand­ing in a meal line at a Quak­er event with Cal­i­for­nia Friend Eric Moon and we start­ed to talk about tes­ti­monies. It was the start of a great con­ver­sa­tion, cut short by some inter­rup­tion or anoth­er before we even hit the dessert sta­tion. When I start­ed as Friends Jour­nal edi­tor I asked him to write some­thing. 2013’s Cat­e­gor­i­cal­ly Not the Tes­ti­monies was the result. We also talked in an ear­ly Quak­er Author Pod­cast.


So where did the SPICES for­mu­la­tion come from? It ulti­mate­ly derived from Brin­ton’s list, with har­mo­ny mor­ph­ing to peace and WIl Coop­er’s integri­ty adding an I. Giv­en its ped­a­gog­i­cal nature, it was prob­a­bly coined by edu­ca­tors. It’s a good teach­ing tool, easy to remem­ber and some­thing you can eas­i­ly weave into a multi-week class. 

Since there’s noth­ing par­tic­u­lar­ly reli­gious about the SPICE/S list, it can work in an essen­tial­ly sec­u­lar envi­ron­ment that might be aller­gic to religious-sounding Quak­er the­ol­o­gy. This would include Friends schools appeal­ing to a non-Quaker audi­ence or a Lib­er­al Friends Meet­ing that wants some­thing non-controversial to teach the kids. I nev­er hear any­one talk about it being derived from “char­ac­ter­is­tics of the Light of Christ,” as Brin­ton did when he intro­duced it.

In the last few years it’s become pret­ty ubiq­ui­tous on Tik­Tok and oth­er short-form video (Dis­cov­er­ing Quak­ers, _gloyoyo_, itsmekat­evee).4 If you have five min­utes to tell a gen­er­al audi­ence about Quak­ers, bite-sized descrip­tions are impor­tant. Also: some of these con­tent cre­ators are prob­a­bly younger than the term itself. Also: I’ve final­ly grown into the Old Man Yelling at the Clouds meme. SPICES is here to stay.

Is SPICES all that ter­ri­ble? No, not real­ly. It can be handy. But it is pret­ty annoy­ing that we’ve con­fused a list of gener­ic val­ues for belief. And it’s super annoy­ing that even that list of val­ues is hemmed in by the require­ment that every com­po­nent fit into a sil­ly acronym.5

What’s fun­ny about the mys­tery of this is that there’s a very good chance that the per­son who first list­ed out SPICE is still around. There’s a box in some­one’s garage packed with late-1990s newslet­ters, one of which lists it out for the first time in print. Any­one with any infor­ma­tion can com­ment below or email me at martink@martinkelley.com.

Influencing Quakers

July 2, 2025

Philadel­phia Year­ly Meet­ing and Friends in Busi­ness spon­sored a two-person pan­el last night called “Quak­er Voic­es, Dig­i­tal Paths” and fea­tur­ing Glo­ria Sul­li­van, who has over 600,000 fol­low­ers across Tik­Tok and Insta­gram, and Grif­fin Macaulay, con­tent cre­ator for Dun­geons and Drag­ons. Glo­ria does­n’t gen­er­al­ly talk about being a Quak­er on her chan­nel but did in Jan­u­ary. It’s had over 300,000 views and a stag­ger­ing 6,042 comments. 

The scale of the new­er forms of online media is real­ly stag­ger­ing, as is the sim­plic­i­ty of start­ing a chan­nel. There’s no need to incor­po­rate or find fun­ders or write mis­sion state­ments: you just start talk­ing to the com­put­er. It quick­ly becomes all-consuming of course, and there’s a lot of thought that goes into the top­ics and scope of the chan­nel. All the pop­u­lar Tik­Toks also have lots of edits to speed them up. It’s a lot of work to do this part or full-time.

Grif­fin talked about being known for a thing and remain­ing pas­sion­ate about it even in a vac­u­um. It’s the follow-your-passion advice: lov­ing what you do will pull peo­ple to you and you will find a way to turn it into a business.

In some ways, I feel that at least some of the work my col­leagues and I are doing 6is akin to an out­field­er scan­ning the sky for pop balls com­ing in from these inter­net men­tions. When a pop­u­lar influ­encer talks about Quak­ers I’m sure hun­dreds of fin­gers open a new tab to ask “What is a Quak­er?” and “What Do Quak­ers Believe?” We hope­ful­ly show up in the search with easily-digestible answers and links to Quak­er com­mu­ni­ties. I asked Glo­ria and Grif­fin for ideas about how we could bet­ter sup­port inquir­ers they might send our way. We’re doing a lot already — good search engine opti­miza­tion, catchy URLs — but there was some good advice on using Insta­gram bet­ter and real­ly sim­pli­fy­ing our mes­sag­ing and turn­ing it into stories. 

Quaker reflections on simplicity

June 30, 2023

From Eileen Kinch:

As fol­low­ers of Christ, we have been com­mand­ed to seek first the King­dom of God. Sim­plic­i­ty is set­ting aside any­thing that gets in the way of seek­ing the King­dom. The Book of Dis­ci­pline of Ohio Year­ly Meet­ing states: ‘The call … is to aban­don those things that clut­ter [our lives] and to press toward the goal unham­pered. This is true simplicity.’

As the pho­to cred­it states, this was one of my pic­tures – way back from the 2009 Con­ser­v­a­tive Gath­er­ing at the Lam­peter Meet­ing­house near Lan­cast­er, Pa.

Genesis: Outer Space and Inner Light, by

November 20, 2018

John A. Mina­han has writ­ten this week’s fea­tured Friends Jour­nal arti­cle, a nice­ly paced explo­ration that touch­es on per­son­al mem­oir, human mile­stones, cul­tur­al mem­o­ry, and the Book of Genesis:

Now the astro­nauts had used that same rhetor­i­cal strat­e­gy but on a plan­e­tary and even inter­plan­e­tary scale. Speak­ing the words of Gen­e­sis, they sent a mes­sage of heal­ing to a wound­ed world; they expressed a cer­tain cos­mic humil­i­ty about our place in the uni­verse; and, most of all, they shared good­will, jaw-dropping in its sim­plic­i­ty, with “all of you on the good earth.” A moral and exis­ten­tial vision took hold of me in that moment and has nev­er let go. Though I couldn’t have artic­u­lat­ed it as such then, it was a real­iza­tion of orig­i­nal goodness. 

Making meetings simpler

May 11, 2018

British Friend Helen Drew­ery writes about what might be a uni­ver­sal desire to make Quak­er orga­ni­za­tion­al life simpler

How can we achieve a flex­i­ble sim­plic­i­ty – liv­ing by the essence of the Quak­er approach but not treat­ing old habits as sacro­sanct? Ear­ly Quak­ers saw sim­plic­i­ty as strip­ping out of their lives the super­flu­ous activ­i­ties and things – John Wool­man called them ‘cum­ber’ – so that they could more ful­ly fol­low the lead­ings of the Spirit.

The Quaker testimonies as our collective wisdom wiki

November 13, 2008

My sort-of response to Cal­lid’s great Youtube piece on the Quak­er tes­ti­monies, I com­pare the clas­sic tes­ti­monies to a wiki: the col­lec­tive knowl­edge of Friends dis­tilled into spe­cif­ic cau­tions and guides. “We as Friends have found that.…” I do talk about how the recent “SPICE” sim­pli­fi­ca­tion (sim­plic­i­ty, integri­ty, integri­ty, com­mu­ni­ty and equal­i­ty) has robbed our notion of tes­ti­monies of some of their power.

Quaker Testimonies

October 15, 2004

One of the more rev­o­lu­tion­ary trans­for­ma­tions of Amer­i­can Quak­erism in the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry has been our under­stand­ing of the tes­ti­monies. In online dis­cus­sions I find that many Friends think the “SPICE” tes­ti­monies date back from time immemo­r­i­al. Not only are they rel­a­tive­ly new, they’re a dif­fer­ent sort of crea­ture from their predecessors.

In the last fifty years it’s become dif­fi­cult to sep­a­rate Quak­er tes­ti­monies from ques­tions of mem­ber­ship. Both were dra­mat­i­cal­ly rein­vent­ed by a newly-minted class of lib­er­al Friends in the ear­ly part of the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry and then cod­i­fied by Howard Brin­ton’s land­mark Friends for 300 Years, pub­lished in the ear­ly 1950s.

Comfort and the Test of Membership

Brin­ton comes right out and says that the test for mem­ber­ship should­n’t involve issues of faith or of prac­tice but should be based on whether one feels com­fort­able with the oth­er mem­bers of the Meet­ing. This con­cep­tion of mem­ber­ship has grad­u­al­ly become dom­i­nant among lib­er­al Friends in the half cen­tu­ry since this book was pub­lished. The trou­ble with it is twofold. The first is that “com­fort” is not nec­es­sar­i­ly what God has in mind for us. If the frequently-jailed first gen­er­a­tion of Friends had used Brin­ton’s mod­el there would be no Reli­gious Soci­ety of Friends to talk about (we’d be lost in the his­tor­i­cal foot­notes with the Mug­gle­to­ni­ans, Grindle­to­ni­ans and the like). One of the clas­sic tests for dis­cern­ment is whether an pro­posed action is con­trary to self-will. Com­fort is not our Soci­ety’s calling.

The sec­ond prob­lem is that com­fort­a­bil­i­ty comes from fit­ting in with a cer­tain kind of style, class, col­or and atti­tude. It’s fine to want com­fort in our Meet­ings but when we make it the pri­ma­ry test for mem­ber­ship, it becomes a cloak for eth­nic and cul­tur­al big­otries that keep us from reach­ing out. If you have advanced edu­ca­tion, mild man­ners and lib­er­al pol­i­tics, you’ll fit it at most East Coast Quak­er meet­ings. If you’re too loud or too eth­nic or speak with a work­ing class accent you’ll like­ly feel out of place. Samuel Cald­well gave a great talk about the dif­fer­ence between Quak­er cul­ture and Quak­er faith and I’ve pro­posed a tongue-in-cheek tes­ti­mo­ny against com­mu­ni­ty as way of open­ing up discussion.

The Feel-Good Testimonies

Friends for 300 Years also rein­vent­ed the Tes­ti­monies. They had been spe­cif­ic and often pro­scrip­tive: against gam­bling, against par­tic­i­pa­tion in war. But the new tes­ti­monies became vague feel-good char­ac­ter traits – the now-famous SPICE tes­ti­monies of sim­plic­i­ty, peace, integri­ty, com­mu­ni­ty and equal­i­ty. Who isn’t in favor of all those val­ues? A pres­i­dent tak­ing us to war will tell us it’s the right thing to do (integri­ty) to con­truct last­ing peace (peace) so we can bring free­dom to an oppressed coun­try (equal­i­ty) and cre­ate a stronger sense of nation­al pride (com­mu­ni­ty) here at home.

We mod­ern Friends (lib­er­al ones at least) were real­ly trans­formed by the redefin­tions of mem­ber­ship and the tes­ti­monies that took place mid-century. I find it sad that a lot of Friends think our cur­rent tes­ti­monies are the ancient ones. I think an aware­ness of how Friends han­dled these issues in the 300 years before Brin­ton would help us nav­i­gate a way out of the “eth­i­cal soci­ety” we have become by default.

The Source of our Testimonies

A quest for uni­ty was behind the rad­i­cal trans­for­ma­tion of the tes­ti­monies. The main accom­plish­ment of East Coast Quak­erism in the mid-twentieth cen­tu­ry was the reunit­ing of many of the year­ly meet­ings that had been torn apart by schisms start­ing in 1827. By the end of that cen­tu­ry Friends were divid­ed across a half dozen major the­o­log­i­cal strains man­i­fest­ed in a patch­work of insti­tu­tion­al divi­sions. One way out of this morass was to present the tes­ti­monies as our core uni­fy­ing prici­ples. But you can only do that if you divorce them from their source.

As Chris­tians (even as post-Christians), our core com­mand­ment is sim­ple: to love God with all our heart and to love our neigh­bor as ourselves:

Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great com­mand­ment. And the sec­ond is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neigh­bour as thy­self. On these two com­mand­ments hang all the law and the prophets. Matthew 22:37 – 40 and Mark 12:30 – 31, Luke 10:27.

The Quak­er tes­ti­monies also hang on these com­mand­ments: they are our col­lec­tive mem­o­ry. While they are in con­tant flux, they refer back to 350 years of expe­ri­ence. These are the truths we can tes­ti­fy to as a peo­ple, ways of liv­ing that we have learned from our direct expe­ri­ence of the Holy Spir­it. They are intri­cate­ly tied up with our faith and with how we see our­selves fol­low­ing through on our charge, our covenant with God.

I’m sure that Howard Brin­ton did­n’t intend to sep­a­rate the tes­ti­monies from faith, but he chose his new catagories in such a way that they would appeal to a mod­ern lib­er­al audi­ence. By pop­u­lar­iz­ing them he made them so acces­si­ble that we think we know them already.

A Tale of Two Testimonies

Take the twin tes­ti­monies of plain­ness and sim­plic­i­ty. First the ancient tes­ti­mo­ny of plain­ness. Here’s the descrip­tion from 1682:

Advised, that all Friends, both old and young, keep out of the world’s cor­rupt lan­guage, man­ners, vain and need­less things and fash­ions, in appar­el, build­ings, and fur­ni­ture of hous­es, some of which are immod­est, inde­cent, and unbe­com­ing. And that they avoid immod­er­a­tion in the use of law­ful things, which though inno­cent in them­selves, may there­by become hurt­ful; also such kinds of stuffs, colours and dress, as are cal­cu­lat­ed more to please a vain and wan­ton mind, than for real use­ful­ness; and let trades­men and oth­ers, mem­bers of our reli­gious soci­ety, be admon­ished, that they be not acces­sary to these evils; for we ought to take up our dai­ly cross, mind­ing the grace of God which brings sal­va­tion, and teach­es to deny all ungod­li­ness and world­ly lusts, and to live sober­ly, right­eous­ly and god­ly, in this present world, that we may adorn the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ in all things; so may we feel his bless­ing, and be instru­men­tal in his hand for the good of others.

Note that there’s noth­ing in there about the length of one’s hem. The key phrase for me is the warn­ing about doing things “cal­cu­lat­ed to please a vain and wan­ton mind.” Friends were being told that pride makes it hard­er to love God and our neigh­bors; immod­er­a­tion makes it hard to hear God’s still small voice; self-sacrifice is nec­es­sary to be an instru­ment of God’s love. This tes­ti­mo­ny is all about our rela­tion­ships with God and with each other.

Most mod­ern Friends have dis­pensed with “plain­ness” and recast the tes­ti­mo­ny as “sim­plic­i­ty.” Ask most Friends about this tes­ti­mo­ny and they’ll start telling you about their clut­tered desks and their annoy­ance with cell­phones. Ask for a reli­gious edu­ca­tion pro­gram on sim­plic­i­ty and you’ll almost cer­tain­ly be assigned a book from the mod­ern vol­un­tary sim­plic­i­ty move­ment, one of those self-help man­u­als that promise inner peace if you plant a gar­den or buy a fuel-efficient car, with “God” absent from the index. While it’s true that most Amer­i­cans (and Friends) would have more time for spir­i­tu­al refresh­ment if they unclut­tered their lives, the sec­u­lar notions of sim­plic­i­ty do not emanate out of a con­cern for “gospel order” or for a “right order­ing” of our lives with God. Vol­un­tary sim­plic­i­ty is great: I’ve pub­lished books on it and I live car-free, use cloth dia­pers, etc. But plain­ness is some­thing dif­fer­ent and it’s that dif­fer­ence that we need to explore again.

Pick just about any of the so-called “SPICE” tes­ti­monies (sim­plic­i­ty, peace, integri­ty, com­mu­ni­ty and equal­i­ty) and you’ll find the mod­ern notions are sec­u­lar­l­ized over-simplications of the Quak­er under­stand­ings. In our quest for uni­ty, we’ve over-stated their importance.

Ear­li­er I men­tioned that many of the ear­li­er tes­ti­monies were pro­scrip­tive – they said cer­tain actions were not in accord with our prin­ci­ples. Take a big one: after many years of dif­fi­cult min­is­ter­ing and soul search­ing, Friends were able to say that slav­ery was a sin and that Friends who held slaves were kept from a deep com­mu­nion with God; this is dif­fer­ent than say­ing we believe in equal­i­ty. Sim­i­lar­ly, say­ing we’re against all out­ward war is dif­fer­ent than say­ing we’re in favor of peace. While I know some Friends are proud of cast­ing every­thing in pos­ti­tive terms, some­times we need to come out and say a par­tic­u­lar prac­tice is just plain wrong, that it inter­feres with and goes against our rela­tion­ship with God and with our neighbors.

I’ll leave it up to you to start chew­ing over what spe­cif­ic actions we might take a stand against. But know this: if our min­is­ters and meet­ings found that a par­tic­u­lar prac­tice was against our tes­ti­monies, we could be sure that there would be some Friends engaged in it. We would have a long process of min­is­ter­ing with them and labor­ing with them. It would be hard. Feel­ings would be hurt. Peo­ple would go away angry.

After a half-century of lib­er­al indi­vid­u­al­ism, it would be hard to once more affirm that there is some­thing to Quak­erism, that it does have norms and bound­aries. We would need all the love, char­i­ty and patience we could muster. This work would is not easy, espe­cial­ly because it’s work with mem­bers of our com­mu­ni­ty, peo­ple we love and hon­or. We would have to fol­low John Wool­man’s exam­ple: our first audi­ence would not be Wash­ing­ton pol­i­cy­mak­ers , but instead Friends in our own Society.

Testimonies as Affirmation of the Power

In a world beset by war, greed, pover­ty and hatred, we do need to be able to talk about our val­ues in sec­u­lar terms. An abil­i­ty to talk about paci­fism with our non-Quaker neigh­bors in a smart, informed way is essen­tial (thus my Non​vi​o​lence​.org min­istry [since laid down], cur­rent­ly receiv­ing two mil­lions vis­i­tors a year). When we affirm com­mu­ni­ty and equal­i­ty we are wit­ness­ing to our faith. Friends should be proud of what we’ve con­tributed to the nation­al and inter­na­tion­al dis­cus­sions on these topics.

But for all of their con­tem­po­rary cen­tral­i­ty to Quak­erism, the tes­ti­monies are only second-hand out­ward forms. They are not to be wor­shiped in and of them­selves. Mod­ern Friends come dan­ger­ous­ly close to lift­ing up the peace tes­ti­mo­ny as a false idol – the prin­ci­ple we wor­ship over every­thing else. When we get so good at argu­ing the prac­ti­cal­i­ty of paci­fism, we for­get that our tes­ti­mo­ny is first and fore­most our procla­ma­tion that we live in the pow­er that takes away occas­sion for war. When high school math teach­ers start argu­ing over arcane points of nuclear pol­i­cy, play­ing arm­chair diplo­mat with year­ly meet­ing press releas­es to the U.S. State Depart­ment, we loose cred­i­bil­i­ty and become some­thing of a joke. But when we min­is­ter with the Pow­er that tran­scends wars and earth­ly king­doms, the Good News we speak has an author­i­ty that can thun­der over pet­ty gov­ern­ments with it’s com­mand to quake before God.

When we remem­ber the spir­i­tu­al source of our faith, our under­stand­ings of the tes­ti­monies deep­en immea­sur­ably. When we let our actions flow from uncom­pli­cat­ed faith we gain a pow­er and endurance that strength­ens our wit­ness. When we speak of our expe­ri­ence of the Holy Spir­it, our words gain the author­i­ty as oth­ers rec­og­nize the echo of that “still small voice” speak­ing to their hearts. Our love and our wit­ness are sim­ple and uni­ver­sal, as is the good news we share: that to be ful­ly human is to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul and mind and to love our neigh­bors as we do ourselves.

Hal­lelu­jah: praise be to God!

Reading elsewhere:

Visit with Christian Friends Conference & New Foundation Fellowship

March 15, 2004

In late Jan­u­ary 2004, I went to a gath­er­ing on “Quak­er Faith and Prac­tice: The Wit­ness of Our Lives and Words,” co-sponsored by the Chris­t­ian Friends Con­fer­ence and the New Foun­da­tion Fel­low­ship. Here are some thoughts about the meeting.

Con­tin­ue read­ing