Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Richard B. Miller on 7th mo. 25, 2010 at 12:17pm

The "quaking" refers to vocal ministry. Quakers take vocal ministry to be allowing God to speak prophetically through the person offering the ministry. Unlike the carefully written sermons of paid pastors, these words are supposed to come directly from God. The minister will often "quake" because he or she will resist speaking the words as long as possible to try to make sure that these are not his or her own random thoughts or musings that is being mistaken for the voice of God. Real vocal ministry often is associated with at least a little quaking because of the heavy responsibility that the minister feels to make sure it is God and not the minister who is speaking.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Colin Lincoln Holloway on 7th mo. 27, 2010 at 12:56pm

I believe that Fox's term was "Quake before (or in the presence) of the lord" when hauled before the magistrates. It was in this incident that we were given a name, intended, of derision. Thing is, as far as I believe it unfolded, Fox told the judge, Bennet I believe, to Quake before the lord. Kind of an eldering on steroids, I've always taken it as.
Instead Bennet attempted to turn it on Fox and the other Children of the Light by saying it was they who are the Quakers, and they that should be the ones to quake at before, not just god, but the legal system as a representative of those other lords and lord, as in king, even if at the time England was between King & Cromwell through the Commonwealth & Rump Parliament .
I can't recall at any other time in Fox's journal that this phrase is used, other than excerpts such as this:
"So that those who had nicknamed us (who are the children of Light) and in scorn called us Quakers, the Lord made to quake; and many of them would have been glad to hide themselves amongst us; and some of them, through the distress that came upon them, did at length come to confess to the Truth." Chapter 14, Labors, Dangers and Sufferings.
Where he seems to twist the irony of the point.
Certainly, as a fellow that preached that it was up to the individual to find their own relationship with the divine, it would seem curious that one should be afraid, or to quake, in that presence.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion