By Jim Schacht

Elias Hicks 

1748-1830

Elias Hicks, Quaker Liberal by Bliss Forbush

Columbia University Press, 1956:  A Review

In the beginning of the nineteenth century Quakers were buffeted by the rise of Unitarianism and an Ecumenical movement on one side and an evangelical revival on the other. We have been confronted the challenges they posed ever since. Our own brand of Quakers arose out of that buffeting and came to be called Hicksite in honor of the central role Elias Hicks played.  Hicks believed in the primacy of the Inner Light or Christ, did not believe in Original Sin, and believed that the evil in the world was caused essentially by people choosing to be distracted by worldly amusements and passions.

Hicks view of the world was formed by two seminal experiences in his life. First, after the death of his mother, he is left his idyllic farm life to live with his older brother and then to be apprenticed to a carpenter he described as in eager pursuit of temporal riches. He enjoyed the dancing, horseracing, balls and other amusements, but concluded those amusements were harmful to him so he gave them up.  Second, he lived through the Revolutionary War where he succeeded in avoiding assisting either side or personal harm, but he and other Quakers paid a heavy price because of the fines and impoundments imposed by both sides. These things, combined with the moral issue posed by slavery resulted in Hicks seeking to isolate Quakers from worldliness, avoid involvement in any way with any government because he saw all governments as created or maintained to some degree by violence, and not just abolish slavery, but not benefit from it and provide for the education and well-being of ex-slaves.

Hicks believed that Quakers should be able to be free to believe what they wanted so long as they acted in a moral fashion so he had no reason to condemn Evangelicals. They did not extend that tolerance to him though. Led by ministers from England they attacked Hicks for not believing in Original Sin, considering the Inner Light having primacy over  the Bible, condemning all paid ministers and generally not caring about traditional Christian doctrine. They accused him of dangerous heresy and sought to prevent him from speaking or even entering into some Meetinghouses .  He was so loved and respected though that in most Meetings a majority sided with him.  The Hicksite/Orthodox split was to last for about a hundred years.

To me Hicks embodies what I see as wonderful and challenging in our Quaker history more than anyone else . His viewing that too great an attachment to pleasure was that basis for sin did not stop him from fathering eleven children, morning the deaths of his four sons or loving and being beloved by his family.  He lived the Peace Testimony fully and prevented the adoption of a Quaker creed like that adopted by Orthodox Quakers. He had the courage to follow his Light without quoting the Bible, while also stating he was open to being convinced differently. He approached all conflicts lovingly and avoided all unnecessary divisive doctrinal or political issues and seems to have left the thousands of homes he visited on his long trips (including one of 2400 miles in 1828) uplifted because of his presence.

Life has changed greatly since his death and it is not possible to live the way he did now. However, I see him as particularly challenging our political involvements and our allowing our lives to be so full of what he would consider harmful distractions. Thank you Elias! Your picture looks grim and foreboding, but somehow you have grown on me to the point that I have to say I see you with love.

This article also appears in the Multnomah Meeting Monthly Newsletter for September, 2024