Preaching the Inward Light: Early Quaker Rhetoric

Chapter 4 Robert Barclay and the Grounding of Early Quaker Homiletic theory

113 chaPTer 4 RoBERT BARCLAY AND THE GRoUNDING oF EARLY QUAKER HoMILETIC THEoRY Robert Barclay (1648–1690), the most important early Quaker intellectual , wrote two works that directly bear on the development of Quaker homiletic theory: Apology1 and Immediate Revelation.2 In this chapter, I will examine pertinent passages from these two works in order to lay out his ideas about the interaction of inward revelation and the Quaker practice of impromptu preaching. By combining reference to these two key works, it is possible to mark the essential outlines of Barclay’s notion of the influence of the Inward Light and to discern his key contributions to the development of the Quaker theory and practice of impromptu preaching. inTroducTion To apology and immediaTe revelaTion Prior to embarking on our course, a brief description of these two works by Barclay is in order. Barclay, a Scott who was educated in the schools of Aberdeen and the Scots Theological School of Paris, was twenty-seven in 1676, the year he composed and published his Apology in Latin (published two years later in English).3 Braithwaite observes that the Apology is “a direct challenge to much of the Westminster Confession and the Shorter Catechism (1646–1648), which were the maturest and latest formulation of scripture-truth as it appeared to cultured and devout Puritans” (387). Braithwaite also claims that the Apology follows the overall organization of the Confession and Shorter Catechism , countering these significant works proposition by proposition. on the other hand, Barclay’s Immediate Revelation was composed in the form of a personal address to Heer Paets, a Dutchman highly interested in debating Barclay’s theological ideas, whom Barclay describes as a “person of quality.”4 The work was pened in 1676 in Latin, the 114 PREACHING THE INWARD LIGHT same year the Apology was printed in Latin, but was not published in English until 1692. In this chapter I will pay particular attention to Propositions I, II, III, V, VI, X, and XI from the Apology, as well as significant passages from Immediate Revelation, concentrating on their relevance to the development of an understanding of impromptu, inspired preaching.5 develoPMenT of Barclay’s ePisTeMoloGy in The apology In the Apology, Barclay’s first proposition flatly states, “the height of all happiness is placed in the true knowledge of God” and the “true and right understanding of this foundation and ground of knowledge is that which is most necessary to be known and believed in the first place.”6 With this statement, Barclay rejects at the outset the notion that any other kind of investigation or knowledge is the primary duty or occupation of humankind. He has erected a hierarchy placing the “true knowledge of God” at the top. His Proposition II, “Of Immediate Revelation,” builds on the first: “Seeing ‘no man knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son revealeth him’ [Matt 11:27]; and seeing the ‘revelation of the Son is in and by the Spirit’; therefore the testimony of the Spirit is that alone by which the true knowledge of God hath been, is, and can be only revealed.” He asserts, “this divine revelation and inward illumination, is that which is evident and clear of itself, forcing by its own evidence and clearness, the well-disposed understanding to assent, irresistibly moving the same thereunto, even as the common principles of natural truths do move and incline the mind to a natural assent.”7 Here we see the suggestion of two sources of knowledge: one inward and the other outward, with the former being absolutely necessary for the knowledge of spiritual matters, and apparently operating only in the presence of a person with a “well-disposed understanding.” In addition, we can discern Barclay’s assent to the Cartesian criterion of clarity, in this case applied to the immediate revelation of spiritual truths. In his discussion of Proposition II, Barclay acknowledges the usefulness of other means of knowledge, specifically tradition, works of creation, and Scripture, but he contends that the question with regard to religious knowledge is not “what may be profitable or helpful, but what is absolutely necessary.” He asserts, “where the true inward knowledge of God is, through the revelation of his Spirit, there is all; neither is there an absolute necessity of any other.”8 BARCLAY AND THE GRoUNDING oF HoMILETIC THEoRY 115 Clearly, in this section Barclay is not writing about...