In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

76Quaker History Quakerism and sets an initial research agenda for future scholars. I suspect this is what Chuck Fager was trying to do and in this, he is very successful.. His insights into the waythe Progressives and the Hicksites interacted are fascinating and important. He shows the easy passage between the two bodies and suggests that Longwood Progressive Yearly Meeting ceased as a separate body in 1 940 because the Hicksites had losttheir Quietisi heritage and adoptedthe modernist one ofthe Progressives. He is strong onwhy FGC Yearly Meetings became congregational and his analysis ofthe fate of the FGC Uniform Discipline in the war years ofthe 1940s and the reunification years ofthe 1950s is compelling. Elsewhere, Fager's background as a journalist comes out strongly, as does his role as leading and unashamed apologist of modern Liberal Quakerism. The driving force is justice and integrity, vital motivations of good scholarship, and Fager is always keen to correct the untruth or the misrepresentation. His style is not always the most formal and his opinions not what we would expect in a purely scholarly work, but his analysis is usually worth hearing out. The book ends with a moving tribute to Bill Kreidler, a strong critique of the representativeness of Earlham School of Religion's consultation on the future ofFriends, and a fairly biting review of the disappointing Pendle Hill update of Howard Brinton's Friendsfor 300 Years. None of these pieces are about Liberal Quaker theology per se as much as they are about the seeking ofjustice for liberal Friends past and present. Chuck Fager has important things to say but this is an eclectic mix ofopinion and history. Numerous typos don't always help ease the way for the reader and one feels Chuck Fager, with so much publishing experience, could have made so much more of a book with this title. Having said that, the fact that this bookmay begin a process ofwiderresearch andpublication (please print your thesis on New England Yearly Meeting, Elizabeth Cazden) means it needs to be welcomed. It is an accessible read, including some very helpful lists, and you never know what new piece ofinformation sits on the next page. "Ben" Pink DandelionUniversity ofBirmingham, England George Fox's Legacy: Friends for 350 Years, Ed. by Charles L. Cherry, Caroline L. Cherry, and J. William Frost. Philadelphia: Friends Historical Association, 2006. viii +149pp. Notes. Paper, $10. This is atruly QuakerFestschrift in simplicity, honesty, scope, and depth, to honor J.William Frost, in recent decades the most distinguished historian ofFriends. The one-page dedication by his colleague Mary Ellen Chijioke Book Reviews77 reminds us that instead ofan Honorary Degree festival upon his retirement in 2002, Frost was encouraged to call together eight outstanding Quaker historians plus respondents and others, friends ofJerry and each other, for a conference which he focussed on the varied roles ofGeorge Fox's image through successive Quaker eras. Our expenses and this strikingly underpriced book were subsidized by Swarthmore College, the FHA and the Rebecca White Trust. Jerry's own six-page Introduction presents no list of his own many publications but an overview and compact summary ofthe essays, which as he notes reflect both the diverse viewpoints, styles, and faith experiences ofdistinct generations ofFriends and also oftheir authors today (unfortunately sequenced alphabetically). Since each essay was carefully crafted and footnoted, even when summarizing their authors' largerworks, this bookcan serve as a fine summaryofcontemporary Quaker historical studies. Melvin Endy's paper on "George Fox and William Penn," (condensed whenhereadit atthe conference), goes muchbeyondhis 1 973 WilliamPenn andEarly Quakerism to present Fox's own changes in doctrine and ideas of his own authority. Endy evaluates with care Richard Bailey's challenging data in New Light on George Fox and Early Quakerism: The Making and Unmaking of a God (1992): Fox at first, like Melchior Hoffmann, had claimedto reincarnate "the heavenly" or "spiritual flesh" as well as the spirit of Christ. Endy knows that Penn instead saw "this inward reality...as bringing divine insight to conscience and power to the will," and that "this concept ... was the lynchpin of the movement from the beginning, known more or less clearlyby all Friends." Friends threatened orthodoxy mainlyby minimizing...

pdf

Share