Rufus Jones and the American Friend: A Quest for Unity

RUFUS JONES AND THE AMERICAN FRIEND AQUESTFORUNITY Diana Alten* "I was once in my life the doctor, the midwife and the nursing, mother at a birth. The offspring that came to birth in that travail was named 77Je American Friend."[ Rufus Matthew Jones' metaphoric remark aptly depicted an event which was conceived in 1893 when Jones, at the age of 30, took over the editorship ofFriends ' Review. The position was offered to him at the recommendation of Isaac Sharpless, then president of Haverford College, and a leader in the progressive wing ofthe Society ofFriends. He remembered Jones as the editor of the college's literary magazine The Haverfordian, and, tracing his career, undoubtedly recognized in Jones the ability to breathe new life into the periodical, for in 1893 a new approach was desperately needed ifit was to survive. Friends' Review, billed as a religious, literary and miscellaneous journal, made its first appearance in 1847 with the promise to its readers that it would defend and uphold the great principles of the Society of Friends while avoiding "as far as practicable" all controversial discussions. At the same time it extended the caveat that no unsettlement of doctrines promulgated by the Gospel of Primitive Friends would be countenanced in the publication.2 It was affiliated with the unprogrammed, moderately liberal arm of the Gurneyite branch ofPhiladelphia Quakerism. Between the years 1847 and 1893 the paper had been under the direction ofsix editors with Henry Hartshorne having the last incumbency . Based in Philadelphia and under the uniform editorial tutelage of highly educated, liberal, Orthodox Philadelphia Friends, it had a self-limiting imprimatur. Friends 'Review was geared to appeal to the Philadelphia Quaker reading public and thus it could not capture the larger constituency required to forge unity among regional Friends. It was, therefore, not surprising that, as Elizabeth Vining has noted,3 *Diana Alten is manuscript cataloguer in the treasure room of the Haverford College Library. 1.Rufus Matthew Jones, "The Birth of the American Friend," MS Rufus M. Jones Papers, Quaker Collection, Haverford College Library. 2.Friends' Review, Vol. 1, No. 1 (1847), 1-2. 3.Elizabeth Gray Vining, Friend ofLife (Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1958), 63. 41 42Quaker History the paper by 1893 was in a "critical condition," its subscriptions having sloughed off due to competition from the midwestern paper, The Christian Worker. The Christian Worker, established in Ohio in 1871, was affiliated with the evangelical, pastoral, midwestern arm of the Gurneyite branch of Quakerism. It reflected the viewpoint of Friends who had experienced the evangelical revival which began after the Civil War and which brought new leadership and increased membership to many midwestern meetings. However, this movement had not touched Friends in Philadelphia and Hartshorne had not dealt adequately with its effects in creating diversity ofviews between western and eastern Friends. Some other Quaker papers of the day were the Friends Intelligencer of Philadelphia, a Hicksite organ (i.e. mystical, liberal and noncreedal ), The Friend, the voice of the Orthodox (or conservative) branch of Philadelphia Quakerism, while to the right of The Christian Worker was a succession of papers beginning with The Bible Student which became The Soul-Winner and later the Evangelical Friend. As editor of the Friends ' Review Jones decided the paper would not run along divisive lines. He declared: "It is not designed to be the organ of a party or section, and it knows nothing of divisions, but aims to . . . honor spiritual realities, rather than forms and traditions ."4 He perceived that the huge task of unifying American Quakerism could only be aided by liberalizing the scope of the Friends ' Review 's message. Favorable reaction to Jones' new policy soon appeared. On 9/18/1893, Charles Bailey, a New England Quaker manufacturer and benefactor ofOak Grove Seminary, wrote, "I have been looking over the review and like the way it now reads . . . do not let it get sectarian again."5 And George Barton, who was to become professor of Biblical Literature at Bryn Mawr College, wrote on 9/3/1893, "I never read a Review before with so much interest."6 From California, Joel Bean wrote on 9 mo. 28, 1893, "I rejoiced ... to see the intention to...