Becoming visible

Some thoughts on badges and plain dress.

My Britain YM name badge and a selection of contemporary Quaker badges.

Back in 1989 Britain (then London) Yearly Meeting was held in Aberdeen and we gathered for the main sessions in a large hall in the middle of the city. We all wore our name badges inside but I was much struck by the ministry of one Friend who asked us whether we were willing to wear our badges outside in the bustling streets, to be visible as Quakers in the world.

Quaker visibility, as a body and as individuals, has varied considerably over the years and perhaps it is time to look at it again.

From the early days of the Quaker movement the process of becoming a Friend - convincement - was usually a gradual process rather than the once-for-all 'lightbulb moment' of conversion. Descriptions of the way in which early Friends came to Quakerism identify several stages. First of all the individual is 'reached' by the message of Quakerism or by the behaviour and example of particular Quakers. Next comes the first part of convincement in which they are, to use an equivalent term, convicted - in the sense of a criminal conviction - that there is a darkness within, a failing that must be changed before convincement can proceed. This failing is different for everyone. Examples given in Friends' spiritual autobiographies include dancing, reading novels, drinking, putting too great an emphasis on one's own status and 'lightness' or insufficient seriousness.

Once a change in behaviour or attitude had been begun then convincement can proceed to the stage where the individual is willing to identify with Quakers and Quakerism and be seen as part of the group both by Friends and by the world in general. This involves taking the Quaker testimonies to peace, equality, simplicity and truth into one's life and expressing them outwardly.

For George Fox the testimony to simplicity included ‘plain dress’, stripping away any ornamentation from the clothes that people wore. Men were encouraged to cut off any buttons from their coats that were just for decoration rather than practical and to do away with any frills or lace. The same applied to women and all were told to avoid the tyranny of fashion. At first Friends chose a sombre colour for their clothes - brown, dark red, grey - and kept to that throughout their lives. A uniform Quaker Grey was a later requirement. The whole point of the practice was to free the mind from worrying about what to wear so that Friends could concentrate on the leadings of God.

Although this was a laudable aim it was fraught with difficulty as Margaret Fell Fox pointed out at the end of the 17th century. She saw the danger of uniformity in outward dress without an inward spiritual transformation.

‘We are now coming into that which Christ cried woe against, minding altogether outward things, neglecting the inward work of Almighty God in our hearts, if we can but frame according to outward prescriptions and orders…we must look at no colours, nor sell them, nor wear them: but we must be all in one dress and one colour: this is a silly poor Gospel. It is more fit for us, to be covered with God’s Eternal Spirit, and clothed with his Eternal Light, which leads us and guides us into righteousness.’

Eventually, as rules for plain dress were set in stone and long lists of infringements appeared in official documents, Quakers became visible but also ‘peculiar’ and set apart from the world, seen as stern, humourless and unapproachable.

Not only did these regulations make those from other denominations who might feel the stirrings of convincement think twice about the step they were taking, they were sometimes also a problem within Quaker families. By the end of the 18th century ‘Plain’ Quakers were in charge of the religious society and it was impossible to have any influence in the organisation without conforming to strict outward standards. But there were other Friends to whom the attitudes of ‘Plain’ Quakers seemed extreme and unreasonable and who preferred to assimilate with those around them as much as possible. In contemporary terms they were known as ‘Gay Quakers’ - ‘Plain’ and ‘Gay’ describing their outward appearance.

John and Catherine Gurney came from well-established Quaker families. John was a partner in the famous Gurney bank, where he worked alongside his ‘Plain’ Quaker relations, but he used his wealth to buy a country estate at Earlham on the outskirts of Norwich and to become a member of the Norfolk ‘county’ set with whom he mixed as a ‘Gay’ Quaker. John and Catherine brought up their seven daughters and four sons as Friends but did not prevent them from mixing with polite society and its worldly ways.

Gradually two of these children, Elizabeth (later Fry) and Joseph John , realised that they were being called to change their way of life and become ‘Plain’. Elizabeth trod this path first, inspired by the American travelling minister William Savery, and later encouraged her brother when he hesitated about looking different and ‘peculiar’ to his friends and fellow workers. The siblings shared a special bond throughout their lives because they had gone along the same path.

For Elizabeth Gurney Fry much of her early concern with plain dress revolved around the suitability of caps and handkerchiefs. In later years her dress was certainly simple but she did not entirely forsake her background. Her plain grey dress was made of silk and the brown shawl she wore when visiting Newgate gaol in her role as a prison reformer was lined with ermine. However it seems that adopting plain dress did in her case release her from worry about changes in fashion and left her freer to concentrate on her spiritual state, so that in a way it did achieve its object.

In the 19th century the rules about plain dress and other evidences of simplicity became more marked. Not only were Quakers seen to be different but they felt that keeping separate from the world, building a hedge to keep out disturbing influences, was essential to Quakerism’s survival. Even those brought up as ‘Plain’ Quakers struggled to get things right.

In her private diary Mary Waterhouse gives some insight into her struggles and obsessive worries. She was born into a well-connected Quaker family in Tottenham, London in 1805 and in 1829 married another ‘Plain’ Friend, Alfred Waterhouse, several years older than herself, and they moved to Liverpool where he was a successful merchant. In Liverpool meeting the prosperous young woman was sometimes reprimanded for not dressing plainly enough and as a young mother had qualms herself as this extract from 1831 makes clear.

At meeting yesterday for the first time since my confinement:- the beginning of it, I felt uncomfortable, being in a cloak the colour of which I feared might offend some who would not wear such a one, and might be occasion of offence in others, who might like to imitate it. How much better to endeavour to keep to what could take the attention of none, though I did not feel condemnation on account of the colour with regard to myself, it not being one I preferred, or exactly what I intended to buy. But of this, enough, except that if it still occasion me uneasiness it will be better to sacrifice the cloak.

I feel sorry for Mary’s predicament but she remained faithful to the outward expression of her faith for the rest of her life, while times changed around her and her loving family moved away from Quakerism and came to regard her as a representative of a bygone age.

Gradually, during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Quakers became less worried about keeping themselves separate and tried to embrace the world, retaining their testimony to simplicity but expressing it in a more liberal way. It became more difficult to tell who was a Quaker from the way they dressed.

Nowadays the image of a Quaker is often that of a campaigner for peace, equality or the environment. Quakers are seen as 'good people' if perhaps rather naive but is that an image we are comfortable with? The message of some recent outreach posters produced for Quaker Week in the UK - here are a wide range of people who are all Quakers whether they fit the Quaker image or not - may be more relevant.

Do we now need to think more about how, when or even if we identify ourselves to others as Quakers. Should we wear badges and what kind should they be? Quaker peace badges and the new Quaker diversity and climate justice badges align us with particular causes and invite conversations along those lines but others may be more controversial.

The latest badge produced by Quakers in Britain has the words ‘Simple Radical Spiritual’ together with a very small Quaker ‘Q’ and perhaps makes claims for contemporary Quakerism that are challenging and not always easy to live up to. When a new badge was produced a few years ago saying ‘I am a Quaker - ask me why’ many Friends were acutely uncomfortable about it and would not wear it. They did not want to be asked questions about their faith (as opposed to general questions about Quaker beliefs and practices) and felt that they were doing enough if they 'let their lives speak'.

Making our personal faith more visible can be difficult but perhaps we need to do it if the Religious Society of Friends is to grow. We have to face the fact that we need to undertake some preparation so that we are ready to share what we believe. Deciding to wear either of these badges may seem more of a challenge than standing apart by changing or limiting what we wear but we still have much in common with faithful Friends in the past.