You Will Be Told What You Must Do

A Biblical Perspective on Quaker Pastors

One of the major historical distinctives of Quakerism has been its view of ministers or pastors, an understanding that has set Friends apart from other Christian denominations since the movement’s origins. While the seventeenth-century Church of England maintained a formal system of ministerial ordination and attributed a higher degree of spiritual authority to the clergy, George Fox, the founder of Quakerism, testified that God revealed to him directly that the call to ministry was entirely divine, not mediated through any human institution.

Fox’s experience of divine revelation regarding the call to ministry recalls the biblical account of God appearing to Saul on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:1–9). In that story, God tells Saul, “Rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you must do.” This biblical example seems to confirm two central points of Fox’s testimony: that God reveals Himself directly to human beings and that God Himself calls people to ministry. Although Jesus’s call to the disciples contains similarities to Fox’s experience, the episode with Saul, where Jesus was no longer physically present, provides the closest New Testament parallel. Some other Old Testament examples also resemble Fox’s experience, including that of Abraham, Moses, and Elijah.

Early Quakers developed a practice for giving public recognition to ministers, known as “recording.” This consisted of noting the spiritual gifts of a particular minister in the minutes of the monthly meeting without conferring any special status or ordination. Historian Thomas Hamm explains that human beings can only recognize a gift given by God; they cannot confer or promote it, for that belongs solely to God. Another form of recognition was allowing ministers to sit on the facing benches at the front of the meetinghouse, yet this did not change the context of radical equality with the rest of the congregation. These Quaker practices stood in stark contrast to contemporary Christian groups, which maintained hierarchical leadership systems granting privilege only to a small minority.

George Fox, the founder of Quakerism, testified that God revealed to him directly that the call to ministry was entirely divine, not mediated through any human institution.

The Quaker desire to cultivate a community of equality, where titles described a person’s role but not their value and where Christ alone held preeminence, echoes the apostle Paul. In his letters, Paul introduces himself at times as a servant of Christ (Rom. 1:1; Titus 1:1; 1 Cor. 4:1) and at other times as an apostle (Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1). By using the title “apostle,” Paul acknowledges his divine calling; by naming himself a servant, he expresses his full submission to God and to the church.

Early Friends also believed that formal academic preparation for ministry was unnecessary, since God Himself equipped ministers to speak God’s will. Hamm even notes that preparation for preaching was not only unnecessary but forbidden; bringing a Bible to read from during worship was unusual. Many testimonies recount early Friends being suddenly moved by the Spirit to preach in meetings or public spaces, where God used them powerfully. William Edmundson, for example, was moved to speak about the day of the Lord and call people to repentance while in a marketplace. Silence played a crucial role as well, as it allowed Friends to hear God’s voice and obey.

Peter’s sermons in Acts 2:14–21 and 3:11–26 resemble the Quaker belief in Spirit-led, spontaneous preaching. First, the Spirit reveals to the preacher what is to be proclaimed: notice that Peter had just been filled with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2:1–13). Second, the people recognized that Peter lacked formal training to speak so boldly, confirming that his message came through the Spirit.

Early Friends also held that ministers needed proven spiritual maturity. A person’s public life demonstrated whether they walked in the Spirit. The Spirit had to attest to a person’s sanctification before that person received the gift of ministry. Paul outlines the qualifications for ministry in 1 Timothy 3:1–7: being blameless, faithful to one’s spouse, temperate, prudent, respectable, not given to drunkenness, and so on. Paul describes someone sanctified by the Spirit, whose good fruit does not come from human effort but from the Spirit’s work.

From the beginning, Friends affirmed the ministry of women, a conviction that now seems commonplace but was radical in the seventeenth century and rejected by all other Christian groups of the time. Given Quaker egalitarianism, acknowledging that women could serve in any ministry role was not only consistent but essential. Fox defended this in his 1656 pamphlet The Woman Learning in Silence. In Women’s Speaking Justified (1666), Margaret Fell, a major Quaker leader, presented a biblical argument for women’s ministry, noting that Jesus appeared first to a woman after the resurrection (Mary Magdalene) and that women were the first witnesses to the resurrection. Jesus Himself confirms the legitimacy of women’s ministry.

Despite lacking full-time paid pastors, early Friends were deeply committed to preaching the gospel. In The Rich Heritage of Quakerism, Walter R. Williams recounts the story of the so-called Valiant Sixty, a group of 54 men and 12 women who spread Quakerism across England, Ireland, Wales, and Scotland during the seventeenth century. About half supported themselves financially, while the Kendal Fund subsidized the others. It was customary for Friends to provide basic support for itinerant ministers. The Quaker theologian Robert Barclay explained that ministers should be supplied “what may be needful to them for meat or clothing.” Paul’s ministry offers a biblical analogy: he gratefully accepted help from churches (1 Cor. 16:17; Phil. 4:16–17) yet also supported himself so as not to burden the churches (2 Thess. 3:7–8). Acts 18:1–3 describes Paul’s tent-making trade, which he practiced alongside his ministry. In 1 Corinthians 9, Paul affirms a minister’s right to be supported by the church, yet he personally declined this right so as not to hinder the gospel. He accepted help but was not dependent on it, ensuring that churches did not control his ministry and allowing him full freedom to obey God.

The landscape of nineteenth-century American Christianity brought major changes to the Quaker ministerial system. Revivals proliferated; many new converts entered the churches; and interdenominational collaboration grew, promoting Bible reading, missionary trips, and the establishment of institutions for religious formation. Among Friends, the first major division emerged, primarily over theological disputes, creating two groups: the Orthodox Friends and the Hicksite Friends. Although both groups initially wished to preserve Quaker identity, the Hicksites were more committed to doing so. The Gurneyite branch of the Orthodox soon introduced vocal prayers, public Scripture readings, and hymns. They increasingly embraced ecumenical collaboration, resulting in significant changes to worship, theology, and views on ministerial practices.

A revival movement among Gurneyite Friends from 1860 to 1880 was influenced by an international Holiness movement, which emphasized preaching and pastoral leadership. Because they believed Christ’s return was imminent, pastoral preaching became a central tool for saving as many people as possible. Revivalist Friends eventually adopted the pastoral system, which included hiring full-time pastors who required academic preparation and instituting hierarchical structures with pastors as primary spiritual authorities.

The adoption of the pastoral system was deeply controversial. Some argued that it threatened the biblical doctrine of the priesthood of all believers and undermined the conviction that only God calls and appoints ministers. While early Quaker beliefs regarding ministers can be strongly supported biblically, this does not mean that nineteenth-century developments involving human participation in ministerial appointment cannot also be justified biblically. 

In Acts 16:1–5, Paul recruits Timothy to join his missionary journeys and, after a period of formation, delegates him to remain in Ephesus to teach and guide the church (1 Tim. 1:1–4). According to Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History, Paul ordained Timothy as pastor of Ephesus. Paul similarly placed Titus as pastor of Crete (Titus 1:5). The letters to Timothy and Titus are rightly called “pastoral epistles,” since they instruct these leaders on methods to carry out pastoral ministry. Does this mean humans replaced God in calling ministers? By no means. Only God calls and appoints, but Scripture shows that God sometimes uses the church to do so. Thus, both early Quaker practices and nineteenth-century pastoral practices can be argued biblically.

I firmly believe that Quaker beliefs and practices concerning pastoral ministry responded to specific historical contexts, and that God guided Quaker leaders in each era to discern the most faithful responses to their challenges.

With the pastoral system came professional ministerial training, something early Friends viewed with suspicion, associating it with the creation of “hired pastors.” Even after accepting academic preparation, Friends wished to avoid the historical-critical methods taught in universities and seminaries. As a result, they founded Bible institutes and missionary schools emphasizing biblical inerrancy. According to modern academic Isaac Barnes May, such training often lacked academic rigor. Yet Scripture offers strong support for academic preparation: Jesus conversed with the teachers of the law at age 12, demonstrating the religious education typical of Jewish boys (Luke 2:45–47). When Satan tempted Jesus at the beginning of His ministry (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13), Jesus responded to each temptation by quoting Scripture, showing mastery of the text that would affirm His ministry. 

The apostle Paul received one of the highest levels of religious education available (Acts 22:3; Phil. 3:4–6). Although he initially misused this knowledge, after his conversion, it became a powerful tool for reaching educated Jews and Gentiles of high social standing. The early Quaker belief that the Spirit spontaneously reveals the message and the nineteenth-century belief that God also works through academic preparation both have strong biblical support.

The ministry of women—long a distinctive part of Quakerism—was weakened by the adoption of the nineteenth-century pastoral system. Isaac Barnes May notes that although revivalist Gurneyites claimed to uphold women’s ministry, the reality fell short. Emma Cook Coffin, an African American recorded minister and evangelist from California, presented these concerns to the Five Years Meeting in 1920; although a few expressed worry, most responses were negative. Some determined women, such as Coffin and Esther G. Frame, did obtain ordination, but their numbers dwindled. In this climate of disadvantage, Quaker figures such as Dougan Clark and David Updegraff presented biblical arguments supporting women’s ministry. Eventually, women regained a central place in Quaker service, especially as missionaries to Central America, South America, and Kenya.

I firmly believe that Quaker beliefs and practices concerning pastoral ministry responded to specific historical contexts, and that God guided Quaker leaders in each era to discern the most faithful responses to their challenges. As an evangelical Quaker who affirms the authority of Scripture, grounding these practices biblically is a way to affirm God’s approval of them. After exploring this topic both historically and biblically, I conclude that God, who most desires that His gospel of love reach all who are in need, has always provided faithful men and women to whom He entrusts His mission. In the case of Quakerism, God revealed the appropriate forms for each era to Friends who were humbly willing to accept and obey them. God will continue calling and commissioning workers for His mission. The question is: Will there be Friends willing to carry forward the legacy of faithfulness and obedience of past generations?