Testimony of Simplicity

The Testimony of Simplicity is the Quaker belief that a person ought to live his or her life simply in order to focus on what is most important and ignore or play down what is least important. It is the practice among Quakers (members of the Religious Society of Friends) of being more concerned with one’s inner condition than one’s outward appearance and with other people more than oneself. Friends believe that a person’s spiritual life and character are more important than the quantity of goods he possesses or his monetary worth. Friends also believe that one should use one’s resources, including money and time, deliberately in ways that are most likely to make life truly better for oneself and others.

General explanation

Like the other Friends testimonies, the Testimony of Simplicity is not a fixed or formalized creed but a mutually accepted set of principles and practices that emerged among Friends over time. It is open to modification as Friends listen for continuing revelation from God.

Early Friends believed that it was important to avoid fanciness in dress, speech, and material possessions, because those things tend to distract one from waiting on God’s personal guidance. They also tend to cause a person to focus on himself more than on his fellow human beings, in violation of Jesus’ teaching to “love thy neighbor as thyself.” This emphasis on "plainness", as it was called, made the Friends in certain times and places easily recognizable to the society around them, particularly by their plain dress in the 18th and 19th Centuries [http://books.google.com/books?id=gtytTEbrf6QC&pg=PA102&lpg=PA102&dq=Thomas+Hamm+plain+dress&source=web&ots=IRAi_NB9Gh&sig=8vENYHl7f1x3ICPUx_CzCVlt474&hl=en#PPA101,M1 Thomas D Hamm on Plainness in "The Quakers in America" on Google Books.] ] .

Simplicity to Friends has generally been a reference to material possessions. Friends have often limited their possessions to what they need to live their lives, rather than accumulating luxuries. The testimony is not just about the "nature" of one's material possessions, but rather also about one's attitude towards these material goods . Many Friends who have been considered exemplary have also been wealthy; their commitment to the testimony, however, led them to use their wealth for spiritual purposes, including aid to the poor and oppressed. On the other hand, some Friends, such as John Woolman, gave up much of their wealth and economic position when they felt it to be a spiritual burden .In recent decades Friends have given the Testimony an ecological dimension: that Friends should not use more than their fair share of the Earth's limited resources .

Simplicity in dress

Friends used to have a strong tradition of simplicity in dress, more properly called "plain dress". Plain dress generally meant wearing clothes that were very similar to Amish or conservative Mennonite dress: often in dark colors and lacking adornments such as fancy (or any) pockets, buttons, buckles, lace, or embroidery [ [http://www.quakerjane.com/spirit.friends/plain_dress-quaker.html "Quaker Jane" on Plain dress] ] [ [http://www.farnsworth.org.uk/quakers.htm Farnworth One-Name study - article comparing Quakers and Puritans.] ] . This was widely practiced until the late 19th and early 20th century, when most Friends began dressing more like other people .

Traditional plain dress survived longer in the conservative branches of Quakerism, which is today represented by meetings such as Ohio Yearly Meeting, where there exist Friends who have kept plain dress alive up to the present day. [ [http://www.conservativefriend.org/faq.htm#113077035 The Conservative Friend website FAQs: "So what about the funny clothes? Do you dress like the Amish?"] ] The number of contemporary Friends voluntarily taking traditional plain dress back up is growing and has been called by some Quakers "The New Plain". [ [http://brooklynQuaker.blogspot.com/2004/12/new-plain.html Brooklyn Quaker blog explains "New Plain".] ] [ [http://www.quakerranter.org/public_friends_rising_up_in_the_new_plain.php Martin Kelley's Quaker Ranter blog comments "Public Friends Rising Up in the New Plain".] ] .

The vast majority of Quakers today are all but indistinguishable from non-Quakers as far as style of clothing is concerned [ [http://www.conservativefriend.org/faq.htm#113077035 The Conservative Friend | An Outreach of Ohio Yearly Meeting of Friends ] ] [ [http://www.quakerinfo.org Quaker Information Center website: "Quakers are not: Amish, Anabaptists, Shakers or Puritans--we come from a separate tradition than these other groups. We mostly don't dress like the man on the box of oats anymore, and today we hardly ever call people "thee." "] /] .

Some Conservative Friends do not self-describe this witness as being part of their simplicity testimony, but rather their integrity testimony, [ [http://www.quaker.us/testimonies.html Conservative Friends of America website: Quaker testimonies] ] viewing it as an obedience to God's will rather than a witness to a human-generated ideal. [ [http://www.quakerjane.com/spirit.friends/plain_dress-reasons.html Quaker Jane website: "The Plain Dress Witness: Reasons Quaker Women Give for Going Plain".] ] Thomas Hamm, in his book "Quakers in America," describes a transition among most Friends from plainness to simplicity .

Simplicity in speech

Early Friends practiced plainness in speech by not referring to people in the "fancy" ways that were customary. Often Friends would address high-ranking persons using the familiar forms of "thee" and "thou", instead of the respectful "you". Later, as "thee" and "thou" disappeared from everyday English usage, many Quakers continued to use these words as a form of "plain speech", though the original reason for this usage had disappeared; their usage was also grammatically distinctive, saying "thee is" instead of "thou art", a holdover from a dialect formerly common in the north of England. Today there are still Friends that will use these terms with other Quakers.

In languages that today maintain the T-V distinction, usage varies. Following the British usage, early francophone Quakers preferred the use of the more informal "tu" to address even those who would by convention be addressed with the more formal "vous". In more contemporary times, however, usage has swung the other way, and French-speaking Quakers today are "more" likely than others to use the formal "vous". In part, this is a recognition of the complexity of the notion of simplicity in speech, whose intent might be understood to be not a requirement of informality, but a desire to address everyone "simply", "i.e.", uniformly. The rejection of the past use of "tu" by white French missionaries to refer to Africans may be a factor in the contemporary francophone usage [ [http://www.quaker.org/fwcc/gloss/fran.html#tutoyer FWCC Glossary] ]

Honorific titles, even Mr., Mrs. and Miss were often avoided by early Friends. Instead Friends tended to address each other by first and last name with no title. This often holds true among Quakers today. In many Quaker communities children address adults by their first names, and in many Quaker schools teachers are called by their first names as well. This practice is now considered more a part of the Testimony of Equality than a part of the Testimony of Simplicity.

Early Friends also objected to the usual names of the days and months in the English language, because many of them referred to Roman or Norse gods, such as Mars (March) or Thor (Thursday) and emperors, such as Julius (July). As a result, the days of the week were known as "First Day" for Sunday, "Second Day" for Monday, and so forth. Similarly, the months of the year were "First Month" for January, "Second Month" for February, and so forth (though researchers should remember however that before the Gregorian calendar was adopted, "First Month" was March rather than the current January). Many Friends organizations continue to use the "simple calendar" for official records.

Additionally early Friends did not, and many modern Friends do not, swear oaths, even in courtrooms (a choice that has been allowed in Britain since 1695, and is protected in the United States by the Constitution, and one that can be problematic elsewhere). Instead they "affirm" that they are going to tell the truth. This was considered an aspect of simplicity because it was simply telling the truth rather than embellishing it with an oath, which is not necessary if one is supposed to always tell the truth. In a similar manner Friends avoid haggling over prices. They simply set a fixed price that they considered fair, which went against the custom of earlier times, but was felt by them to be simpler and more honest (this practice is generally considered more a part of the Testimony of Integrity than a part of the Testimony of Simplicity).

implicity in general life

The Testimony of Simplicity is an important part of Quaker life, and many examples of its influence can be seen in both day-to-day and ceremonious practices. In keeping with the testimony, for example, many meetings that have care of a graveyard ask that those erecting monuments to deceased Friends keep the testimony in mind and erect only a simple, low-lying stone.

Misconceptions

Common misconceptions about Quaker plainness.
*People think Quakers today will look like the illustration on the Quaker Oats package. Most Quakers dress like everyone else.
*People often confuse the Amish, the Mennonites and the Shakers with Quakers. Although one can note similarities among these groups, the Amish, Mennonites and Shakers are separate and different from Friends [ [http://www.quakerinfo.org/ Quaker information and religious beliefs ] ] .
*Many often think Quakers in all periods and all places had a required "uniform" that was recognizable. The truth is that the typical dress of the Quakers was subject to the individual conscience in most times and places, and the actual practice has always been varied.
**"But contrary to this, we (are told we) must look at no colours, nor make anything that is changeable colours as the hills are, 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." -Margaret Fell
*Finally, Quakers do not consider poverty to be "inherently" virtuous.

References

Sources

* Hamm, Thomas D. "Quakers in America", (Contemporary American Religion series), Columbia University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-231-12362-0. "NOTE": The section on "Simplicity" is at pp.101-108. Some pages from this section are available on Google Books.
* Fager, Charles E. "The Quaker Testimony of Simplicity" in "Quaker Religious Thought", Vol. 14, #1. Summer, 1972.
* Foster, Richard J. "Freedom of Simplicity". Harper & Row, 1981. ISBN 0-06-104385-0
* Pym, Jim. "Listening To The Light: How To Bring Quaker Simplicity And Integrity Into Our Lives". Rider Books, 1999.
* Whitmire, Catherine. "Plain Living: A Quaker Path to Simplicity", Sorin Books, 2001. ISBN 1-893732-28-2

External links

* [http://quakersfp.live.poptech.coop/qfp/chap20/20.27.html From "Quaker Faith and Practice", Britain Yearly Meeting]
* [http://www.quakerjane.com/spirit.friends/plain_dress-reasons.html Reasons Women Give for Going Plain]