'C' is for Celestial Inhabitation
In this posting I aim to explain the importance
of celestial inhabitation to first generation Quakers and indicate why this
understanding was suppressed by later Friends. I want to argue that this caused
a significant change in early Quaker theology that had a number of negative
implications and suggest that Friends might wish to revisit the vision of
celestial inhabitation and consider whether it has something to contribute to our
contemporary faith and practice.
1. The Early
Quaker Position
A. Introduction
Early Quakerism was founded on a dramatic
experience of Christ returning in Spirit to teach and transform his people so
that they could say like the apostle Paul “It is no longer I who lives but
Christ who lives in me” (Gal. 2:20). Such an experience of intimate union with
God has been called celestial inhabitation. This was a highly controversial
position to hold within seventeenth century Puritan England. The dominant form
of Calvinism rejected the idea of divine immanence and the possibility of
liberation from sin in this life. Therefore the claim that Christ might dwell
within a person (what Richard Bailey has called a ‘Christopresent theology’)
was regarded as blasphemous and got many early Friends into trouble with the
authorities, most notoriously in the case of James Nayler who was convicted of
‘horrid blasphemy’ and endured a most brutal punishment. Here we see James
Nayler, at the beginning of his Quaker ministry responding to the accusations of
Quaker opponents:
And thou art offended at the
"knowledge of Christ within the saints"; art not thou ashamed to
profess the Scripture and deny what they witness? Which of
the saints did witness any other knowledge of Christ after his ascension but as
he was revealed in them? And all that know him in Spirit know him within them;
and is there any Christ but one? Because thou sayest, "they know no other Christ but a
Christ within them"; and thou that knows no Christ but without, ye know
him not but by hearsay; and then art not thou that notionist thou speaks on? James
Nayler – A Few Words Occasioned (1653)
In making sense of their spiritual
experiences, early Friends found plenty of references within the New Testament
that appeared to validate their understanding of celestial inhabitation.
Writing in his Journal, George Fox argued that the Quaker position was no
different to that of the apostle Paul:
Paul saith, “The first man is from
the earth, earthly (1 Cor. 15:47). “And as we have born the image of the
earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly (1 Cor. 15:49). And “we
have this treasure in earthen vessels (2 Cor. 4:7). “And I live” he said, “Yet
not I, but Christ liveth in me (Gal. 2:20) who is the life of all God’s people.
George Fox - Journal
Based on the testimony of scripture, Fox
and early Friends believed that celestial inhabitation was a normal experience
within the early church where individuals and communities were led by the
living presence of Christ dwelling within them:
The scriptures saith God will dwell in men,
and walk in men … Doth not the Apostle say, the saints were partakers of the
divine nature? And that God dwells in the saints, and Christ is in them, except
they be reprobates? And do not the saints come to eat the flesh of Christ? And
if they eat his flesh, is it not within them? George Fox – Great
Mystery of the Great Whore (works volume 3, pp.181-82)
B. The Incarnation – Heaven and Earth
Unite
“And the
Word became flesh and lived among us” (John 1:14).
For early Friends, a crucial implication
of the incarnation was that, in the person of Christ Jesus, heaven and earth
were united. The ‘epistle’ to the Hebrews had great resonance for them, partly
because of its vision of the new covenant (see below) but also because of the
way in which the incarnation was seen to break the boundaries dividing spirit
and matter, heaven and earth. In this sense, Christ acts as a bridge between
the divine spiritual realm and the created physical realm and in doing so he sacralizes
the material creation by his divine indwelling. So although the language of
early Quakerism sounds very dualistic, in fact the experiences of Friends
enabled them to transcend dualistic thinking in this way.
C. The New Covenant
Early Quaker understandings were based
on a fundamental distinction between the old and the new covenants that can
been found in the writings of the apostle Paul and in Hebrews. In the old
covenant the relationship between humanity and God was regulated and mediated
through outward forms (e.g. outward law, temple, priests and sacrifices)
whereas in the new covenant these are all fulfilled inwardly and spiritually by
Christ (Jeremiah 31:31-34). In the new covenant, by his own sacrifice, Christ
ended the old form of law and fulfilled it by writing it on people’s hearts. A
life lived in unity with God was now possible because Christ could dwell within
the hearts of his people.
D. The Significance of Pentecost
At Pentecost
the spirit was poured out on all flesh (Acts 2:1-21) ensuring that entry into
the new covenant in which heaven and earth overlapped was available to all
people. Early Quakerism was Pentecostal in the sense that it was characterised
by a transformational experience of the Spirit of Christ dwelling within people
as an inward teacher, priest, prophet and king.
E. The Body as the Temple of God
God is spirit (John 4:24) and humans are
flesh. However, as we have seen in the incarnation and the new covenant, Spirit
and flesh become one (heaven and earth meet). In the new covenant, God’s
dwelling place is the human tabernacle, people are gathered into a temple of
living stones (1 Peter 2:4-5) and Christ dwells within them in their measure
(Ephesians 4:7). The physical Quaking
of early Friends can therefore be understood as an external manifestation of the
breaking open of the creature and of the Spirit pouring in (as heaven and earth
connects).
F. The Body of Christ
It is quite normal for Christians to refer to the church as the
body of Christ. However, for early Friends this was understood in an almost
literal sense. More than in merely a metaphorical sense, Christ was seen to be
the head of the church, controlling both the individual and corporate body. The
true church became Christ’s body continuing his work within the world.
9. The Transformation of the Whole
Creation
Another defining feature of the early
Quaker vision was the belief that in Christ people were restored to an Edenic state
of innocence in perfect harmony with God and with the rest of the creation
(Moore 2000, p.83). This was a restoration of God’s original intention for the creation.
Humanity had been created to reflect the nature of God in creation but a loss
of union with God threw the created order into disarray, a state of affairs
characterised by separation, disunity, disorder and disharmony (Wilcox 1995,
p.21 & 25). Through the indwelling of Christ this gulf was bridged. Early
Friends felt that the wisdom and order of creation was revealed to them, that
they were brought into harmony with this wisdom and order and could understand
and practice right relationship with and right use of the creation
3. The
Biblical References
Let us now look at a number of biblical
references that early Friends used to support their belief in celestial
inhabitation:
a. God’s promise is that we will transcend human
limitations and come to share in the divine nature:
Thus he has given us,
through these things, his precious and very great promises, so that through
them you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of lust,
and may become participants in the divine nature. (2 Peter 1:4)
b. God’s temple is now the human body and the Holy
Spirit dwells within it:
Or do you not
know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which
you have from God, and that you are not your own? (1 Cor. 6:19)
…like living stones,
let yourselves be built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to
offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 2:5)
c. Christ dwells within us in part but this can grow
until it reaches fullness:
“one
Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of
all, who is above all and through all and in all. But each of us
was given grace according to the measure of Christ’s gift. (Ephesians
4:5-7)
…until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the
knowledge of the Son of God, to maturity, to the measure of the full stature of
Christ. (Ephesians 4:13)
d. When Christ
dwells within us we are transformed and Jesus becomes visible again in our own
lives:
You
yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts,
to be known and read by all; and you show that you are a letter of Christ,
prepared by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not
on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts. (2 Cor. 3:2-3)
…always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of
Jesus may also be made visible in our bodies. For while
we live, we are always being given up to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the
life of Jesus may be made visible in our mortal flesh. (2 Cor.
4:10-11)
4. The
Quaker Rejection of Celestial Inhabitation
During
the 1650 the emerging movement had been on the offensive. However, with the
restoration of the British monarchy in 1660 Quakers (along with other
dissenting religious groups) suffered severe persecution at the hands of a
government that was committed to imposing the establish church and cracking
down on nonconformity. Hundreds of Friends were imprisoned and most of the
first generation leaders lost their lives due to the terrible prison conditions
of the time. In such circumstances it is not surprising that corporately
Quakers became concerned to manage their public image and campaign for
religious toleration. In the face of accusations of doctrinal heresy, religious
enthusiasm and political subversion, Friends began to emphasise their
orthodoxy, their peaceable intentions and their respectability. In these new
circumstances the celestial inhabitation and the ‘Christopresent’ theology of
the 1650s seemed far too unorthodox, threatening and enthusiastic to a Quaker
movement that was losing its charismatic fire and becoming an ordered
community. As a result, Friends suppressed this aspect of the early Quaker
vision and in some cases censored and altered earlier writings that were
regarded as unsafe. Michelle Tartar has argued that in Robert Barclay’s Apology for the True Christian Divinity Quakers turned to a traditional theology of dualism
(radically separating the spiritual and the material/bodily) “Severing the
‘inward’ from the ‘outward’, Barclay disempowered the original Quaker notion of
celestial flesh by replacing Fox’s literalization of the spirit with a more
traditional and figurative hermeneutics of religious worship.” The ‘corporeal’
experience was replaced by a rational/ philosophical one (Tartar 2004, pp.93-94).
It can be argued that the legacy of this transformation in Quaker theology has
had a number of negative implications (Johns 2013, pp.7-15). These include a
tendency:
i) To mistrust the human
body and suppress active physical expression.
ii) To neglect the goodness
of the physical creation in favour of a disembodied spiritual realm.
iii) To adopt an
inward-looking and introverted spirituality.
Although this transition did not undermine the basic Quaker
commitment to the spiritual equality of women, it may well have resulted in
greater restrictions on a woman’s ability to express herself and take the role
of prophet. The radical freedom of the 1650s was strongly predicated on the
assertion that it was Christ living through the human vessel. In such
circumstances gender distinctions were deemed irrelevant.
5.
Contemporary Significance and Implications
In revisiting the vision of celestial
inhabitation and considering whether it has something to contribute to contemporary
Quaker faith and practice, Friends (particularly those within the Liberal
strand of Quakerism) might like to consider a number of queries:
a. Overcoming dualism – Is our faith and practice based on an artificial
separation between the spiritual/heavenly and the physical/earthly? Does our
focus on the inward and the spiritual lead to a neglect of the physical, the
bodily and the natural? What might a
spirituality founded on the unity of spirit and matter and heaven and earth
look like?
b. Valuing the material creation – Is our corporate concern
for the beauty and variety of the creation (e.g. Advices and Queries no. 42)
consistent with a faith and practice which sometimes focuses on the inward and
spiritual at the expense of the outward and the physical? How can we bring these
two aspects of Quakerism into greater harmony?
c. Valuing the body and physical expression – Is our faith and practice
weakened by a neglect of the body and an avoidance of physical expression? Can
we find a way of holding together inward contemplative practice and outwardly embodied
physical expression? Can these two dimensions of human life be united within
our spirituality?
d. The possibility of real transformation – has our vision of the power
of the Spirit become too limited and domesticated? In focusing on a more ‘realistic’
role for the Spirit as a source of guidance, have we neglected its more radical
transformative potential? Does the vision of new birth through the power of the
Spirit have any meaning to us today?
e. Heaven on earth – do we merely pay lip service to the idea that it is
possible to create heaven on earth or do we really believe it? How might the
early Quaker experience of living in the place where heaven and earth meet,
inspire our witness today? Can we again be a people who embody this vision?
f. Learning from other faith traditions – can we find inspiration
in other faith traditions? How do we relate to other spirit-led churches such
as those based on Wesleyan holiness (e.g. Methodism and Pentecostalism)? Can we
find inspiration in Eastern Orthodox pneumatology in which the Holy Spirit fills all
things and humans and the whole creation are on a path towards deification (theosis)?
Can we learn from ancient and contemporary forms of animism?
6. References
Bailey, Richard
(1992) New Light on George Fox &
Early Quakerism: The Making and Unmaking of a God
(Edwin Mellen Press)
Dandelion, Pink
(2004) The Creation of Quaker Theory:
Inner Perspectives (Ashgate)
Fox, George (1975) The
Works of George Fox, eight volumes (AMS Press)
Johns, David
L (2013) Quakering Theology: Essays
on Worship, Tradition and Christian Faith (Ashgate)
Moore,
Rosemary (2000) The Light in
their Consciences: Faith,
Practices, and Personalities
in Early British Quakerism, 1646 -1666 (Pennsylvania State
University Press)
Nayler, James &
Kuenning, Licia (2003-9) The Works of James Nayler, four volumes
(Quaker Heritage Press)
Nickalls, J Ed. (1997) The Journal of George Fox (Philadelphia
Yearly Meeting)
Spencer, Carole (2007) Holiness: The Soul of Quakerism (Paternoster
Press)
Tartar,
Michele L (2004) ‘Go North!’ The Journey
towards First-generation Friends and their Prophesy of
Celestial Flesh (in Dandelion, P. 2004)
Wilcox,
Catherine (1995) Theology and Women’s
Ministry in Seventeenth Century English Quakerism (Edwin
Mellen Press)
Thanks for this very thought-provoking post Stuart. I wasn't familiar with the term 'celestial inhabitation', although the experience of 'Christ who lives in me' has always seemed to me central to a Quaker understanding of Christianity, so it is helpful to see the theology teased out here.The process you describe of downgrading the role of the Spirit to one of rational guidance, rather than radical transformation, is important. It was perhaps given greater momentum by the Enlightenment, and fed into modern secular rationalism too?
ReplyDeleteI'm really enjoying this alphabetical series and looking forward to 'D' for... Diggers? Deism?
In Friendship,
Craig
Thanks Craig! Yes, rationalism and Deism played their part but the desire for respectability and religious toleration was probably decisive in the 17th century. I am still discerning what 'D' should be. The Diggers are on the list!
ReplyDeleteThanks for this Stuart! I do think that dualism is very present in our local meetings. Silent meeting for worship is often given precedence over all other community activities. I would like to see Quakers eating together every week as a matter of course. Plus there's certainly a lot we can learn from the Orthodox church. That icon of the world full of burning bushes!
ReplyDeleteThank Mark! I agree about the Orthodox church. I am about to do some serious engagement with Orthodox theology and spirituality in preparation for a course at Woodbrooke in October. It is maybe not too surprising that some Friends seeking a deeper engagement with a mystical Christian spirituality have moved to the orthodox church.
DeleteThank you Stuart, I think this is avery important entry in your blog and hope that it finds a wide readership. You are putting your finger on a deep and fundamental issue within Christian spiritual understanding. The early Friends really grasped something in this understanding of 'celestial habitation' and it is tragic that it was lost so very early on due to the pressures of conformity. This wholistic understanding of the relationship between the spiritual and physical, so central to the Jesus perspective, almost entirely lost due to the influence of Gnosticism and Neo-Platonism, were once again beginning to be recovered by early friends only to be snatched away once more. It is a huge challenge for us not to let it happen again but to establish it a a central understanding of Christian spiritual reality. I felt that each of your Contemporary Significance and Implications really hit the mark; each needing careful engagement and debate to open them up. Your find comment about there being much to learn from ancient and contemporary animism was nothing short of music to my soul!
ReplyDeleteThank you Noel! In forging a new nondualistic, Jesus-centred, shalom focused Christian spirituality we do have an mmensely rich and fruitful heritage to draw upon despite the persistent presence of the dualistic error!
ReplyDeleteVery stimulating, but I have a question about dualism in Fox himself. I was told that in the phrase walking cheerfully over the world the word 'over' actually referred to the action of treading down (the context was how to translate this into German - durch meaning through [the world] and uber suggesting pressing down). So that Fox was talking of suppressing creatureliness, fallenness, that which must be eliminated I suppose for the 'celestial habitation' to take place. Now Paul of Tarsus talks of body (soma), flesh (sarx) and pneuma (spirit) - the body is a given - how else can incarnation take place? - but sarx leads to spiritual death. Thus there is not so much a dualism as a trialogue. Is this reflected in the development of Quaker thinking? An obsession with sarx (creatureliness?) is transcended by the inspiration of pneuma (the work of the Spirit) and might lead to a greater respect for soma (the glory of creation)?
ReplyDeleteHi Harvey, my sense is that 'the world' as Fox and early Friends used this term, is not the physical creation but rather fallen and deluded human ideas, ideologies, systems and structures (produced by a turn away from God and towards 'the serpent'). When the divine Spirit indwells the physical creature, the creature's relationship to God and to the creation is transformed (and deluded and fallen human 'notions are driven out). I very much like you final sentence and I think it is consistent with my reading of early Friends. However, I would want to define 'sarx' as alienated and deluded creatureliness rather than creatureliness per se. Stuart.
DeletePS - I think that a positive evaluation of God's good creation can be seen very clearly in James Nayler's tract 'The Lamb's War Against the Man of Sin' of 1658:
ReplyDelete“The Lamb's quarrel is not against the creation, for then should his weapons be carnal, as the weapons of the worldly spirits are: "For we war not with flesh and blood," nor against the creation of God; that we love; but we fight against the spiritual powers of wickedness, which wars against God in the creation, and captivates the creation into the lust which wars against the soul, and that the creature may be delivered into its liberty prepared for the sons of God. And this is not against love, nor everlasting peace, but that without which can be no true love nor lasting peace”
I have just read your comment on my response re sarx etc. (I have been away in Spain hence the tardiness of this reply). Thanks so much for the Nayler quote from the Lamb's War, very helpful and uplifting. Is there anything you could recommend which would elaborate for me the use of the word creatureliness in early Quaker discourse? It is one of those words, like perfection, which can be very ambiguous and at times quite unhelpful in contemporary discussions of Quaker spirituality.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the terms flesh and creatureliness are often misunderstood and interpretation ambiguous. The Michele Tartar reference above might help a bit. The issue is very much rooted in the Augustinian and Luther/Reformation reading of the distinction between spirit and flesh in the Pauline epistles. You might like to have a look at what Tim Peat Ashworth has to say about this in his book 'Paul's Necessary Sin'.
ReplyDeleteHarvey - you might also have a look at Walter Wink's references to 'sarx' in his book 'Engaging the Powers'.
ReplyDeleteI see this passage as pointing towards what you're finding in later books: [John16.7]: "It is to your advantage that I am going away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you." As I read this, it is not about Jesus going off to some nonphysical location where the Spirit might be found and sent to Earth... What it suggests: 'As long as I am with you, you keep looking out at this man here and seeking God that way. When I am no longer physically present, this will force you to look inward; then you find Me where you need to recognize Me.'
ReplyDeleteYes, very helpful forrest, thank you!
ReplyDeleteThank you Stuart.
ReplyDeleteI think 'celestial inhabitation' is a difficult term and can easily be misunderstood. I am not saying you have, but if taken literally, as Patricia Crawford warned ("Women and Religion in England", p. 178), it can lead to all sorts of problems which I think manifest themselves to some extent in Richard Bailey's work.
Can I take this opportunity therefore to refer you and others to pp. 266-7 of my "The Early Quakers and the Kingdom of God" where I address this particular and very interesting early Quaker experience, indeed even to my footnote 46 on p. 267. I think it is much better, frankly, to address their Christ/Logos mysticism, as I call it, rather than any possible 'celestial inhabitation'.
Hi Gerard,
ReplyDeleteI share your caution about the concept of celestial inhabitation. Although it is very interesting, I do think that Richard Bailey's work uses an overly literalistic interpretation.
God is Spirit and humans are creatures. The Spirit can indwell the created and transform it but that does not make the created divine. I think the Eastern Orthodox distinction between Divine essence and Divine energies is helpful. We can partake in divine energies but not in the Divine essence.
Of course in 17th century England, to subscribe (as I believe early Friend did) to the Pauline proclamation that 'it is no longer I who lives but it is Christ who lives in me' was regarded as blasphemous.
Shalom, Stuart.