As a realist, consistency was never a characteristic of Penn’s political practice. When
he was young, he was an ardent promoter of the enlightened constitutional theory,
longing for founding his own government in a distant colony to realize his political
ideals. In 1670s, his efforts to eliminate authoritarianism and promote religious
toleration and civil liberties outpaced any Englishman of his era. As he wrote, “we
lay a foundation for after ages to understand their liberty as men and Christians,
that they my not be brought in bondage, but by their own consent; for we put the
power in the people.” 1
But at the same time, as a British aristocrat and an intimate friend of the Crown,
authoritarianism was actually deeply rooted in his thoughts. He was essentially a
conservative thinker, committed to well-ordered social system, where distinction
amongst people is upheld. Although he was eager to get rid of the rigid hierarchy in
the Church of England, he did not live in a vacuum.
William Penn, the Quaker governor, was different enough from his Quaker people.
Does it suggest that religious ideology can be better preserved in the lower classes
in the society? Elites are inclined to compromise to power. A proprietary governor
might not be a firm promoter of political liberty.
Among the various religious factions in the colonies, Quakerism may be the best
breeding ground for political liberty. Broken away from the hierarchical Church of
England, they rushed to another extreme in seeking individual freedom. Quakerism
was never a scripture-based Christianity denomination in the 17th Century. Different
from Puritans, they did not base their belief on any authoritative rule (including
Christian Bible) or systematic theology. Instead, they focused on their “inward light”
and sought spiritual inspirations, which might lead to very personal interpretations
of religious principles. It seems that Quakerism is no more than a reflection of
political liberalism in the religious life. It was particularly attractive to the people in
the lower classes in a society who were not interested in systematic theological
teachings and tired of hierarchical social structure (noting that a majority of early
Quakers were English farmers). I doubt whether Puritan’s evangelical approach had
ever been appealing to the general population. It was once imposed on the people,
such as what happened in Geneva; but it could not become widely popular in a
society. In a generation deeply influenced by the Enlightenment, John Blackwell, the
Puritan deputy governor’s failure in Pennsylvania was almost destined. For the
same reason, the Pennsylvanians deviated from Penn’s proprietary Frame of
Government to seek a liberal revision.
The underlying reasons for Quakerism’s success in Pennsylvania in 17th Century
also explain the ever increasing influence of Pentecostal churches all around the
world today. Reformed churches, the descendent of Puritans, attract only a very
1
William Markham to Governor Benjamin Fletcher, May 20, 1696, Calendar of State Papers, Colonial
Series, America and West Indies, 1696-97 (London, 1904), p. 27xi.
limited number of people, primarily intellectual thinkers. America is not as religious
as it claimed to be since the very beginning. In Pennsylvania, Quakerism was merely
a disguise for the individualists to pursue their political goals. The governing
philosophy there is not a specific religious denomination, but the widespread
liberalism and individualism.