You’ll Never Be as Radical as This 18th-Century Quaker Dwarf

1,904 Views | 52 Replies | Last: 6 yr ago by 7thGenTexan
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You'll Never Be as Radical as This 18th-Century Quaker Dwarf

Oh, I had never heard of this man, but definitely need to learn more about him. I love reading about these great men whose stories have been largely ignored and forgotten by history.

Quote:

It was September 1738, and Benjamin Lay had walked 20 miles, subsisting on "acorns and peaches," to reach the Quakers' Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. Beneath his overcoat he wore a military uniform and a sword both anathema to Quaker teachings. He also carried a hollowed-out book with a secret compartment, into which he had tucked a tied-off animal bladder filled with bright red pokeberry juice.

When it was Lay's turn to speak, he rose to address the Quakers, many of whom had grown rich and bought African slaves. He was a dwarf, barely four feet tall, but from his small body came a thunderous voice. God, he intoned, respects all people equally, be they rich or poor, man or woman, white or black.

Throwing his overcoat aside, he spoke his prophecy: "Thus shall God shed the blood of those persons who enslave their fellow creatures." He raised the book above his head and plunged the sword through it. As the "blood" gushed down his arm, several members of the congregation swooned. He then splattered it on the heads and bodies of the slave keepers. His message was clear: Anyone who failed to heed his call must expect death of body and soul.

Lay did not resist when his fellow Quakers threw him out of the building. He knew he would be disowned by his beloved community for his performance, but he had made his point. As long as Quakers owned slaves, he would use his body and his words to disrupt their hypocritical routines.

Quote:

Lay, a hunchback as well as a dwarf, was the world's first revolutionary abolitionist. Against the common sense of the day, when slavery seemed to most people as immutable as the stars in the heavens, Lay imagined a new world in which people would live simply, make their own food and clothes, and respect nature. He lived in a cave in Abington, Pa., ate only fruits and vegetables "the innocent fruits of the earth" and championed animal rights. He refused to consume any commodity produced by slave labor and was known to walk abruptly out of a dinner in protest when he found out that his host owned slaves.

Quote:

Disparaged and abandoned by his fellow Quakers, Lay eventually helped win the debate over slavery. He wanted to provoke, to unsettle, even to confound to make people think and act. His greatest power, indeed his genius, lay in his gift as an agitator. In every meeting he attended, public or private, he drew a line over the issue of slavery. He asked everyone he met, Which side are you on?

Slowly, over a quarter-century, his relentless agitation changed hearts and minds. In 1758 a friend arrived at his cave to inform him that the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting had finally taken the first big step toward abolition, ruling that those who traded in slaves would henceforth be disciplined and perhaps driven from the community. Lay fell silent for a few reverential moments, then rose from his chair, praised God and announced, "I can now die in peace." He died a year later, an outsider to the Quaker community he loved, but a moral giant of a man.
Martin Q. Blank
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh man, that's radical.
Frok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"You'll Never Be as Radical as This 18th-Century Quaker Dwarf"

Hold my beer

Create Account
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think it would be pretty radical to own a slave today.
cohibasymas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Great story thank for sharing.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


Martin Q. Blank
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.
And he was a troll...literally.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG


Look at all those virtue-signalers and their props, right? Your comment is nonsense.
Frok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


At that time it certainly was not virtue-signaling. He was standing up against an institution he thought was wrong and he confronted it.

Virtue-signaling is meaningless actions that have no effect other than make yourself look good.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?


No. He performed actual miracles. You would have thought he would have lobbied Pilate to free Roman slaves if his goal was social justice.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?


No. He performed actual miracles. You would have thought he would have lobbied Pilate to free Roman slaves if his goal was social justice.


I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Is it all virtue signaling if you don't perform miracles? Is protesting slavery just virtue signaling since Jesus didn't say anything about it? What, exactly, is virtue signaling and what is legitimate protest in your mind?
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"Virtue signaling" and "trolling" are two terms that have been rendered meaningless on this site by their non-stop misuse. Only on texags is an 18th century Christian calling on his brothers and sisters to reject the evil of slavery considered "virtue signaling".
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm guessing UTExan never "virtue signals" by condemning abortion.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RetiredAg said:

I'm guessing UTExan never "virtue signals" by condemning abortion.


Actually I don't. Although late term abortions where the fetus is more fully developed can be troubling. The law of the land is what it is and I don't possess the medical competency to judge each case.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?


No. He performed actual miracles. You would have thought he would have lobbied Pilate to free Roman slaves if his goal was social justice.


I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Is it all virtue signaling if you don't perform miracles? Is protesting slavery just virtue signaling since Jesus didn't say anything about it? What, exactly, is virtue signaling and what is legitimate protest in your mind?


Legitimate protest is fine if an issue bothers you. I would hesitate to link such protests to Christian faith because that presupposes all Christians should agree with a particular viewpoint.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
UTExan said:

RetiredAg said:

I'm guessing UTExan never "virtue signals" by condemning abortion.


Actually I don't. Although late term abortions where the fetus is more fully developed can be troubling. The law of the land is what it is and I don't possess the medical competency to judge each case.

Wow. I just assumed you were anti-abortion (Not legally, but morally due to faith). So is there any immoral act you'll condemn, or do you hide behind the "law of the land" for all things? I'm not even talking about calling for a law. Just you, as someone that claims Christ...are you unwilling to make a moral statement about anything?

Also, you've failed to explain how standing against slavery in the 18th century is virtue signaling. Surely you can see your use of that term makes no sense.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?


No. He performed actual miracles. You would have thought he would have lobbied Pilate to free Roman slaves if his goal was social justice.


I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Is it all virtue signaling if you don't perform miracles? Is protesting slavery just virtue signaling since Jesus didn't say anything about it? What, exactly, is virtue signaling and what is legitimate protest in your mind?


Legitimate protest is fine if an issue bothers you. I would hesitate to link such protests to Christian faith because that presupposes all Christians should agree with a particular viewpoint.

That's very morally relativistic of you. There are things all Christians should agree on. The fact that there isn't agreement, even on evils like slavery, torture, abortion, etc doesn't make the stance any less right or Christ-centered.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?


No. He performed actual miracles. You would have thought he would have lobbied Pilate to free Roman slaves if his goal was social justice.


I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Is it all virtue signaling if you don't perform miracles? Is protesting slavery just virtue signaling since Jesus didn't say anything about it? What, exactly, is virtue signaling and what is legitimate protest in your mind?


Legitimate protest is fine if an issue bothers you. I would hesitate to link such protests to Christian faith because that presupposes all Christians should agree with a particular viewpoint.


Should Christians be okay with slavery? What defines "legitimate protest"?
Martin Q. Blank
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I, for one, am against slavery. I know there are many out there who are not, but I think humans should be treated with dignity and respect. I am wanting to be radical. But after reading this article, I realize I have my work cut out for me.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RetiredAg said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?


No. He performed actual miracles. You would have thought he would have lobbied Pilate to free Roman slaves if his goal was social justice.


I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Is it all virtue signaling if you don't perform miracles? Is protesting slavery just virtue signaling since Jesus didn't say anything about it? What, exactly, is virtue signaling and what is legitimate protest in your mind?


Legitimate protest is fine if an issue bothers you. I would hesitate to link such protests to Christian faith because that presupposes all Christians should agree with a particular viewpoint.

That's very morally relativistic of you. There are things all Christians should agree on. The fact that there isn't agreement, even on evils like slavery, torture, abortion, etc doesn't make the stance any less right or Christ-centered.
Christianity has outlived every cultural norm confronting it. It is not threatened by the excesses of the political right or left. Your citation of torture is an interesting one. If one's wife, son or daughter is being held hostage with the threat of death or being sold into prostitution, I can almost guarantee the family will allow morally for a suspect to be tortured to get the necessary information facilitating a rescue. Unlike you, most of my professional life has been spent in military or police service."Law of the land" (statutory or case law) serves as a moderating factor in human relations, as imperfect as it is, which is likely the reason Paul instructed Christians to be subject to civil authorities. Similarly, slavery as practiced over the millennia has taken different forms but it is still forced servitude, which I personally oppose based on my faith. That does not mean that I want or need to force YOU to believe that. Those who NEED others to agree with them really may need some good mental hygiene disciplines. I suspect that your issue with me is that you believe Christianity should be more social while I believe it should be more personal.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?


No. He performed actual miracles. You would have thought he would have lobbied Pilate to free Roman slaves if his goal was social justice.


I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Is it all virtue signaling if you don't perform miracles? Is protesting slavery just virtue signaling since Jesus didn't say anything about it? What, exactly, is virtue signaling and what is legitimate protest in your mind?


Legitimate protest is fine if an issue bothers you. I would hesitate to link such protests to Christian faith because that presupposes all Christians should agree with a particular viewpoint.


Should Christians be okay with slavery? What defines "legitimate protest"?
Legitimate protest=lawful, peaceful, persuasive with the force of a powerful moral argument. The dwarf, within his own social and religious circle engaged in what was judged as legitimate protest while outsiders may consider it excessive and self-righteous. Recall some abolitionists preached the need to kill up to 300,000 white southern men, women and children and collected money to arm John Brown with rifles. Consider also the conduct of northern armies in the south in the Shenandoah Valley and later Georgia where they raped, looted and burned as a matter of policy, destroying foodstuffs of the civilian population.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

Christianity has outlived every cultural norm confronting it. It is not threatened by the excesses of the political right or left.
Standing up against evil isn't because we feel Christianity is threatened. It's because we are to stand against evil. It's not about right or left, but righteousness. Hiding behind the law is a cop out.
Quote:

Your citation of torture is an interesting one. If one's wife, son or daughter is being held hostage with the threat of death or being sold into prostitution, I can almost guarantee the family will allow morally for a suspect to be tortured to get the necessary information facilitating a rescue.
What the family will allow is irrelevant. The family doesn't dictate what is, or isn't moral, at least from a Christian perspective. Torture is patently anti-Christ.

Quote:

Unlike you, most of my professional life has been spent in military or police service. "Law of the land" (statutory or case law) serves as a moderating factor in human relations, as imperfect as it is,
I've worn the costume of a soldier before. It doesn't absolve me of evil committed while doing so.
Quote:

which is likely the reason Paul instructed Christians to be subject to civil authorities.
I do believe we should be subject to civil authorities. When we break the law for righteousness sake, we should be willing to submit ourselves to the state's punishment.

Quote:

Similarly, slavery as practiced over the millennia has taken different forms but it is still forced servitude, which I personally oppose based on my faith. That does not mean that I want or need to force YOU to believe that.
The Quaker in the OP was addressing his fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. You claimed he was "virtue signaling" for calling on the church to reject an evil institution. Again, your claim is nonsense.

Quote:

Those who NEED others to agree with them really may need some good mental hygiene disciplines. I suspect that your issue with me is that you believe Christianity should be more social while I believe it should be more personal.
Christianity isn't an "individualistic" faith. We are all part of one body. When one claims Christ, yet embraces or is silent about evil, it's not just he that suffers. It harms the entire church body. It's not about "needing" others to agree. It's about calling on the church to be a witness to His Kingdom, and not sheepishly hiding behind the skirt of the state to justify silence.

So, I take it you do not agree with the actions of people like Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks or anyone in the long history of the church who has engaged in civil disobedience.

PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

Legitimate protest=lawful, peaceful, persuasive with the force of a powerful moral argument.
No, sometimes the most legitimate protests are not lawful.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?


No. He performed actual miracles. You would have thought he would have lobbied Pilate to free Roman slaves if his goal was social justice.


I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Is it all virtue signaling if you don't perform miracles? Is protesting slavery just virtue signaling since Jesus didn't say anything about it? What, exactly, is virtue signaling and what is legitimate protest in your mind?


Legitimate protest is fine if an issue bothers you. I would hesitate to link such protests to Christian faith because that presupposes all Christians should agree with a particular viewpoint.


Should Christians be okay with slavery? What defines "legitimate protest"?
Legitimate protest=lawful, peaceful, persuasive with the force of a powerful moral argument. The dwarf, within his own social and religious circle engaged in what was judged as legitimate protest while outsiders may consider it excessive and self-righteous. Recall some abolitionists preached the need to kill up to 300,000 white southern men, women and children and collected money to arm John Brown with rifles. Consider also the conduct of northern armies in the south in the Shenandoah Valley and later Georgia where they raped, looted and burned as a matter of policy, destroying foodstuffs of the civilian population.


Civil Rights marches like in Selma were not considered legal. And the white authorities made sure they weren't peaceful. We're those just virtue signaling to you?

As for Sherman and Georgia, you are way off. I would recommend reading an actual history of the March rather than a partisan screed.

I should also add that I find it interesting, you have attacked abolitionists for the lives lost during the Civil War while not attacking the slave owners who killed hundreds of thousands of Africans and raped thousands of women over centuries.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

Civil Rights marches like in Selma were not considered legal. And the white authorities made sure they weren't peaceful. We're those just virtue signaling to you?


Not lawful....virtue signaling, amirite?!
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG


Not lawful. Back of the bus, you virtue signaler!
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG


Not lawful...get some, you virtue signalers!
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Would Jesus throwing the money-changers from the temple count as virtue-signaling? It was illegal and violent (to a degree).
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dr. Watson said:

Would Jesus throwing the money-changers from the temple count as virtue-signaling? It was illegal and violent (to a degree).
According to some here, I would imagine it would be considered as such. Although I'd disagree on the "violent" aspect .

The problem is that Christianity in America has looked like America for far too long. Americans pride themselves on their individualism, so they've reinterpreted the Gospel to be solely about a personal relationship. They have stripped our faith of it's inherently radical, upside-down nature that was modeled to us by Christ. While it certainly has a "personal" element to it, as in my personal relationship with Christ, it is absolutely social. We are part of a greater body. We are not individual islands of personal faith. But, Americanism has infected the church.

UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Dr. Watson said:

UTExan said:

Virtue-signaling before the term was popular. And he used props. Nothing to see here.


So fighting for what you believe in is now "virtue signaling"? Was Jesus virtue signaling?


No. He performed actual miracles. You would have thought he would have lobbied Pilate to free Roman slaves if his goal was social justice.


I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Is it all virtue signaling if you don't perform miracles? Is protesting slavery just virtue signaling since Jesus didn't say anything about it? What, exactly, is virtue signaling and what is legitimate protest in your mind?


Legitimate protest is fine if an issue bothers you. I would hesitate to link such protests to Christian faith because that presupposes all Christians should agree with a particular viewpoint.


Should Christians be okay with slavery? What defines "legitimate protest"?
Legitimate protest=lawful, peaceful, persuasive with the force of a powerful moral argument. The dwarf, within his own social and religious circle engaged in what was judged as legitimate protest while outsiders may consider it excessive and self-righteous. Recall some abolitionists preached the need to kill up to 300,000 white southern men, women and children and collected money to arm John Brown with rifles. Consider also the conduct of northern armies in the south in the Shenandoah Valley and later Georgia where they raped, looted and burned as a matter of policy, destroying foodstuffs of the civilian population.


Civil Rights marches like in Selma were not considered legal. And the white authorities made sure they weren't peaceful. We're those just virtue signaling to you?

As for Sherman and Georgia, you are way off. I would recommend reading an actual history of the March rather than a partisan screed.
Done that as well. Retreating southern troops also burned stores of civilians to deny them to Sherman's army, but that does not excuse the savagery of federal troops:
Rethinking Sherman's March

The Selma marches were peaceful first amendment protests until Alabama police reaction made them violent-that reaction was itself a violation of the 14th amendment in its scope, focus and intent and such outrages were codified into federal law (Title 42, USC1983). Law is inherently flexible and organic---it changes according to circumstance and social condition. Hence, slavery which was lawful in the Roman Empire and during periods of plantation agriculture, had no place in a a decreasingly hierarchical and rigid social and economic structure. But I don't conflate human law with Divine law. Human law is regulatory and may share some aspects of Divine law, Sapper
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RetiredAg said:

Dr. Watson said:

Would Jesus throwing the money-changers from the temple count as virtue-signaling? It was illegal and violent (to a degree).
According to some here, I would imagine it would be considered as such. Although I'd disagree on the "violent" aspect .

The problem is that Christianity in America has looked like America for far too long. Americans pride themselves on their individualism, so they've reinterpreted the Gospel to be solely about a personal relationship. They have stripped our faith of it's inherently radical, upside-down nature that was modeled to us by Christ. While it certainly has a "personal" element to it, as in my personal relationship with Christ, it is absolutely social. We are part of a greater body. We are not individual islands of personal faith. But, Americanism has infected the church.


Yes, I think you virtue signal. Honestly, I think that you take the role of militant judge---the very same thing that seems to bother you about evangelical Christians. Merely an observation because I am not judging you. You need to live into the reality of faith to which God calls you. I am pretty content with who I am---a sinner saved by grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ. I am without the need of a priestly class as intermediaries.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Yes, I think you virtue signal. Honestly, I think that you take the role of militant judge---the very same thing that seems to bother you about evangelical Christians. Merely an observation because I am not judging you. You need to live into the reality of faith to which God calls you. I am pretty content with who I am---a sinner saved by grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ. I am without the need of a priestly class as intermediaries.
Ugh, again you clearly do not know what the term "virtue signaling" means. Changing a profile picture on Facebook so everyone sees how "good" I am, but doing nothing in real life is virtue signaling. Holding views that may be unpopular w/ Americanized Christians, but actually living and acting in accordance to those views is not virtue signaling. I'm not taking the role of militant judge. I simply believe those who claim to follow Christ should lead lives that look like Christ. When I fail at that, I pray other believers "judge" me and seek to correct me. It's what we are charged to do. We aren't individuals. We don't live on an island. We are part of the body of Christ, and when one part acts in a way that doesn't bring glory to God, we all suffer. We are to hold each other accountable. It's why I'm critical of false teachers like Robert Jeffress and less critical of atheists. Only one is dragging the name of Christ through the mud.

And I'm not sure what prompted the "I am without the need of a priestly class as intermediaries". I'm not Catholic, and that's certainly not what I'm attempting to be. What you have a need for, as well as all Christians, is brothers and sisters that will hold us accountable when we err and choose the ways of the world.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Watson said:

Would Jesus throwing the money-changers from the temple count as virtue-signaling? It was illegal and violent (to a degree).
No. His authority (truth) was much greater than the temple hierarchy and they were challenged by that fact; that is why they killed him. If they had served the truth they would not have allowed the money changers into the temple area. His reaction (out of truth) was strong because they profaned an area deemed sacred to His Father.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.