Index librorum prohibitorum

"the shifts we have outlined affected even individual Quakers over the course of a single lifetime. On this point, it is notable that of the 131 publications written by George Fox and considered by the [Second Day] Morning Meeting before 1704, 50 per cent written between 1652 and 1660 were retrospectively deemed unacceptable, compared to 40 per cent written between 1661 and 1670. Of course it is remarkable that the Meeting should reject so many of Fox’s works in either period, but the shifting pattern also illustrates a subtle shift in Fox’s thinking—towards a later, more acceptable ‘brand’ of Quakerism over time. This pattern cannot have been caused by Fox’s direct response to the concerns of the Morning Meeting, as the publications in question were all written before its foundation. Rather, it suggests a steady and deliberate trajectory which affected even those who were Quakers from the start: Tickell, Travers, and Burrough . . . were all convinced Friends of the 1650s, and their Quakerism was therefore the result of direct conversion rather than upbringing. That they also bore the hallmarks of change implies that developments were being driven by a cultural or theological shift within Quakerism, beyond a merely sociological adjustment in the profile of the movement or the character of its members."

     Madeleine Pennington, Quakers, Christ, and the Enlightenment (Oxford:  Oxford University Press, 2021), 48, underscoring mine.