|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Quakers and Christianity
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
But more than that, one of our traditional core values has been to work to eliminate the causes of war and strife.sabine
That's a very interesting statement. It amounts to a declaration of a creed which Quakers claim not to have!
Sadly your approach (like any) can result in or exacerbate strife
It's a paraphrase of something George Fox said. Friends are free to interpret it individually (if at all). In the spirit of that George Fox statement, I'm not going to debate with you about how you wish to define it. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Peace, sabine
[ 01. November 2017, 12:06: Message edited by: sabine ]
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I can see what you're getting at and where you are coming from, EM but it'd be a bit like joining an ecumenical group and then expressing concern that not all the members are evangelicals.
Or an RC or an Orthodox Christian joining an ecumenical group only to complain that the rest of the group didn't have the same view of the sacraments or ecclesiology as they do.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
But more than that, one of our traditional core values has been to work to eliminate the causes of war and strife.sabine
That's a very interesting statement. It amounts to a declaration of a creed which Quakers claim not to have!
Sadly your approach (like any) can result in or exacerbate strife
It's a paraphrase of something George Fox said. Friends are free to interpret it individually (if at all). In the spirit of that George Fox statement, I'm not going to debate with you about how you wish to define it.
Peace, sabine
Aha! Avoiding dialogue!
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
If you live for peace how do you square that with the turmoil you cause elsewhere?
Point of Order Mr Speaker: Leo is not a Quaker.
Also - this is one of those "when did you stop beating your wife" questions.
Apologies. If a Quaker lives for peace how do you square that with the turmoil you cause elsewhere?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
Churches Together groups are more often sunk by disagreements over women in leadership, LGBT matters, or one church refusing to accept that another is truly Christian. Orthodox churches and many RCs, though, will be as likely as the Quakers to have objections to some evangelistic campaigns.
IME CTE groups sink mostly because they cannot work within their terms of reference. CTE aren't there to make decision over matters like women in leadership, LGBT matters etc
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
EM - can you point to a post where you describe what these Quakers allegedly did? I'm struggling to know what to think based on what I can glean being a bit vague. Ta.
Here's a couple
1. In one town, Quaker influence directly prevented any joint outreach events taking place. They talked it out at a CTE meeting demanding that consensus be accommodated
2. In a place of great need, in the bottom 10% of deprivation. For all their claims on social justice, the Quakers did nothing at all on their doorstep in the town yet supported causes elsewhere in the world. In the long run that attitude led to a breakdown in inter church relationships.
I can add more -- but of course other groups behave in similar ways
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
But more than that, one of our traditional core values has been to work to eliminate the causes of war and strife.sabine
That's a very interesting statement. It amounts to a declaration of a creed which Quakers claim not to have!
Sadly your approach (like any) can result in or exacerbate strife
It's a paraphrase of something George Fox said. Friends are free to interpret it individually (if at all). In the spirit of that George Fox statement, I'm not going to debate with you about how you wish to define it.
Peace, sabine
Aha! Avoiding dialogue!
This feels like a bait and pounce, not an invitation to dialogue.
You and I have been through this on other threads, and your mind does not seem to have changed when it comes to your assertion that Quakers have creeds.
My participation on this thread certainly indicates an ability to engage in dialogue, but I don't see the point in going round and round with you again.
I can live in a world where you believe Friends have creeds. You have an opinion, and that's fine. I don't need to rehash a former debate.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
EM - can you point to a post where you describe what these Quakers allegedly did? I'm struggling to know what to think based on what I can glean being a bit vague. Ta.
Here's a couple
1. In one town, Quaker influence directly prevented any joint outreach events taking place. They talked it out at a CTE meeting demanding that consensus be accommodated
2. In a place of great need, in the bottom 10% of deprivation. For all their claims on social justice, the Quakers did nothing at all on their doorstep in the town yet supported causes elsewhere in the world. In the long run that attitude led to a breakdown in inter church relationships.
I can add more -- but of course other groups behave in similar ways
Forgive me, but this is still vague. What outreach events were being proposed? What was the Quaker position from which they wanted concensus? What initiatives on the doorstep was everyone else proposing? I'm trying to get a picture and currently don't grasp it.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
At the risk of a tangent, I'd have thought that it's a reasonable expectation that a CTE group would find common cause on issues of social justice.
On evangelism and evangelisation less so.
Had there been some initiative on that bottom 10% of the indicators housing estate that involved something that went beyond thrusting tracts at people, then perhaps the Quakers and others might have been better disposed to support it.
It seems a bit rich to accuse them of supporting things abroad and not in their own backyard when what they were being asked to support may have been misunderstood from their perspective.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure, Karl, I get that.
From what I know of EM from the Ship I'm sure he takes a nuanced and holistic approach to these things, but not all evangelicals do, if course.
How would the Quakers or anyone else involved with the CTE know that the outreach initiative wasn't going to be kind of tub-thumping revivalist effort that was all about saving people's souls but doing diddly-squat about the systems, structures and multifaceted factors that led to that town having areas that had such high levels of deprivation in the first place?
Heck, back in the day, long before The Eden Project made this sort of thing fashionable, I moved onto a deprived housing estate in some kind of noble, if rather misguided effort, to evangelise. We did have some impact, later on and elsewhere in an unplanned kind of way, but looking back had Quakers, liberal Christians and whoever else come along and advised us to do things differently, we'd have been wiser had we listened to them.
I'm sure EM and his colleagues would have been wiser than we were, mind.
I can certainly understand where EM is coming from but at the same time I'd be surprised if it was simply a case of Quakers putting the kibbosh on evangelism simply because they don't hold proselytising... although I'm sure that was a big factor.
Now, if someone had started some kind of outreach activity already which took a multi-agency approach with various strands of support services, community cohesion activities and so on and then invited the CTE group to get involved, I wouldn't be surprised if the outcome would have been different.
As it was, what were they presented with?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
1. This feels like a bait and pounce, not an invitation to dialogue.
2. You and I have been through this on other threads, and your mind does not seem to have changed when it comes to your assertion that Quakers have creeds.
3. My participation on this thread certainly indicates an ability to engage in dialogue, but I don't see the point in going round and round with you again.
I can live in a world where you believe Friends have creeds. You have an opinion, and that's fine. I don't need to rehash a former debate.
sabine
1. I've probed what to me was the clear inconsistency in some of the statements you've made. There is no intentionality to bait, only to delve deeper.
2. You're right. Neither my mind nor my opinions have changed but I am open to them being changed
3. What I feel is that you are able but unwilling to engage. You may well be right that it is ultimately pointless as we both have what we believe to be the "correct" take on the issues we've covered.
However I do have a more nuanced view now as a result, to help me understand why Quakers may approach things in the way they do.
[ 02. November 2017, 06:44: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
That's why I'm probing for details.
Thanks Karl.
I'm happy to PM the particular instances if you like, as to detail them here would publicly identify places and people.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I can certainly understand where EM is coming from but at the same time I'd be surprised if it was simply a case of Quakers putting the kibbosh on evangelism simply because they don't hold proselytising... although I'm sure that was a big factor.
What I have noticed in Ecumenical contexts is that the group tends to defer to the Quakers much more than they defer to some other groups. To put it bluntly, they seem to lean over backwards to accommodate the Quaker position more than they will to (say) accommodate the Methodist or Baptist position. Equally I feel that the Friends in this sort of context can be just as intransigent on some issues (which is their right, of course) as (say) some Evangelicals are on others - they just express themselves much more quietly.
Now this may be my personal perception and it may not be true everywhere ... but am I "on to something" here or barking up a very wrong tree?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Now this may be my personal perception and it may not be true everywhere ... but am I "on to something" here or barking up a very wrong tree?
A long time ago, I was at a discussion group at university. The group included various people from different Christian denominations and various chaplains, including someone from the Quakers.
I don't remember what the discussion was about, but I do remember clearly that there was fundamental disagreement on the topic, the Quaker guy would wait until there was a lull and say something like "well, Quakers do this.."
Which at the time seemed incredibly unhelpful, it wasn't really addressing the question and wasn't even really giving a personal view or explaining reasoning.
I got the feeling that the Quaker process was more important to this guy at least than the solution/destination - which was frustrating when most of the rest of us were trying to battle it out in debate.
Just an anecdote, of course.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Tangent alert
I was told earlier this week that the true term which distinguishes the 'real' and faithful to Fox Quakers from the rest is not "Inner Light" but "Inward Light". It is the term he used and is regarded as a shibboleth by those who regard themselves as True Friends. "Inner Light" though is the popular term among Friends of the anything goes sort of spirituality, the sort that EM is grumbling about.
I found that interesting.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
That's why I'm probing for details.
Thanks Karl.
I'm happy to PM the particular instances if you like, as to detail them here would publicly identify places and people.
Need it? I wasn't after chapter and verse, just trying to establish what sort of "outreach" you were talking about. Standing on a street corner waving a black floppy bible? Putting on street theatre? Having a speaker in a marquee? It's just too vague to know what the objection might be.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
But more than that, one of our traditional core values has been to work to eliminate the causes of war and strife.sabine
That's a very interesting statement. It amounts to a declaration of a creed which Quakers claim not to have!
I think it’s a pretty big stretch to call that statement (which sabine terms a “value”) a “creed.” A creed sets forth what beliefs a group holds in common, particularly with regard to doctrine. Beyond the pretty obvious idea that war and strife are undesirable, what is there about belief, particularly the kind of belief typically set forth in a creed or confession, in the statement sabine shared?
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Tangent alert
I was told earlier this week that the true term which distinguishes the 'real' and faithful to Fox Quakers from the rest is not "Inner Light" but "Inward Light". It is the term he used and is regarded as a shibboleth by those who regard themselves as True Friends. "Inner Light" though is the popular term among Friends of the anything goes sort of spirituality, the sort that EM is grumbling about.
I found that interesting.
I guess the difference would be that "inward light" implies that its origin is external to you, but "inner light" means that its origin is inside of you? The former would indeed seem more compatible with the idea of an objectively existing God.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
In some ways, I think, there are parallels between dialogue between Western Christians and the Orthodox here, insofar as Western and Eastern Christians can sometimes end up 'talking past each other'.
In a similar way Quakers can probably think they are being helpful whilst everyone else finds them difficult to pin down or understand. Equally, the kind of concepts that evangelicals might be familiar with or which more sacramentally inclined Christians might be familiar with might not cut much ice with the Friends. They'd understand what was being proposed or upheld but it wouldn't necessarily be an 'issue' as far as they were concerned.
I remember a discussion a while ago when I raised the issue of some Anglican 'fellow travellers' who'd begun attending Friends' meetings because they were fed up of the in-fighting over women's ordination and other issues within their own church.
They were then surprised and offended when they weren't admitted to full Quakerhood as it were because they were still receiving communion occasionally in Anglican parishes.
The various Friends here, Sabine included, explained why this was the case and I could understand the logic, but at the same time I could understand the upset and sense of rejection the Anglican women felt at being excluded, as they saw it, because they were persisting in a practice that was dear to them but not to the Friends.
I'm not taking sides on that one, simply punting it out as an example of the kind of dynamic we are talking about here.
It isn't an issue of 'fault' or 'blame' but of a need for a clearer understanding of one another's respective positions.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
However I do have a more nuanced view now as a result, to help me understand why Quakers may approach things in the way they do.
I'm glad about this. I think you may have run into Friends who are treating this issue as if it were a creed. That's disappointing. How one enacts our Testimonies is really a fruit of one's personal relationship with the Divine. It will vary, and it's not a rule or a hammer.
In this specific instance, is the outreach just secular (food, housing, employment)? It there a religious aspect (e.g., must attend a certain kind of worship service before receiving help)?
In my city, we have several faith-based outreach efforts. If the end game is to get people into the church/belief set of the faith organizers, I think Friends would (and do) opt out rather than try to change the nature of the outreach.
But there are also ecumenical groups with which we happily serve, despite our differences. I wish it could be that way for your concern.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
Oops, didn't make myself clear about outreach
EM, I am not saying I think your situation is one of trying to get recipients to believe or join (there isn't enough info to go on) it seems the Friends you mention are holding whatever the group hopes to do hostage to a threshing out of one member-group's pov differences with the rest. That would not go down well in wider Quaker circles (see my"standing aside" comment earlier in this thread).
There is a time and place for trying to form an organization based on common ground. After it is formed is not the mostne effective.
sabine
[ 02. November 2017, 15:11: Message edited by: sabine ]
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amor
Apprentice
# 18031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
However I notice that it now also includes the phrases: “All CTE Member Churches accept this Basis though an exception is made for 'any Church or Association of Churches which on principle has no credal statements in its tradition and therefore cannot formally subscribe to the statement of faith in the Basis provided it satisfies 75% in number of those full members which subscribe to the Basis that it manifests faith in Christ as witnessed to in the Scriptures and it is committed to the aims and purposes of Churches Together in England and that it will work in the spirit of the Basis'. The Religious Society of Friends is a member of CTE under this clause”.
Make of that what you will!
Good evening Ffriends,what I've been told by a Friend involved in some way in negotiations leading up to the creation of this clause was that it was a fudge that allowed us in, but still kept the Unitarians out.
Posts: 8 | From: Gong toi and fro | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
Welcome to posting on the Ship, fellow Friend!
sabine
[ 02. November 2017, 20:18: Message edited by: sabine ]
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amor
Apprentice
# 18031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
1. I can't see that Quakers are excluded on a "don't want you" basis. Being really picky, any group can self exclude if they don't belong in the sense of accepting the core principles. On a national level 75% of Quakers may accept the central part of CTE's constitution - the revelation of Christ as unique saviour - but I have two issues here:
- the 75% is reflected in an historical position. Many have moved since in all denominations
- that may be true nationally but locally that isn't the case from the evidence on the ground. Th
The clause refers to 75% of existing CTE members being willing to allow the Society of Friends being allowed to join CTE. It would always have been impossible to ascertain what percentage of Friends would agree with the basic statement of faith of CTE.
[ 02. November 2017, 20:21: Message edited by: Amor ]
Posts: 8 | From: Gong toi and fro | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amor
Apprentice
# 18031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
Welcome to posting on the Ship, fellow Friend!
sabine
Thanks for the welocome, Friend!
Posts: 8 | From: Gong toi and fro | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amor
Apprentice
# 18031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
EM - can you point to a post where you describe what these Quakers allegedly did? I'm struggling to know what to think based on what I can glean being a bit vague. Ta.
Here's a couple
1. In one town, Quaker influence directly prevented any joint outreach events taking place. They talked it out at a CTE meeting demanding that consensus be accommodated
2. In a place of great need, in the bottom 10% of deprivation. For all their claims on social justice, the Quakers did nothing at all on their doorstep in the town yet supported causes elsewhere in the world. In the long run that attitude led to a breakdown in inter church relationships.
I can add more -- but of course other groups behave in similar ways
I think the problem with "Outreach" for Friends Christocentric or not is related to, for want of a better word, our universalism, the knowledge that God is within everyone. Early Friends called on people not to run after the clergy but to look within themselves to find the light of Christ. There remains a wariness of telling people what to believe, if anything accentuated by the fact that may contemporary Friends have come to Quakerism from other faith groups because they of their disatisfaction with being led and told what to believe
As to working within the broader community Friends individually and Meetings collectively don't shy from local involvement,although this can take different forms. Within my own Meeting which is near a London major prison, a large proportion pf our members are involved in different ways in working with and supporting those incarcerated. I don't know if you would count those in the local gaol as the local community, but its challenging and difficuly work and I'm glad that Friends are doing it.
Posts: 8 | From: Gong toi and fro | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amor:
I think the problem with "Outreach" for Friends Christocentric or not is related to, for want of a better word, our universalism, the knowledge that God is within everyone, ... (snip) ... if anything accentuated by the fact that many contemporary Friends have come to Quakerism from other faith groups.
Those certainly square up with my experience.
[ 03. November 2017, 06:54: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amor:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
EM - can you point to a post where you describe what these Quakers allegedly did? I'm struggling to know what to think based on what I can glean being a bit vague. Ta.
Here's a couple
1. In one town, Quaker influence directly prevented any joint outreach events taking place. They talked it out at a CTE meeting demanding that consensus be accommodated
2. In a place of great need, in the bottom 10% of deprivation. For all their claims on social justice, the Quakers did nothing at all on their doorstep in the town yet supported causes elsewhere in the world. In the long run that attitude led to a breakdown in inter church relationships.
I can add more -- but of course other groups behave in similar ways
I think the problem with "Outreach" for Friends Christocentric or not is related to, for want of a better word, our universalism, the knowledge that God is within everyone. Early Friends called on people not to run after the clergy but to look within themselves to find the light of Christ. There remains a wariness of telling people what to believe, if anything accentuated by the fact that may contemporary Friends have come to Quakerism from other faith groups because they of their disatisfaction with being led and told what to believe
As to working within the broader community Friends individually and Meetings collectively don't shy from local involvement,although this can take different forms. Within my own Meeting which is near a London major prison, a large proportion pf our members are involved in different ways in working with and supporting those incarcerated. I don't know if you would count those in the local gaol as the local community, but its challenging and difficuly work and I'm glad that Friends are doing it.
Outreach is this case wasn't telling people what to believe, it was showing Christ's love.
It's just like your prison ministry which is very laudable. Please tell me, though, why the local Quakers here in this town are exclusively concerned about world issues but wouldn't be part of the Living Wage Coalition (not a church body) on their doorstep, when its proven that over 20% of people in this town live in wage poverty.
I take your point about a number of Quakers moving from other denominations. One of the main protagonist here left another denomination years ago and, to judge from his input into joint meetings (bearing and language), still has anger issues to resolve on that score
I'd also want to suggest - again from experience - that the reasons people leave churches isn't necessarily about being told what to believe. In some cases they want to cast God in their image and so leave to find a forum which is loose enough to accommodate that perspective. The issue with belief is only a cloak, albeit one that they fail to recognise.
A bad church experience (for whatever reason) makes one wary - you'll understand then why evangelicals might have issues with Quaker theology and praxis. The big question for some outsiders is this; how do you know as a Quaker that the light you find when you look within is truly the light of Christ, especially as it is self determining without external references?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Outreach is this case wasn't telling people what to believe, it was showing Christ's love.
You've still notably not explained exactly what it is that you mean.
quote:
It's just like your prison ministry which is very laudable. Please tell me, though, why the local Quakers here in this town are exclusively concerned about world issues but wouldn't be part of the Living Wage Coalition (not a church body) on their doorstep, when its proven that over 20% of people in this town live in wage poverty.
Once again, you appear to think that the person you are interacting with here has intimate knowledge of the situation you describe. Why would that be the case?
Maybe the local Quakers you mention have other things to occupy their time. Maybe all kinds of things - why are you grilling an Apprentice on something they may have zero knowledge about simply because they're a Quaker?
quote:
I take your point about a number of Quakers moving from other denominations. One of the main protagonist here left another denomination years ago and, to judge from his input into joint meetings (bearing and language), still has anger issues to resolve on that score
Plenty of those kinds of people about in many denominations. I don't think this is really a very fair reflection of your issues with the Quakers.
quote:
I'd also want to suggest - again from experience - that the reasons people leave churches isn't necessarily about being told what to believe. In some cases they want to cast God in their image and so leave to find a forum which is loose enough to accommodate that perspective. The issue with belief is only a cloak, albeit one that they fail to recognise.
Maybe. So what?
quote:
A bad church experience (for whatever reason) makes one wary - you'll understand then why evangelicals might have issues with Quaker theology and praxis. The big question for some outsiders is this; how do you know as a Quaker that the light you find when you look within is truly the light of Christ, especially as it is self determining without external references?
This is self-evidently asking the wrong question.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's just like your prison ministry which is very laudable. Please tell me, though, why the local Quakers here in this town are exclusively concerned about world issues but wouldn't be part of the Living Wage Coalition (not a church body) on their doorstep, when its proven that over 20% of people in this town live in wage poverty.
Once again, you appear to think that the person you are interacting with here has intimate knowledge of the situation you describe. Why would that be the case?
Maybe the local Quakers you mention have other things to occupy their time. Maybe all kinds of things - why are you grilling an Apprentice on something they may have zero knowledge about simply because they're a Quaker?
Some of EMs responses also seem to imply a sense (incorrect) that Friends have a homogeneity of behavior and belief that we don't, in fact have. Not prosletyzing isn't even a Testimony (just a trend that grew out if our quietist period, which is why I speculate without knowing specifics that these Friends are acting as if it were a Testimony), and even if it were, all Friends interpret things differently. Same for deciding which specific outreach issues will be adopted by a local Meeting. Many Friends help their neighbors at home. The only way to know why the Friends you mention are behaving the way you describe is to ask them, not us.
quote:
A bad church experience (for whatever reason) makes one wary - you'll understand then why evangelicals might have issues with Quaker theology and praxis. The big question for some outsiders is this; how do you know as a Quaker that the light you find when you look within is truly the light of Christ, especially as it is self determining without external references?
How does anyone explain any number of beliefs (spiritual or mundane) to another who doesn't believe? It's very difficult. How does one explain Grace if another person is not inclined to believe in it? How does one explain
intuition?
Some parts of Quaker thinking have to do with authority. One's personal relationship with the Divine informs behavior (in the best of circumstance). The Inner voice is a metaphor to explain spiritual promptings. I have heard people (not Friends) say " God laid it on my heart to do such and such." I accept that this is a valud metaphor for them. Some people say "God told me it would be Ok." I'm not inclined to ask if they actually heard a voice
As well the Inner Light, which I believe all of humanity has. It's a metaphor that Friends can relate to. Some people say we are "children if God," another metaphor.
EM has had a bad experience, and seems to be trying to figure out who these people are and why they are behaving badly. Answers from Friends on the Ship don't seem to satisfy EM who then has more questions. I know it's hard to convey tone in plain text, but it does, at times, feel like a grilling, as Mr. Cheesy pointed out, and as the "Aha!" statement earlier felt.
Learning about an unfamiliar faith is extremely hard when one has an ongoing difficult relationship with people who are part of that faith body. I'm sympathetic to that predicament. But I think the ability for threads on the Ship to assuage EMs residual feelings from this experience are not good, sadly.
EM, I'm very sorry that we can't seem to help out here.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
Thanks everyone. What you have said has been helpful: I will be able to approach my conversations with Quakers with more understanding and grace.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amor
Apprentice
# 18031
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Amor:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
EM - can you point to a post where you describe what these Quakers allegedly did? I'm struggling to know what to think based on what I can glean being a bit vague. Ta.
Here's a couple
1. In one town, Quaker influence directly prevented any joint outreach events taking place. They talked it out at a CTE meeting demanding that consensus be accommodated
2. In a place of great need, in the bottom 10% of deprivation. For all their claims on social justice, the Quakers did nothing at all on their doorstep in the town yet supported causes elsewhere in the world. In the long run that attitude led to a breakdown in inter church relationships.
I can add more -- but of course other groups behave in similar ways
I think the problem with "Outreach" for Friends Christocentric or not is related to, for want of a better word, our universalism, the knowledge that God is within everyone. Early Friends called on people not to run after the clergy but to look within themselves to find the light of Christ. There remains a wariness of telling people what to believe, if anything accentuated by the fact that may contemporary Friends have come to Quakerism from other faith groups because they of their disatisfaction with being led and told what to believe
As to working within the broader community Friends individually and Meetings collectively don't shy from local involvement,although this can take different forms. Within my own Meeting which is near a London major prison, a large proportion pf our members are involved in different ways in working with and supporting those incarcerated. I don't know if you would count those in the local gaol as the local community, but its challenging and difficuly work and I'm glad that Friends are doing it.
Outreach is this case wasn't telling people what to believe, it was showing Christ's love.
It's just like your prison ministry which is very laudable. Please tell me, though, why the local Quakers here in this town are exclusively concerned about world issues but wouldn't be part of the Living Wage Coalition (not a church body) on their doorstep, when its proven that over 20% of people in this town live in wage poverty.
I take your point about a number of Quakers moving from other denominations. One of the main protagonist here left another denomination years ago and, to judge from his input into joint meetings (bearing and language), still has anger issues to resolve on that score
I'd also want to suggest - again from experience - that the reasons people leave churches isn't necessarily about being told what to believe. In some cases they want to cast God in their image and so leave to find a forum which is loose enough to accommodate that perspective. The issue with belief is only a cloak, albeit one that they fail to recognise.
A bad church experience (for whatever reason) makes one wary - you'll understand then why evangelicals might have issues with Quaker theology and praxis. The big question for some outsiders is this; how do you know as a Quaker that the light you find when you look within is truly the light of Christ, especially as it is self determining without external references?
I can't of course answer the question about the Meeting I dont know being unwilling to get involved in campaigning for a living wage.
You ask if we are seeking to create a god in our own image. Perhaps we do sometimes, but the same could be asked of anyone in any faith group, particularly those in positions of authority over others, in a context where the others are expected to accept and at times revere the leadership. History is scarred with the damage wrought by the Charismatic leader.
Within Quakerism we minister to our peers and leave it to them to discern the truth of ministry, they are our external referants. Quaker worship and ministry is collective and decision making is by the worshipping community listening together for the "still small voice" to guide us. Do we need other external authorities? Friends have a nuanced relationship with the Bible and other religious texts.One that many evangelicals might find challenging, but in reality not so different from that of many non-evangelicals who those evangelicals share denominations with. In some ways we may be closer to the Pentecostal and Charismatic movemengs with their belief that revelation is ongoing; but in reflctive calm, I personally feel we do so in a more rational and discerning way. In the end it's all about the Mystery of Faith.
Posts: 8 | From: Gong toi and fro | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
The big question for some outsiders is this; how do you know as a Quaker that the light you find when you look within is truly the light of Christ, especially as it is self determining without external references?
Due to the activities of James Naylor early in the history of the Quaker movement, serious consideration was given to how folk discern whether something is a genuine leading of the spirit rather than a personal aspiration. There is a process called a meeting for worship for clearness, that Quakers in the unprogrammed worship tradition use for this kind of discernment.
It is a meeting for worship specifically convened to support a friend who feels they may be experiencing a leading of the spirit.
Depending upon how you understand what is happening in a meeting for worship, this is may be an opportunity for people within the community to reflect and feedback a consensus view on what is being suggested, or an opportunity to commune with the divine and be inspired by the holy spirit to understand whether the person is truely being called by God to do a specific thing.
In any case, it is testing against an external referent rather than solely being determined by an individual.
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
In fact St. Paul advocated much the same thing to the church at Corinth: "Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said" (1 Cor. 14:29). This has also been true in the best - though not the worst! - of Charismatic churches.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Exclamation Mark
You might be interested to read The Sacred Compass which is an American Quaker take on spiritual discernment. They apply the term far more widely than the rest of us and seem to have a far more developed system for discerning a 'leading'. I have reviewed The Sacred Compass as part of wider reading around spiritual direction I am doing slowly.
Quotation marks are used there because I think that is Quaker terminology.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
I think The Sacred Compass is a good resource, and I'm not saying this because the author is known to me and belongs to my Yearly Meeting (roughly comparable, but a bit different than, a church conference).
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
Missed the edit window, and I wanted to say that Jenjie Jon wrote some very thoughtful things in her review.
Missed the fact that there are actually 5 streams of Quakerism in the US, but no matter. Even among Friends, classifications are a matter of ongoing discussion.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Thing is, I can see why evangelicals might have an issue with Quakers, but let's face it, many evangelicals have a problem with anyone who isn't evangelical not to mention the 'wrong' type of evangelical even ...
It wasn't just the Establishment that had an issue with the Friends. You've only got to read Bunyan's views on the Quakers to see that.
I sort of 'get' the Quakers, even though my theology would tend to be more conservative.
I'm on the editorial board of a Christian magazine and we have an annual residential at Woodbrooke Quaker Study Centre in Birmingham. I won't be able to make this year's. Last year's coincided with the election of Donald Trump.
The younger Friends were clearly agitated by this, understandably so. I sat in on their morning Meeting and it was far from quiet. All manner of agitated readings from the bloodier parts of Revelation.
I stuck my neck out and shared a few thoughts from something I'd observed at the evening meeting, a flower/plant arrangement where decay and new growth co-existed.
I used this as an analogy for how good and bad and indifferent coexist at any one time and the need to develop an equilibrium.
One of the Friends then shared something which struck a real chord with me, something which went from agitated cliche to poetic metre, almost. Very striking.
It beat everything I'd encountered in what passes for 'prophecy' in charismatic circles.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sorry to double-post but I also think Jengie is onto something with her observations about the Friends' discernment process.
No such process is infallible, but from what I've seen and heard the Quakers are more robust on this than those charismatic evangelicals who claim to have a stock in trade on these things.
The apparent lack of an 'external reference point' is certainly troublesome from an evangelical perspective, but then again many evangelicals tend to be chary of any reference point - be it the Church, Tradition, other criteria - other than their own, often subjective, particular 'take' on scripture ... which some of them don't even recognise to be a tradition like anyone else's.
I suppose the conclusion I've come to is that the Quaker Way is coherent and consistent within its own frame of reference, although I doubt it looks that way to many Friends themselves at times, let alone anyone else ...
Problems may then arise if there's an expectation that this frame of reference ought to apply to everyone else or that Quakers should conform to other people's reference points.
That appears to have happened, on both sides perhaps, in the instances EM and Baptist Trainfan cite.
I have to say that I wonder whether EM's commendable activism can have a flip-side. Frustration with lack of action can lead to judgementalism if we aren't careful. I struggle with that in things I'm involved with.
I can see why EM is frustrated that the Quakers weren't apparently supporting a fair wage initiative but at the same time I'm sure there were any number of worthy causes or initiatives that anyone around that table could have been challenged about.
'Not supporting the local XYZ? Call yourself a Christian? Call yourself an evangelical / Catholic / Quaker (delete as appropriate) ...?'
Anyhow, as EM says some good insights into Quakerdom here on this thread.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The apparent lack of an 'external reference point' is certainly troublesome from an evangelical perspective...
In the Quaker tradition there is the Clearness Committee. It's purpose is not to tell a person what to do or give permission, but rather to listen and ask questions to help someone achieve clearness about a leading for him/herself and then the way forward with that leading.
Clearness Committee members do not decide whether a person's leadings are "ccorrect." In the course of reflection during a Clearness Committee, outside references certainly come into play, not authoritatively, but as suggestions to ponder.
Here is a description of how they work
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
Missed edit window. Clearness Committees can be used by a group as well as by an individual.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Sorry to double-post but I also think Jengie is onto something with her observations about the Friends' discernment process.
No such process is infallible, but from what I've seen and heard the Quakers are more robust on this than those charismatic evangelicals who claim to have a stock in trade on these things.
The apparent lack of an 'external reference point' is certainly troublesome from an evangelical perspective, but then again many evangelicals tend to be chary of any reference point - be it the Church, Tradition, other criteria - other than their own, often subjective, particular 'take' on scripture ... which some of them don't even recognise to be a tradition like anyone else's.
I suppose the conclusion I've come to is that the Quaker Way is coherent and consistent within its own frame of reference, although I doubt it looks that way to many Friends themselves at times, let alone anyone else ...
Agreed.
As part of my doctoral work, I did some study in Quaker discernment, and was impressed. One quote from a book written by a (small f) friend who is a (big F) Friend that I found particularly apt, especially in an American context: “If a Friend were asked if consensus tends to slow down or derail progress, he or she would probably reply, ‘That depends on what you consider progress!’"
Having seen how seen the fruit of corporate decision-making in more individualistic evangelical & Pentecostal contexts, I think he was on to something.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, and it's certainly an area where I think the rest of us can learn from the Quakers.
It's often struck me how, in the UK at least, given the Quaker emphasis on inclusivity, reflection, social justice and what we might call a kind of spiritual 'mindfulness', one might expect them to have more adherents. They chime with the zeitgeist.
Of course, some would say that's a negative thing, but other expressions do so too, the informality of charismatic worship and fellowship for instance.
Quakers are thin on the ground. Only around 15,000 of them here from what I can gather. Many more in some countries.
I suppose one can hold Quaker style values without necessarily having to be one or formally align oneself.
I have a small f friend who meets with the Friends and who may well become one, I think. I can see how it 'fits' and suits her.
Meanwhile, although it's been observed that Quakers want their own way or apparently so, I think there's another aspect that should be noted. Whilst it's true that I've heard Quakers make disparaging remarks about how other groups 'tell people what to believe' and boast how they are free from the constraints found elsewhere, it's certainly true, in my experience, that they are very keen to recognise what they take to be evidence of divine activity, the work of the Spirit, elsewhere.
I remember hearing an Orthodox priest relate how a group of Quakers turned up unannounced at the Liturgy one Sunday morning simply because they wanted to listen and observe. When he spoke to them afterwards he was struck by how much they 'got' the essence of it, far more so in his judgement than some people from more formal liturgical backgrounds within Western Christianity.
Apparently, Romanides, a recent Greek theologian was intrigued by the Quakers and was convinced they'd encountered the Uncreated Light.
Equally, I've heard Quakers say that visiting RCs often 'get' what they are about given the contemplative and meditative traditions within Catholicism.
I'd suggest that this needs to be held up as a counter-balance to those times when others may have found the Friends perplexing or frustrating to deal with.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
... It's often struck me how, in the UK at least, given the Quaker emphasis on inclusivity, reflection, social justice and what we might call a kind of spiritual 'mindfulness', one might expect them to have more adherents. They chime with the zeitgeist. ...
I'd suspect they like the idea of the Quakers, but don't want actually to sit in silence with others for an hour on a Sunday morning.
It's the flakier equivalent of people who would like to imagine that their local CofE church still has 'all services 1662' and none of that nasty shaking hands, but don't dream of actually wasting their precious time going there.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The apparent lack of an 'external reference point' is certainly troublesome from an evangelical perspective...
In the Quaker tradition there is the Clearness Committee. It's purpose is not to tell a person what to do or give permission, but rather to listen and ask questions to help someone achieve clearness about a leading for him/herself and then the way forward with that leading.
Clearness Committee members do not decide whether a person's leadings are "ccorrect." In the course of reflection during a Clearness Committee, outside references certainly come into play, not authoritatively, but as suggestions to ponder.
Here is a description of how they work
sabine
Parker Palmer describes one of his own experiences with a Clearness Committee in Let Your Life Speak. He had been offered a prestigious position as president of a Quaker college. He writes that he formed a Clearness Committee cuz that's what they do, but mostly he wanted to brag indirectly about this great honor.
So the committee meets and does what it does-- pray and listen together. And then they ask him some gentle questions. They begin wtih the more obvious ones, "what are your goals? What would you like to accomplish in your first 5 years as president? What strengths do you bring?" etc.
Then the committee asked what should have been an easy one: "what would you like best about being president?" Palmer responded: "well, I wouldn't like having to wear a suit every day." The committee gently reminded him the question was what would you like, not what would you not like. So Palmer took another stab at it, but each time he was asked, he just kept saying things he wouldn't like-- having to leave the classroom, having to schmooze donors, etc etc.
Finally, after several rounds of answering the question with what he would not like, Palmer was forced to say quietly, "I guess I would like having my picture in the paper with the word "president' under it."
In typical Clearness style there was no rebuke, no advice given, no evaluation. Just one final question: "Is there a simpler way to get your picture in the paper?"
Palmer remained in the classroom.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
When we lived up north and before we were married, my wife lodged with a sweet old couple in Leeds, overlooking Headingley Cricket Ground. Sacred soil to many.
The husband had been a professional footballer, a Battle of Britain pilot and a 'floor-walker' in a department store when such things were new to the UK. At one time he'd worked for a family-run Quaker firm.
The Friends there called everyone 'Friend' and still used 'thee'and 'thou' (although quite a few other people still did in Yorkshire back then, and still today to an extent).
He liked them but felt they were nepotists and promoted relatives beyond their capabilities.
The neice of the Quaker boss came to work in the typing pool where she quickly made a nuisance of herself. My friend dared to speak out about this at the weekly office meeting whereupon his boss sat back in his chair and said, 'Take thy papers, Friend' and summarily sacked him on the spot.
On the bus journey home, my friend resolved not to tell his wife until after they'd had their tea (evening meal to non-UK readers).
As they were sat there after the meal and he was summoning the courage to tell his wife, he saw his boss's hat bobbing past the window. Rat-a-tat. There was a knock on the back door. My friend opened it to find his boss on the doorstep. '8.30 sharp, Monday morning,' said the boss, then turned on his heels and walked away.
He'd reflected on his decision and relented.
I've told a few Quakers this story and they've all laughed. Times have changed but they recognise it.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Thank you Gamaliel. That tale works particularly well with the boss's voice bits in a Yorkshire accent.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Huddersfield or Leeds rathr than Sheffield or Doncaster, I feel.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
