 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: MW 2872: Phoenix Quaker Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I am sorry to sound critical of another MW report, but does this meet the guideline of being a Trinitarian church?
Again, I'm sorry to sound boring, but there is nothing on their website to suggest that this particular Quaker Meeting is Christocentric, never mind Trinitarian.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
They are a an unprogrammed meeting for worship, in a church with no creed. How would you know ?
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
I get the impression that the MWer did not know about Quaker practices before attending the meeting.
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
I have to admit I thought that the MW project was carefully aligned towards Trinitarian Christian worship. In the past, Quaker (and, indeed, Unitarian) worship has been covered but the guideline was that this would no longer happen.
I do not, of course, mean any disrespect to the Quaker tradition by bringing this up and nor does this rule. The idea is that we are at liberty to criticise our own tradition, but it would be very rule to do the same for others.
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
There is a question as to whether Quakers consider themselves Trinitarian or not.
At any rate, we have relaxed the rule of late. We do on occasion allow reports of services that strictly speaking are not Trinitarian.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
There is a question as to whether Quakers consider themselves Trinitarian or not.
I'm not sure there is - some of the Quaker meetings are fairly clear that they are not-Christian (some are actively anti-Christian). Therefore I think it is a reasonable deduction that they are not, overall, Trinitarian unless otherwise stated.
quote:
At any rate, we have relaxed the rule of late. We do on occasion allow reports of services that strictly speaking are not Trinitarian.
That is interesting, might I suggest that the rules are revisited in that case?
Once again, I dislike reading MWs which are overly negative because the MW-er is judging the content on the basis of something it is not intending or saying that it is.
The MW-er says:
quote:
The word “God” had not been mentioned, let alone Jesus or the Holy Spirit. No reading from scripture had been given. The four people who spoke said interesting things, but there was no follow-up or continuity of dialog or debate. I suppose this might have happened during the potluck luncheon, though.
Well, that could just be because that Quaker meeting (which, tellingly, does not claim to be a church) does not hold to a theology of a deity, does not believe in Jesus as saviour or the Holy Spirit as a real thing. I think in the mind of the MW-er here, the complaint is being made that the Quaker group is not Trinitarian, which is the thing that the rule was intended to prevent in the first place.
I think the rule is essentially sound. I would love to see MW of Unitarians, Quakers.. but then we open the door to MW of Spiritualists, JWs, Mormons etc. And to me that seems unfair if the majority of those who are doing the MWing are actually not at first-base with the thing that they are reviewing.
In a British sense, that would be like reviewing an Ikea restaurant in the same bracket as a Gastro-pub. That, to me, is just unfair - if the MW is unable to judge the thing on its own merits rather than against their own existing standards of what church should be.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
The word “God” had not been mentioned, let alone Jesus or the Holy Spirit. No reading from scripture had been given. The four people who spoke said interesting things, but there was no follow-up or continuity of dialog or debate. I suppose this might have happened during the potluck luncheon, though.
Well, that could just be because that Quaker meeting (which, tellingly, does not claim to be a church) does not hold to a theology of a deity, does not believe in Jesus as saviour or the Holy Spirit as a real thing.
Or, it could mean that the people there did have a Trinitarian theology, but the nature of the meeting was such that they didn't feel the need to mention that at that time. My limited experience with Friends is that if you want to know what they think then the best approach is to join them for lunch and talk with them. Unlike other groups, they don't meet to proclaim what they believe - so, no reading of Scripture and exposition thereon, no creeds, no liturgy, no hymns. Meetings serve a different purpose.
I would certainly agree with the consensus that this MWer entered the meeting with insufficient understanding of the nature of the meeting, and how it differs from worship in other places. That has nothing to do with whether or not this particular group of Friends is Trinitarian.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Once again, I dislike reading MWs which are overly negative because the MW-er is judging the content on the basis of something it is not intending or saying that it is. <<snip>> I think the rule is essentially sound. I would love to see MW of Unitarians, Quakers.. but then we open the door to MW of Spiritualists, JWs, Mormons etc. And to me that seems unfair. . . .
Well, then, feel free not to read them. If you don't like the way the MW page is run, apply for the job by all means. But until such time as you are hired, stop acting the part of the new kid on the block telling the older kids how they should be playing with their marbles.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Well, then, feel free not to read them. If you don't like the way the MW page is run, apply for the job by all means. But until such time as you are hired, stop acting the part of the new kid on the block telling the older kids how they should be playing with their marbles.
That's harsh. There was no such implication intended of the management of the project.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Interestingly, Churches Together in England have got their knickers slightly in a twist over this. Their recent Annual Report strongly affirms that they are Trinitarian, yet the Friends have always been full members since CTE's inception. This was a carry-over from the old Council of Churches days. No-one seems too willing to kick them out!
The Unitarians are "observers", incidentally - though one particular "observer" I knew was rather more Trinitarian orthodoxy than he thought!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Of course, some Friends are trinitarian. Although, without any formal creedal statement there's a) no requirement for them to be and b) it's not going to be easy to find out how many Friends are trinitarian. Though as I understand it (and, I could be completely wrong) Friends are far more likely to be trinitarian in the UK than in the US, though if that's the case I don't know why.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
As I understand it, Quakerism has split in the USA into various denominations - with Evangelicals at one extreme and (for want of a better word) Unitarian-types at another.
In the UK almost all Quakers are in the Britain Yearly Meeting with a very small handful of congregations doing anything different. Hence the BYM contains a variety of views.
I also agree that most Quakers are extremely nice and some, but not all, of those I have met are Trinitarian Christians. An increasing number seem to be Non-theists.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Of course, some Friends are trinitarian. Although, without any formal creedal statement there's a) no requirement for them to be and b) it's not going to be easy to find out how many Friends are trinitarian. Though as I understand it (and, I could be completely wrong) Friends are far more likely to be trinitarian in the UK than in the US, though if that's the case I don't know why.
I MW'd a Quaker meeting in Cairo many moons ago.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
leo: I MW'd a Quaker meeting in Cairo many moons ago.
I think they should have switched off the phone (and possibly the door bell).
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
Just to note that mr cheesy has begun a thread for discussing the rules of the MW project over in the Styx. Debate on the general principle of reviewing non-Trinitarian congregations should probably be redirected there.
This thread can remain for discussing this particular report.
Thanks!
dj_ordinaire, Eccles host
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
Just a question, since I'm not familiar with these meetings. Is it anything like Zen meditation? Or like Taizé-style silence? What are the differences?
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
[disclaimer: Quaker are non-creedal and practice varies widely, my comments relate to the tradition of unprogrammed worship in the UK. Quakerism arises from the protestant Christrian tradition in England, in the mid-17th century. There are curently upwards of 20,000 members in the UK and about 350,000 of the various flavours worldwide. In the UK about half or slightly over identify as Christians, about 10% as non-theist. Last time I looked this stuff up anyway.]
Early Quakers, likes many others, felt they were reclaiming something of how the apostles faith would have been.
The unprogrammed meeting was intended to be a gathering for worship in which participants would await the presence of the divine, giving spoken minstry only at the inspiration of the holy spirit. Peoples understandings have evolved and diversified over time. There is an idea in the tradition that different people may be led in different ways, that ultimately important truths are beyond words and that there can be personal contact/inspiration/communion with the divine/transcendentant.
In practice, most Quakers will tell you it takes along time before you manage to spend the entire hour in a 'gathered' state. But that the meeting can hold / or contain when people may be distressed / disruptive etc if the meeting is sufficiently gathered/focused.
This gathered state is somewhat like a mindful meditation for some people, others might engage in silent prayer. It is not uncommon to have bibles and other appropriate texts around and people may also read them silently intermittently or occasionally as ministry. My experience of a gathered state is of a mindful awareness, similar to what I have managed when trying to meditate. My experience of being called to minister, which I have done twice, was of an idea going round and round in my head until I felt I must say it - it was a very wierd and uncomfortable experience.
Spoken ministry within the meeting is is not debated, you reflect on what has been said, it would be unusual to reply to it directly. (I did once know someone who managed to start an argument in a quaker meeting, a feat so unusual it was still talked of 20 years later, it was ended by one of the elders standing to minister - then standing in silence for 15 minutes)
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
I was told once by a practicing Friend (to use their own terminology) that they were called Quakers because they would resist as far as possible the urge to speak and only do so because they were quaking so much they knew there was no alternative to speak out.
Would that all groups practicing extempore prayer followed the same wise guidance.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Well, seeing as mr cheesy has referred to the Holy Spirit as a 'real thing' and not a Person, then perhaps the rest of us are at liberty to question his particular Trinitarian credentials?
--------------------
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
|
|
|
Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
