Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by James C Schultz on 8th mo. 19, 2010 at 9:20am

I don't even like the word Christian! Outside of the Society of Friends no one is going to know what Quaker "means". The only time I use it is when I'm asked what church I go to.

Permalink Reply by David Carl on 8th mo. 19, 2010 at 2:34pm

In general, how about using the word "loving" in its place? There might be others as well, but that should cover quite a bit!

When it comes to specific perspectives on theological matters (such as in your example), perhaps it would help to think about what we value in that perspective. WHY do we think its "Quakerly?" Does it include the outcast? Encourage forgiveness or healing? Illuminate the darkness in our hearts? Of course, another Friend may still disagree with you, but at least you will be clearer on what the disagreement is about!

Permalink Reply by James Miller on 8th mo. 21, 2010 at 8:56pm

I like the historical resonances of the word. While today's RSoF is not George Fox's, the word "Quaker" evokes a connection, however tenuous, to that first generation and their energetic witness. I need some stories in my life, stories as repositories of powerful metaphors-- and this word recalls stories of Friends whose lives I want to remember. But using the word doesn't diminish other stories, other words, or the spiritual experiences they imperfectly articulate.

And I've felt it too-- "quaking" inwardly when the spirit moves. I use the word to honor my experience, and that of Friends long past.

Permalink Reply by Helen Bayes on 8th mo. 22, 2010 at 1:05am

Thanks James. Shorthand names ARE a worry. I am happy to call myself Christian, when I have a sense that others around at the time have a similar meaning to the shorthand. I am a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams, and if questioned, say I've learned (and still learning) form Jesus' teaching and example of nonviolence. I readily say I'm a Quaker, knowing many people don't know what it means, and then I enjoy some discussion if they're willing!

Permalink Reply by Helen Bayes on 8th mo. 22, 2010 at 1:35am

I'm working on it David, thank you. I'm thinking that within Quaker community, it's a good discipline to use a real word instead: "loving" does cover a lot. One might use "simple", "peaceable", "truthful", "patient". In the example, I was saying that there is a distinctive Quaker theology, and thus some different perspectives to pay attention to. Some wd disagree that there is any common Q theology.

Permalink Reply by Helen Bayes on 8th mo. 22, 2010 at 1:46am

Thank you James. I love the word Quaker. It is real for me too - quaking. Though I quake less these days. When feeling inward movement, I simply give in and do what it requires. Perhaps the quaking is about unwillingness to surrender. I feel much joy to have this trust.
But I would not call it 'quakerly' to be like this. I would call it faithful, maybe, or obedient. And such words remind one that it is not just us-Qs that have these experiences.

Permalink Reply by C. Morningbear Cullimore Mercer on 10th mo. 26, 2011 at 2:05pm

As a person who strives to define Quaker ideals I have experienced both pain and pride at its usage.  I like the word because it evokes the simple testimony of early Friends.  Unfortunately, the people using the term define it in their own world of reference which can be quite small.   It amazes me how "quakerly" is used distructively and life denying as it can be toward persons with different sexual preferences or gender identities.  My belief tells me that "quakerly" is life and love affirming which can, like any adjective, be used poorly.