Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by funnel101 on 11th mo. 25, 2010 at 10:26pm

Yes, there can be a real dissonance between our Quaker faith and our practice...

In my Meeting, we struggle most with ageism: as a historic Meetinghouse that takes pride in its history, we sometimes seem to assume that older members--especially those born into Quakerism--are closer to the Light than us younger members. No one in my Meeting would admit to being biased in such a way, (though some in my Meeting would agree with me that this is a bias) but it is clear to me that older members are listened to more than younger ones. There have been several occasions now where I've relayed a Message... and it doesn't get listened to until months or years later, when an older Friend relays the same Message. Perhaps I was only called to plant the seed, but there have been other occasions as well.

Permalink Reply by Alice M Yaxley on 11th mo. 26, 2010 at 11:59am

I recognize the problems you are naming in the influence questions - I think it is really important that we have a collective sense of repentance and know our dependence on divine guidance to get free of all demonic influences, whether racism, sexism or whatever. I think that is how we can come to trust one another - knowing we are committed together to the life of following Christ, and all equally likely to be wrong and dependent on continuing help, all living within the liberation that we are being brought through our obedience to God's leading.

I am not convinced of what you have bound up with that problem in this post though - is it the case that undoing the privilege problems precludes the recognition of particular spiritual gifts for preaching/teaching, or fostering the spiritual life of the meeting, which is why ministers and elders used to be so named? I think perhaps it is better to record those gifts openly, and hence hold those people (through which the gifts are given to the church) both accountable and supported by it? Rather than the accretion of dependence on Friends through purely worldly values, which are all too likely to reinforce class/gender/race hierachies?

Permalink Reply by Martin Kelley on 11th mo. 26, 2010 at 6:41pm

Hi CQ: Sounds like you're rebelling against a notion of Quaker equality that never existed. From the start Friends took their cue from 1 Corinthians 12 about the diversity of spiritual gifts. Some people are better at ministry, discernment, spiritual care, etc. There are still meetings where the facing benches are reserved for recorded ministers & elders. I've been in meetings for business where the clerk has unapologetically looked toward specific "weighty" members of the meeting before moving on in business. In these meetings people are formally recognized with a status that gives their input more weight. This is the traditional Quaker way.

This status is supposed to come from the meeting's recognition that a member has gifts in ministry, discernment, etc., and leads a life of care and attention to these. Here's a traditional-leaning yearly meeting's qualifications for elders:

In every meeting for worship there is a vital and a continuing need for a nucleus of Friends who feel exceptional concern for the deeper spiritual life of the meeting. They will also feel a concern for the encouragement and guidance of the vocal ministry. These, however, are but the primary qualifications to be looked for in Elders. Ideally, they need, in addition, a considerable insight into character, an alert spiritual discernment, exceptionally good judgment, and a fund of ready tact and open friendliness. All these qualifications should be humbly dedicated to a deeply felt zeal for the spiritual growth of the Society, and upheld and purified by the power of constant watchful prayer. Ohio YM Discipline

Unfortunately, human elements all too often come into play (I'm talking generically, not Ohio). Who's friends who whom, or related to the right person, or just who "looks" the part. Most of the schisms among U.S. friends have had a power-trip element to them. This has led to a distrust of authority of all sorts, which creates its own problems. That could be a whole other post, but I think secret unnamed authority is one (the secret nod rather than an open, clearly-understood one) and the way our meetings can be held back from important decisions by less-grounded members who can't separate spiritual guidance from their own personal biases.

I hope we can find a way to get the balance back. As funnel101 says, ageism is a big issue these days. I've seen nominating committees that are too concerned about worldly credentials. And I've been in too many meetings for business where decisions were obviously decided before anyone walked in the room.

Permalink Reply by Cotswold Quaker on 11th mo. 28, 2010 at 6:22pm

I am not rebelling against a notion of equality that was never there. The opposite in fact. I am pretty well versed on early Quaker history. I am very aware that their notion of equality referred originally only to the idea that each person had an equal portion of god in them. Barclay warned the social revolutionaries among their ranks, that this was NOT a reason to level social relations. Some lhe Levellers went off, were abandoned by their Quaker friends and massacred. In the US, early Quakers were deeply divided on the matter, with Quaker enslavers using this theology to justify their slave holding. It seems to me that from the very early days of Quakers, there has existed an uneasy fence sitting. On one side, those with privilege interpreting the theology to defend their privilege and exploitation of others. On the other side, Quakers interpreting the theology to work towards redistribution of power and an end to privilege. My problem with the words "elders" and "overseers" is not about the people or the roles and responsibilities, it is with the continued use of this language which harks back to a time, especially in the US and slavery times when people with power of life and death over Africans were called by these names. I wonder black Americans might say about Quakers continued use of these terms? For me, they symbolise a lack of awareness of the dynamics of race and class power in society today. I would like to see the titles of these important roles changed to better reflect the good and useful purpose of these roles in Quaker organisations.
You said, "Unfortunately, human elements all too often come into play". I wonder what else we could expect? We are, human after all! and whatever our relationship to the divine, we are all here together on this planet to do something together. I think Quaker theology has something positive to bring to our work together. I recall the words of a very wise Quaker Minister, I think he was from a conservative meeting, who said the only thing you can depend on is that we will all hurt each other, its a fact of life, because we are all separate and different to one another. What matters, is how we make up with each other, this is the heart of forgiveness, finding our way back to each other without denying the pain that lies between us. I believe we Quakers have corporate work to do on many fronts, to acknowledge the divisions and to change so that everyone's talents flourish in the service of the community.

Permalink Reply by Cotswold Quaker on 2nd mo. 14, 2011 at 5:31pm

In your first paragraph you refer to  "demonic influences, whether racism, sexism or whatever"

In your second paragraph your refer to "purely worldly values, which are all too likely to reinforce class/gender/race hierachies"

I am unclear if you are saying racism, sexism and class discrimination are the work of the devil or of people or is human society the work of the devil?

Can you clarify? 

Permalink Reply by Alice M Yaxley on 3rd mo. 30, 2012 at 3:20am

Dear Cotswold Quaker, I wonder if this discussion is the one you referred to in your recent comment on Karen Mercer's 'Covergence movement/the purp... I apologize for missing this post of yours here last year and will attempt to reply in some form as soon as I have some time to do so. Bless you, it sounds from your comment as though the word you point out has had a huge negative effect on you in our conversations so far - well done for working that out and for persisting in asking for more information.

The shortest answer is that I follow the usage of Walter Wink. I think Quakers historically have been very good at bringing evil home, to recognize the seeds of war in our own hearts and lives, and that as Wink says, learning how to perceive and name evil is part of being able to choose differently. Of course as Fox preached, it is not a good thing to "preach up sin", but instead use the obvious presence of evil in the destruction of our planet's life support systems, the evils of exploitative industrialism, wealth inequalities and so on as part of our process of turning to Christ's light to be taught what the opposite of evil is.

Blessings.

Alice Yaxley.

Cotswold Quaker said:

In your first paragraph you refer to  "demonic influences, whether racism, sexism or whatever"

In your second paragraph your refer to "purely worldly values, which are all too likely to reinforce class/gender/race hierachies"

I am unclear if you are saying racism, sexism and class discrimination are the work of the devil or of people or is human society the work of the devil?

Can you clarify? 

Permalink Reply by Alice M Yaxley on 4th mo. 6, 2012 at 6:32am

Dear Cotswold Quaker, here's a little more in terms of resources: there's a book on Google books that has some great words about this:‘The gospel in black and white: theological resources for racial reconciliation’ by Dennis L. Okholm. If you search in that for "demonic" there's a good quote or two - one on P19 "My point is that there is a psychology which is demonic, and we in the church must repent of this thing and see the deception and duplicity on both sides".

I expect you don't easily relate to traditional religious language at all - it is something I have studied in order to join the worldwide Quaker tribe. More another time, perhaps.

Permalink Reply by Cotswold Quaker on 4th mo. 14, 2012 at 2:20am

Alice, I also have a liking for Walter Wink. I like that he recognises and grapples with social forces. Apat from the Liberation theologists, there are few Christians in the west who really try to do this consistently, from my experience and reading anyway, I could be wrong there. Its not ever ben an area I have delved into that deeply, only come across through my political reading and activity over the years. Inevitably, as a christian scholar, WW uses a dualistic and biblical language to describe these social forces; good and evil etc.  What he calls evil forces that exist outside the human sphere,  I would say are the expressions of our collective human actions, not at all independent of us but arising out of what we do together. On a small scale, I would say they are like the mood/atmosphere  you sense when you walk into a room of people, but magnified to a much larger scale. They may well become outside of our control, but they arise directly out of what we are doing. We can change the "atmosphere" by changing what we are doing. Thats why I like the Quaker way because at the heart of our discipline, at least here in the UK, is the understanding and acceptance (hopefully), that through what we do and how we do it, we can come to a discovery that is true for our selves, of the sacred nature of ourselves as part of life and that we can know this by learning how to stay in touch with this part of myself that wants life, love and to create. I find that through the Quaker disciplines of Meeting for worship, our discernment processes and our testimonies.  So for me, there are no demons only our own fear of what we create ourselves. That's empowering way of seeing things.  There are some religious words that are too frightening to be used and have led to millions of cruelties and murders. These words, demon and demonic have a powerful christian history attached to them and yes, they resonate for me because they are words of power. They have been used to condemn millions of women to the stake as witches, millions of Jews to be burned in pogroms and concentration camps, to justify the enslavement of millions of Africans whose black skin has been interpreted as devilish. Today in the UK, children are being abused and murdered because they are thought to be possessed by demons. I personally, would not use these words for these reasons and I shudder when I hear them used. 

Alice M Yaxley said:

Dear Cotswold Quaker, I wonder if this discussion is the one you referred to in your recent comment on Karen Mercer's 'Covergence movement/the purp... I apologize for missing this post of yours here last year and will attempt to reply in some form as soon as I have some time to do so. Bless you, it sounds from your comment as though the word you point out has had a huge negative effect on you in our conversations so far - well done for working that out and for persisting in asking for more information.

The shortest answer is that I follow the usage of Walter Wink. I think Quakers historically have been very good at bringing evil home, to recognize the seeds of war in our own hearts and lives, and that as Wink says, learning how to perceive and name evil is part of being able to choose differently. Of course as Fox preached, it is not a good thing to "preach up sin", but instead use the obvious presence of evil in the destruction of our planet's life support systems, the evils of exploitative industrialism, wealth inequalities and so on as part of our process of turning to Christ's light to be taught what the opposite of evil is.

Blessings.

Alice Yaxley.

Cotswold Quaker said:

In your first paragraph you refer to  "demonic influences, whether racism, sexism or whatever"

In your second paragraph your refer to "purely worldly values, which are all too likely to reinforce class/gender/race hierachies"

I am unclear if you are saying racism, sexism and class discrimination are the work of the devil or of people or is human society the work of the devil?

Can you clarify? 

Permalink Reply by Alice M Yaxley on 4th mo. 14, 2012 at 6:04am

Cotswold Quaker wrote:

...  Inevitably, as a christian scholar, WW uses a dualistic and biblical language to describe these social forces; good and evil etc.  What he calls evil forces that exist outside the human sphere,  I would say are the expressions of our collective human actions, not at all independent of us but arising out of what we do together. On a small scale, I would say they are like the mood/atmosphere  you sense when you walk into a room of people, but magnified to a much larger scale. They may well become outside of our control, but they arise directly out of what we are doing. We can change the "atmosphere" by changing what we are doing.

I don't read Wink in the same way you do. I think he makes it very clear in the introduction to Engaging the Powers that he is not using a dualist framework, and I don't identify as doing so either. Is it possible that your religious beliefs in nontheism are causing you to perceive something in both his writing and mine which is not there?

I thought Wink's writing was very clear about us being able to perceive the spiritual forces in exactly the way you describe, arising out of our collectivity and which can be engaged with through prayer. Dark powers affect us in just the same way as "the Light" or whatever you want to call the healing power of Christ. We are required to choose the powers we want to engage with - my understanding is we attempt to choose truth.

I think when we lose the ability to perceive and name evil we also lose the ability to engage it - Wink's earlier books in the powers trilogy are all about this, to my reading - what did you get from those? To my mind dismissing the language because it can be abused is like binning rational thought because it has led to nuclear bombs. We are taught in the christian tradition to look for the fruits which come from our actions in order to understand the spirit that moves us. The spirit is the characteristic flavour - rational thought in isolation from relational values might well lead to nuclear bombs and other horrors, but to my mind that problem is also a pointer to look more closely at the spirit which moves underneath.

There is clear guidance to my reading on knowing God's Holy spirit from other motivations (for example Isaiah 58, Galatians 5 esp v. 22-23); as I understand the Holy Spirit has this special 'flavour' which is inclusive and leads to unity, although sometimes we are called through painful realizations on the way and must go slowly and tenderly with each other. No surprise that humans get it wrong in my mind, to me the wonder is that we don't always.

Wink sets out in very clear terms (to my reading) how christianity invites us to end the human habit of scapegoating, fingerpointing and 'othering': in accepting christ we are embracing the end of scapegoating. I have a sense that I am not personally responsible for the views of others who also use the scriptures but in ways I don't understand or approve of, and one of the reasons to engage with the tradition is in order to share a common language with people I disagree with so we are able to talk, since to my mind communication is a necessary precursor to conflict resolution. That said I don't know that many christians who don't love and use Wink's work. I wonder if that clears anything up for you?

Permalink Reply by Olivia on 4th mo. 14, 2012 at 7:28pm

Hello friends,

I applaud Alice for bringing up the demonic which is a hard topic that is especially cringe-inducing for many progressives but I have found great additional levels of peace in coming to recognize this where it exists, while still maintaining a very healthy progressive view of life...filled with an interest in liberation and authenticity.

Two comments on Martin Kelley's earlier remarks:

1) "specific "weighty" members of the meeting before moving on in business. In these meetings people are formally recognized with a status that gives their input more weight. This is the traditional Quaker way."    

     This has bothered me as well -- the feeling that I thought we were just listening for / looking for the Light of Christ in one another and letting the degree of Light spoken through another speak for itself.   To me having weighty and non-weighty Friends is in direct obfuscation  :-)  to the interest in seeing the Light as it is. 

2) Also Martin's comment about nominating committees being too concerned about worldly credentials:      I was very disappointed in how my meeting introduced new members to the community.  Those who were more "poor" in spirit or in credentials got less of any greeting or warm introduction while those who were well credentialed or popular got a good warm introduction.   This was offensive to me since I thought the Gospel was exactly the opposite of that approach and the "least of these" was alienated in this process -- and their sympathizers.

Permalink Reply by Alice M Yaxley on 4th mo. 15, 2012 at 3:39am

Olivia said:

... 2) Also Martin's comment about nominating committees being too concerned about worldly credentials:      I was very disappointed in how my meeting introduced new members to the community.  Those who were more "poor" in spirit or in credentials got less of any greeting or warm introduction while those who were well credentialed or popular got a good warm introduction.   This was offensive to me since I thought the Gospel was exactly the opposite of that approach and the "least of these" was alienated in this process -- and their sympathizers.

There's such clear guidance in the Epistle of James about this. I am working on taking that seriously.

Still thinking about your point #1. I hear what you are saying there, that's a good point.

Is it a bit like having a support and accountability group? When I have to decide on things I ask my three people who have agreed to help me with discernment. I trust their judgements and always feel lighter for asking for their help, and when I remember to ask them I can be more confident about staying on the path because I trust that they also hold the intention to help me find the path and stay on it.

If I disagree with what they say, we would work through that, because it is probably a way in which Christ is teaching me or them. It is useful whether we agree or disagree. So we might record the gift that God is giving to the Meeting through someone, and as part of helping that person stay accountable, we might ask them to speak particularly about an item that concerns their gift.

We expect that because their spiritual practice centres closer to this area, that they might well have something useful to say on it? If the contribution of that Friend doesn't enlighten, it may be that there is some learning that this Friend, or the Meeting needs to do around this issue. I think from my own experience that I always learn something from doing discernment, even if it's just a reminder of something I had forgotten.

So I'd say "Listen to the Life!" is stil the overwhelming priority. And, in the process of living as beloved community, it might be a good idea to ask those Friends who we recognize as having gifts in a relevant area, because it helps us all stay accountable?