Comment by James Riemermann on 5th mo. 21, 2009 at 2:52pm

I should also add what might not be clear. Despite my differences, I am very grateful for the efforts Martin has put into stimulating and organizing Quaker conversation on the web through this site. Likewise Bill Samuel, who has been hosting a very diverse forum on quakerinfo.com for most of the past decade.

Comment by Nathan Swift on 5th mo. 21, 2009 at 3:41pm

"Quakerism was alive when I met it. " Hehehehe, I LIKE that. So maybe it's just the Christian part that needs renewal and we can use your help. Hmmmm, if so, who is called to help in spite of the pain that will come?

Comment by Bradius V. Maurus III on 5th mo. 22, 2009 at 3:04am

Comment by Bradius V. Maurus III 56 minutes ago
Delete Comment I am myself a neopagan Friend in the Romano-Hellenic tradition, and therefore can only be a member of the Religious Society of Friends insofar as it is universalist, and universalist specifically in a sense that does not impose a specific holy book on its members. This having been said, I can sympathise with Alice's position. Quakerism grew up in a very Christian religious and social background, and there is a great congruence between the language of the Judaeo-Christian scriptures and Quakerism. This makes communication and cohesion among Friends easier in such meetings where there is a strong consensus on this approach.

But I would have to suggest that that cannot be the final word. We believe in continuing revelation, and what was all very satisfactory in the past might be inadequate for the spiritual needs of today. In Europe the best available statistics show that only45 % of British Quakers would prefer to be individually called "Christians". And probably the majority of those would feel uncomfortable with expressions like "Lord and Saviour".

In the liberal unprogrammed tradition we have for decades now been admitting people to membership who are refugees from Christian groups and traditions which appalled them, and they feel a spiritual need for the real love and sincerity that Christianity at its best, and Quakerism, can provide, but scriptural language leaves them cold. Many people such as myself who are not from a Christian orientation at all were also admitted by virtue of our non-credalism.

If the Holy Spirit is trying to tell us something these days, I would look to the very numerous monthly meetings who under its guidance have in recent decades admitted so many people into our Society for whom the Bible is not personally relevant or resonant. The Bible has much to teach everyone (including, I think, the lovely Gospel of John)0, but to limit ourselves to it just because it was so emphasised by the early Friends under the influence of their surrounding culture does not seem to me what we are now called to do.

While I myself have taught the Bible as literature at the university level, I have been equally or more inspired by reading the Tao Te Ching, Marcus Aurelius, the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, and other classical and religious works. Surely we should take advantage of our openness, our non-credalism, our faith in ongoing revelation and prophetic inspiration, and our extremely varied membership to learn how to use more strands from differnt traditions to make our modes of religious expression more ample, varied, and flexible. This will not be as easy as falling back on the Bible as something common to us all, but it might be worth it to try to face up to this challenge.

And we must remember too that large portions of European society and culture have already entered a post-Christian phase in which the Judaeo-Christian scriptures are no longer a fully shared heritage on the basis of which to communicate within ourselves and with others in outreach. This is probably not yet the case in the United States, but it is already a reality here in Europe. So, it seems to me that we should not limit ourselves to just one book, however beloved and traditional. Rather than limit ourselves in that way, might it not be better to compile in our monthly and yearly meetings a list of Quaker-relevant core scriptures from different traditions which might be read by all in the meeting to provide a more ample and universal basis of common reference? (I have suggested a few titles above.) Such an approach might also promote a greater appreciation for the Bible as one scripture among many, occupying a special historical place in Quakerism, but not something that one has to respect or praise or believe in too unreservedly, but rather something to learn from and be inspired by. And perhaps reminding ourselves that the Spirit has been active in inspiring others around the world, and not only the authors of the Judaeo-Christian scriptures. And centering on the Spirit rather than writings is what Quakerism is really all about, isn;t it?

Comment by Nathan Swift on 5th mo. 22, 2009 at 10:10am

"Pruning" seems to me to be a useful term. I would describe the activities of Fox et alia as pruning away merely religious accretions to the message of Jesus. The question then becomes one of defining rootstock and what formalities distract or even detract from that message. Part of what early Quakers "pruned" was the idea that God only spoke to us through Christian forms and tradition, though that tradition (somewhat pruned) was the primary if not the only vehicle for expression of the Light at that time. I have to wonder if the vigor of the message is served by limiting the form of expression. What is it that needs to be pruned?
In His Love,
Nate

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page