How is "community" carried out in a Quaker monthly meeting?

I like the weekly worship at meeting, and I have F/friends who I socialize  and work with in and out of  meeting. However, I am concerned about what I see as lack of awareness of "community."  That community, spiritual or any other does not simply "happen," but is skill, or a practice to be done every Sunday and at every committee or any other function.  There is no discussion about "community" other than in sentimental terms.
My observation is that no aspect of what makes up a community is discussed in a meaningful way at local, regional or national events. 

I am not some kind of consultant, but these my thoughts:  Community has both gentle and hard aspects.  The gentle aspects are all about people skills, leadership skills,  responding to needs if Friends and attenders,  convening any type of  meeting, starting a discussion group, handling conflicts within meeting, and many others.  The hard aspects are stewardship: taking care of the building, the grounds, paying bills, handling the inflow of contributions and more. 

While we Quakers are very good with our handle our weekly experiences with the Divine without the assistance or guidance of clergy,  I am doubtful that many meetings can genuinely provide the emotional care, handle conflicts, or navigate complex interpersonal issues without assistance or even some type of training at workshops, conferences, provided by other Quakers or other sources. 

While I have expressed some strong thoughts and feelings, I do feel a strong need for a reality check. I look forward to any comments.

Sorry about my photo. I am new to this website.

Views: 104

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

In Short: There is a way of being wherein people become aware of or experience immanent self-sustained being inshining upon their consciousness and conscience. This experience or awareness of immanent being in itself becomes that which may gather people together. Faith is in the experience itself (as the fondation of consciousness and the informer of conscience) as mediator itself in itself to guide and inform their relationships and interactions. In this different way some gatherings (relatively speaking) forego outward mediations such a religious leaders, institutions, and ideological constructs or contrivances like community to guide and inform or order their relationships. Some people (relatively speaking) are drawn out of participation in and identification with outward forms altogether, such as established Meetings or Yearly Meetings or Churches and set times and places for worship. This is not to judge those who (relatively speaking) are drawn into outward mediated formalities to guide and inform their relationships; just to assert and affirm another way of spiritual experience.

The best we typically do is to sit together, each of us alone with God (as we fail to understand Him.)

Now if all of us were to be sitting together with God, that would unite us.

To have a common purpose -- like the early Jerusalem church described in Acts -- would at least unite us. 

But there are too many people's crying needs pawing at our attention; we can't (and shouldn't) give up our individual leadings as to what tasks we're individually called to address. Such tasks are gifts from God -- but they aren't what we're here for.

We're here on Earth to learn to love; this is God's basic assignment given for our sakes -- because life would be tasteless without it.  

So we join ourselves with a loose association of patience-teachers; sometimes we may wonder what on Earth we're doing with these people.

Others in that same group may look around and find themselves in a wonderful gathering of the like-minded. For them, this can be quite nurturing; for others it is simply stagnation and ingrowth -- creating one large happy family of happy Quaker Smugness. [And what about Quaker-Critic-Smugness? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of critical observation?] 

"Community"? -- What about solidarity with all our fellow poor-souls? How compatible are these two conditions? 

  It is very easy to point out what we cannot do, what is difficult, and throw up our hands. We can allow ourselves to become paralyzed or worse, isolated from the person sitting next to you.  I think we would want to declare solidarity with someone!  I assume we would want solidarity with those we worship?!

To see the God in someone, I must look at him or her.  I must get some sense of what it feels like to be sit and stand across him or her. And I need to know more and more about him or her.  Otherwise, we are just talking about abstractions like characters in a novel, movie, television show.

I think I am not the only person who feels this way.

Reply to Discussion


Support Us

Did you know that QuakerQuaker is 100% reader supported? If you think this kind of outreach and conversation is important, please support it with a monthly subscription or one-time gift.

You can also make a one-time donation.

Latest Activity

William F Rushby replied to Jean Yeager's discussion 'Why Do Primitive Quakers Cling to Traditition?'
"My paper on  "Ann Branson and the Eclipse of Oracular Ministry in Nineteenth Century…"
7th day (Sat)
William F Rushby replied to Jean Yeager's discussion 'Why Do Primitive Quakers Cling to Traditition?'
7th day (Sat)
William F Rushby replied to Jean Yeager's discussion 'Why Do Primitive Quakers Cling to Traditition?'
7th day (Sat)
William F Rushby liked William F Rushby's blog post South Starksboro Through a Child's Eyes
11th month 28
William F Rushby replied to Jean Yeager's discussion 'Why Do Primitive Quakers Cling to Traditition?'
11th month 27
William F Rushby replied to Jean Yeager's discussion 'Why Do Primitive Quakers Cling to Traditition?'
"Your question is a good one!  Some traditionalists cling to "old ways" (at least…"
11th month 27
Jean Yeager posted blog posts
11th month 27
Jean Yeager updated their profile
11th month 27

© 2019   Created by QuakerQuaker.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service