Recently in blogs Category
Interesting reading today about how our Quaker structures can choke the Spirit and hem in our communities. Johan M is no stranger to Quaker institutions, but in "Clerk Please" he writes:
But who will see and proclaim these things to new audiences if we are so busy trying to sort out our structures, nomination processes, and interpersonal animosities that we don't take the time to discern and honor leadings?
Susanne K echos some of these themes in her latest post, "Quakerism and Structure":
One of the key parts of George Fox's revelation was that religious structures can kill the free movement of the Spirit... My Ffriend R has advocated the practice of disbanding the Religious Society of Friends every 50 years. He believes that the spark of the initial vision and passion of religious groups only survives for about 50 years before developing structures start to choke the movement of the Spirit.
It's been about eighteen months since I was sidelined from the professional Quaker world (I work for some Quakers now, but on a contract basis and the relationship is much different). A year or two before this, my monthly meeting melted down and more or less devolved into a worship group and while I've found a more active meeting to attend, it's not particularly close and I haven't joined.
The result of these two changes is that I haven't sat in a staff meeting for over a year; I don't attend business meetings; I don't belong to any committees; I don't represent any group at conferences. After years of being what Evan Welkin called an uberQuaker, I'm an uninvolved slacker. Bad Martin, right?
Except I'm not uninvolved of course. I feel I'm doing as much now to help people find and grow into Quakerism than I did when I was paid to do this. I don't spend much time with that 2% skim of Quaker elite who attend all the same conferences and appoint each other to all the same committees, but then catering to their needs was pretty high maintenance and was never something I thought of as the real mission.
Suzanne talks about the "Sabbatical Year" meme, and of course lots of electrons fly about the blogosphere about the possibilities of the Emerging Church movement. There's a hunger for a different way of being a Friend. I know one Quaker who threatens to burn down the famous meetinghouse he worships in because he feels that the building has become an empty icon, a weight of bricks upon the Spirit (I'll leave him anonymous in case something mysterious happens to the meetinghouse tonight!). How tragic would it be, really, if some of institutional baggage was laid down and we had to find other ways to confirm and support one another's ministries?
I love teaching Quakerism, I love helping Quakers use the internet for outreach and I love reaching out to potential Friends with my writing. I'm doing all that without committees or staff meetings. No budgets to fight over, no mission statements to write.
Half a decade ago now I wrote about the "lost Quaker generation," active and visionary Gen X Friends who seemed to be dropping out in droves. We're all keeping in better touch now via Facebook but I haven't noticed much jumping back into the fray. What I have noticed is a phenomenon where Friends half a generation older are taking on Quaker responsibilities only to drop away from active meeting involvement when their terms ended.
If we could pull together all of the dropouts together and start meetings that focused on worship, religious education and deep-community activities, I think we'd see something interesting. I envy those with less-musty, Gen-X heavy meetings nearby (Robin M showcased her meeting recently). And don't get me wrong: I also love the old Quaker ideal of the strong local Quaker community and the bonds of the community on the individual, etc., etc. But I don't see meetings like that anywhere nearby and the only clear leading I really have is to continue this "freelance" teaching, writing and organizing. It's not the situation I want but it's the situation I have and at this point I have to just trust the leadings as they come step by step and have faith they're going somewhere. Boy though, I wish I knew where all this was heading sometimes!
For any bleeding edge Web 2.0 Quakers out there, there's now a QuakerQuaker FriendFeed account to go along with its Twitter account. Both accounts simply spit out the QuakerQuaker RSS feed but there might be some practical uses. I actually follow QQ primary by Twitter these days and those who don't mind annoying IM pop-ups could get instant alerts. Web 2.0 everywhere man Robert Scoble recently posted that many of his conversations and comments have moved away from his blog and over to FriendFeed. I don't see that occurring anytime soon with QQ but I'll set the accounts up and see what happens. I've hooked my own Twitter and FriendFeed accounts up with QuakerQuaker, so that's one way I'm cross-linking with this possible overlay of QQ.
For what it's worth I've always assumed that QQ is relatively temporary, an initial meeting ground for a network of online Friends that will continue to expand into different forms. I'm hoping we can pick the best media to use and not just jump on the latest trends. As far as the Religious Society of Friends is concerned, I'd say the two most important tests of a new media is it's ability to outreach to new people and its utility in helping to construct a shared vision of spiritual renewal.
On these test, Facebook has been a complete failure. So many promising bloggers have disappeared and seem to spend their online time swapping suggestive messages on Facebook (find a hotel room folks) or share animated gifs with 257 of their closed "friends." Quaker Friends tend to be a clannish bunch and Facebook has really fed into that (unfortunate) part of our persona. Blogging seemed to be resuscitating the idea of the "Public Friend," someone who was willing to share their Quaker identity with the general public. That's still happening but it seems to have slowed down quite a bit. I'm not ready to close my own Facebook account but I would like to see Friends really think about which social media we spend our time on. Friends have always been adapting--railroads, newspapers, frequently flier miles have all affected how we communicate with each other and the outside world. Computer networking is just the latest wrinkle.
As a personal aside, the worst thing to happen to my Quaker blogging has been the lack of a commute (except for a short hop to do some Haddonfield web design a few times a week). I'm no longer stranded on a train for hours a week with nothing to do but read the journal of Samuel Bownas or throw open my laptop to write about the latest idea that flits through my head. Ah the travails of telecommuting!
Update, 11:55am: so far mostly so good. The site's moved over. I think I've fixed up most of the links. Caching seems to be problematic still (if you get a bunch of gibberish instead of links, then hit refresh). New features include a brand spanking new design, a little fun with the Flickr flash slideshow and commenting on category pages using Disqus.com.
More importantly, it's very easy for me to set up new categories and event pages and I plan to be a lot more generous doling them out. Let me know about Quaker events where we might expect a conclave of bloggers and let me know those tagging categories you've always wanted. I've added quaker.racism, quaker.arts, and quaker.parenting, three popular requests, but I won't bump them up to the main sidebar until they get a certain amount of content.
And on the timely note, I added a category to collect news about the violence in Kenya. Those of you who feel comfortable using del.icio.us should tag Quaker Kenyan news you find with "quaker.kenya"
Readers will probably be unsurprised to learn that I use Technorati, Google Blog Search, etc., every day to keep track of the Quaker blogosphere. I act as a kind of community organizer and my searches are for interesting posts talking about Quakers (until reading Eileen's post I hadn't check my Technorati "rank" in months). Many people's first introduction to QuakerQuaker.org is getting linked from it, and I suspect I've accidentally outed a few beginning bloggers who hadn't told anyone of their new blog!
I have a professional blog on web design and analytics (with a somewhat off-topic but satisfying post on top at the moment) and separating that out has allowed me to use this personal blog, QuakerRanter, for whatever I like. Most regularly readers would say it focuses on Quakerism and cute kid pictures and while those are the most common posts, the most read posts are the minor fascinations I indulge myself with occasionally. Quaker plain dress is something I practice but don't think about most of the time (806 readers in past month). My wife and I love to bust on bad baby names and unfairly unpopular baby names (627 visits). I've also detailed some outings to semi-legendary South Jersey haunts (317) and score high on searches to them.
The conventional wisdom of the blog-as-publicity tool crowd would probably say these off-topic posts are distracting my core audience. Perhaps, but they're infrequent on the blog and long-lived on Google. Besides, I think it helps people to know I'm not just obsessed with one topic. Being a part of a real community means knowing each other in all of our quirks. I'm more tender and forgiving of other Quaker bloggers when I know more of their story: it puts what they say into a context that makes it sound more lived, less ideological. There's certainly good reasons for tightly-focused professional blogs (I'd drop Techcrunch from my blogroll if they started posting kids pictures!), but as more people read posts through feeds and aggregators I wonder if there's going to be as much pressure for personal, community-oriented blogs to be as single-minded in their focus.
We all have diverse, quirky interests so why not indulge them? I have seen blogs that try too hard to pander to particular audiences and boy, are they boring! A certain degree of idiosyncrasy and subjective orneriness is probably essential. Personality is at least as important as focus.
PS: I'm also interested in making sure I don't loose the core audience with all my side trips, hence the "latest Quaker posts" at the top of the page. I have at least one request for a Quaker-only RSS feed and will eventually get that going.
PPS: As if on queue, the next post in Google Reader after Eileen's is Avinish Kaushik's Blog Metrics: Six recommendations for measuring your success. Parts of it are probably a bit technical for most QR readers but it's useful for thinking about blogs as outreach.
I won't belabor the point, but I wonder if something similar is happening within Friends. It's kind of weird that only two people have commented on Johan Maurer's blog post about Baltimore Yearly Meeting's report on Friends United Meeting. Johan's post may well be the only place where online discussion about this particular report is available. I gave a plug for it and it was the most popular link from QuakerQuaker, so I know people are seeing it. The larger issue is dealt with elsewhere (Bill Samuel has a particularly useful resource page) but Johan's piece seems to be getting a big yawn.
It's been superseded as the most popular QuakerQuaker link by a lighthearted call for an International Talk Like a Quaker Day put up by a Livejournal blogger. It's fun but it's about as serious as you might expect. It's getting picked up on a number of blogs, has more links than Johan's piece and at current count has thirteen commenters. I think it's a great way to poke a little fun of ourselves and think about outreach and I'm happy to link to it but I have to think there's a lesson in its popularity vis-a-vis Johan's post.
Here's the inevitable question: do most Quakers just not care about Friends United Meeting or Baltimore Yearly Meeting, about a modern day culture clash that is but a few degrees from boiling over into full-scale institutional schism? For all my bravado I'm as much an institutional Quaker as anyone else. I care about our denominational politics but do others, and do they really?
Yearly meeting sessions and more entertainment-focused Quaker gatherings are lucky if they get three to five percent attendance. The governing body of my yearly meeting is made up of about one percent of its membership; add a percent or two or three and you have how many people actually pay any kind of attention to it or to yearly meeting politics. A few years ago a Quaker publisher commissioned a prominent Friend to write an update to liberal Friends' most widely read introductory book and she mangled the whole thing (down to a totally made-up acronym for FWCC) and no one noticed till after publication--even insiders don't care about most of this!
Are the bulk of most contemporary Friends post-institutional? The percentage of Friends involved in the work of our religious bodies has perhaps always been small, but the divide seems more striking now that the internet is providing competition. The big Quaker institutions skate on being recognized as official bodies but if their participation rate is low, their recognition factor small, and their ability to influence the Quaker culture therefore minimal, then are they really so important? After six years of marriage I can hear my wife's question as a Quaker-turned-Catholic: where does the religious authority of these bodies come from? As someone who sees the world through a sociological/historical perspective, my question is complementary but somewhat different: if so few people care, then is there authority? The only time I see Friends close to tears over any of this is when a schism might mean the loss of control over a beloved school or campground--factor out the sentimental factor and what's left?
I don't think a diminishing influence is a positive trend, but it won't go away if we bury our heads in the sand (or in committees). How are today's generation of Friends going to deal with changing cultural forces that are threatening to undermine our current practices? And how might we use the new opportunities to advance the Quaker message and Christ's agenda?
Last month's annual sessions of Baltimore Yearly Meeting (the regional body for Friends those parts) were marked by an important report from its representatives to Friends United Meeting, an international body of Friends that Baltimore belongs to but has a complicated relationship with. Attendees at the yearly meeting session heard the report, of course, and news trickled out in various ways (one visitor IM'ed me that day with the briefest sketch).
Enter the internet. At some point Baltimore put the report up on their website. The information was there but there's no opportunity for discussion as the BYM website has no commenting feature. I posted the report up to QuakerQuaker and within a few hours, Johan Maurer was on top of it. Johan used to be the chief executive of Friends United Meeting and a wide experience with Friends from across the Quaker theological and cultural spectrum. He's also an active blogger and he posted a reply, What is really wrong with FUM, part two: the Baltimore YM report, that I find particularly useful. His blog has comments. I've put Johan's post up on QuakerQuaker and we now have a forum to try to tease apart the range of issues in the Baltimore report: leadership, theology, international relations, etc. How cool is that?
PS: I linked to the Wikipedia articles on Baltimore and Friends United Meeting. Has anyone else noticed Wikipedia makes a much more accessible introduction to Quaker bodies than their own websites?
My F/f Thomas T emailed me about the Blogphiladelphia “unconference” happening next month in downtown Philly. It sounds like it could be silly and interesting at the same time so I’ve signed up.
Personal stalkers making summer plans should keep mid-August open. It looks like my blog/IM/Twitter/Facebook buddy C Wess Daniels and I are going to add yet another social media to our repertoire and actually meet face to face as co-presenters for an evening event at Ohio Yearly Meeting Conservative. Along with Ohio’s David Male we’ll be banging on that ever-popular “Convergent Friends” drum. I’m not sure I’ve ever actually given my two cents on the term and the phenom. I’ll probably post about it in the lead up to the August event as a kind of preparation. Anyone within road-trip distance of Barnesville is invited to come over Friday evening the 17th to hear the talk.
And speaking of Conservative Friends, everyone should check out the great newish website called The Conservative Friend, an unofficial outreach initiative of Ohio Yearly Meeting. It’s simple but attractive, walks that fine line between truth telling and humility with grace and has a wonderful sense of humor and self-awareness that sneaks up on you as you read through. Now who knew Ohio Conservatives had a sense of humor? Seriously, it’s really nice work.
I’ll be missing the Conservative Gathering of Friends being held in the Lancaster, PA, area next weekend. I’d like to claim that money and time is keeping me from attending but it’s hard to argue that when I drove by its meeting sites only a few days ago just to look at trains. Well, let’s just say at this moment of life my spirit needed family time more than Quaker gathering time. I hope it goes well; if any QuakerRanter readers do attend I’d love to hear their impressions.
This First Day I stayed up late (I’m doing some fill-in night work these days and morning is late for me) and visited northwest Philadelphia’s Chestnut Hill Monthly Meeting for worship and a monthly education hour they call “Forum.” This month’s focus was on Quaker blogging and I was asked to speak along with Imperfect Serenity Eileen Flanagan and Juliloquy (as usual I’m using the identities they give on the blog). In the audience were SEPTA Kid (who I knew I knew from Flickr!), A Thin Place Dan Evans and Christie, the yearly meeting staffer who helped put together the recent yearly meeting youth blog. When we began the Forum moderator asked for a show of hands for people who had blogs and there were even more bloggers there. Per capita Chestnut Hill might even outpace Twin Cities in blogdom. A few thoughts in no particular order:
Blogging Cultures
A recurring theme to the questions was privacy and how far we go to name ourselves and family members. All three of us cloak ourselves in one way or another (mine is primarily geographic, though Dan claimed he could find my address if he wanted (tell me if you can so I can see if I can plug up that hole!)). The whole concern seemed a little age-reflective, just in that I wondered if folks there knew just how open the whole Facebook/Myspace 20-something crowd can be. A difference of course is that we three panelists (and most of the audience) are of that professional age where we do have to worry about outward appearances. A common message on Myspace is the announcement that someone’s got a job and will now take down their more wild pictures. Are the differences in how willing people are to share their lives online a reflection more of changing generational standards or age-based necessities?
Mommy and Daddy Blogs & Bloggings
We three bloggers were all parents of young’ish children and this all came up in our stories. With my small kids, family arrangement with my wife not being Quaker and current night-shift work, it’s nearly impossible for me to give a lot of face-time to Quaker activities (Chris M recently posted about being able to accept an important meeting appointment that he had to turn down a few years ago, in part because of parental responsibilities). The particulars of my current life arrangement makes getting to worship a major accomplishment. Many bloggers are parents of small kids and our sites have given us the ability to stay more engaged in a sort of intellectual life than we could be otherwise. Many other bloggers seem to be geographically isolated from their peer group, which creates a similar dynamic.
Panels & Interest Groups, Workshops and Worship
It’s tempting to compare this panel to the outwardly-similar interest group I convened with LizOpp and Robin M at last year’s FGC Gathering. The most pronounced difference is that the interest group didn’t focus on blogging but mentioned it only as a piece of our spiritual life story. Our concern was the ministry that was growing out of the blogosphere. We grounded our session in worship and as I wrote last summer, much of the talk had a feel of testimony to it.
At the Chestnut Hill Forum blogs were the focus. I’m quite qualified to talk about blogs and the internet from a purely technical and social standpoint, of course, and that’s mostly what I did but it felt awkward for me. Christie touched on this when she asked a question towards the end about why my blog posts tend to have strong opinions but my presentation that day was so mild. The question has stayed with me and I think part of the difference is that the monthly Forum series is pattered after a secular educational model: it’s more workshop that worship sharing. For me that kept it on a level on mechanics. I could share what’s been happening on the Quaker blogosphere from a sociological standpoint but to give something approaching “testimony” would have felt out of place. Educational forums are fine and I don’t want to dismiss their value but their form probably does keep the conversation at a particular level.
Contextless Forwards
In her question Christie also mentioned how certain posts of mine sometimes get forwarded around to yearly meeting staff. I consciously try to keep my blog wide-ranging, as a way to give readers a way to know the person behind the blog. I know what I write can sometimes be challenging. I know too that it’s easy to dismiss challenges by taking statements out of context in such a way that the messenger can be parodied as some sort of other who can be safely ignored. Regular readers will hopefully catch the love that undergirds everything I write (my goal at least) and will understand the balance I try to keep between liberal and traditional Quakerism. But it’s good to remember that some people only reading certain posts: I might want to take care to represent myself completely in everything post I write, even if it’s only a disclaimer.
— — —
Enough for now, I’ve got to wake up the baby from his nap. It was great to visit Chestnut Hill, where I’ve never worshiped before. It was quite refreshing to be a meeting where there’s lots of parents and families. It was nice to meet the other bloggers and have a chance to talk about Friends and blogging to a new audience. Thanks to Amey for organizing it, my dear friend Thomas for tech’ing it up and to everyone who came and participated.
There are periods in my Quaker blogging where I feel a stop to write on my blog. The quietness doesn't come from having nothing to say; rather I don't know how to say it. Is Christ's Spirit telling me simply to watch and understand, to sit mute as I see Friends laugh away His concerns? Or do I also have a call to name and witness it publicly?
During these times my online ministry generally comes out in my comments on other people's blogs. Here then are my links to my last ten comments. Please be aware that I do sometimes comment on non-Quaker sites (imagine!) which also show up here:
Elsewhere
For those interested, I do have a tech links blog over on my web design site, and that QuakerQuaker is mostly a overgrown links blog.
Everyone can now add posts to the QuakerQuaker category listings. Simply bookmark the post in Del.icio.us, list the QQ categories and it will be added to the page.
For example, say you’ve seen just the coolest post on Convergent Friends. Go to the Convergent Friends page to find the right “tag”—in this case “quaker.convergent”. Bookmark the post you like, write a title and description and list “quaker.convergent” as its tag. An hour or so later the post will show up on the Convergent Friends page. How cool is that? Here are instruction on how to use Del.icio.us and title pages.
There have been a few recent posts about the state of the Quaker blogosphere. New blogger Richard M wrote about Anger on the Quaker blogs and LizOpp replied back with Popcorn in the Q-blogosphere?.
There’s been some head-scratching going on about QuakerQuaker over the last few weeks. In the service of transparency I’ve posted my contributor guidelines on the About QuakerQuaker page. Here they are:
Post should be explicitly Quaker: Any thoughtful posts from any branch of Friends that wrestles in some way with what it means to be a Quaker is fair game. While we all have our own issues that connect deeply with our understanding of our faith, the Blogwatch only seems to work if it keeps focused on Quakerism, on how we our faith and lives interact. Back when this was just a links list on my personal site I would get complaints when I added something that seemed related to my understanding of Quakerism but that wasn’t specifically written from a Quaker standpoint (when we want to make this kind of link we should do so on our personal blogs where we can put it in better context).
Post should be timely: I’ve billed QuakerQuaker as “a guide to the Quaker conversation” and links should go to recently-written articles with strong voices. We’re not trying to create a comprehensive list of Quaker websites, so no linking to organizational homepages. While most links should go to blog posts, it’s fine to include good articles from Quaker publications. A link to something like a press release or new book announcement should only be made if it’s extraordinary. Remember that QuakerQuaker posts will only appear on the main site for a few days (if the initial setup goes well I can start work on some ideas to giave a more timeless element to the site).
Post should be Interesting: Don’t bookmark everything you find. If the post feels predictable or snoozy, just ignore it (even if the writer or topic is important). The Quaker bloggers all have their audiences and we don’t need to highlight every post of every blogger. Only make the link if the post speaks out to you in some way (it’s quite possible that one of the other contributors will pick up, finding something you didn’t and highlighting it in their description). That said, the posts you link to don’t have to be masterpieces; they can have grammatical and logical mistakes. What’s important is that there’s some idea in there that’s interesting. It might be a good discipline for each of us not to add our the posts from our own personal blogs but to let one of the other contributors do it for us.
That’s it. While there are some vague assumptions in all this about the role of tradition and community, discipline and individualism, there’s nothing about theology or who gets linked. This is a publication, with something of an editorial voice in that I’ve chosen who gets to add links and asked them to be subjective, but its very mellow and I’ve been happy to see contributors range far afield. Google tells us that this is one of 18.7 million “Quaker” websites and $10/month will get you your own so let’s not do too much navel-gazing about what’s linked or not linked. If you don’t find it interesting, there are plenty of non-subjective Quaker blogs lists out there. I do listen to feedback and am always twiddling with the site so feel free to send email to me at martink-at-nonviolence-dot-org.
Read a fabulous article last night and this morning by Diana Boyd, a PhD student at UC-Berkeley and a researcher at Yahoo! Research Berkeley. She’s writing about the interactions of culture and technology and it speaks a lot to some of the online and offline conversations I’ve been having lately.
Here’s the link: G/localization: When Global Information and Local Interaction Collide. And here are some snippets to entice you to follow it:
On culture:
When mass media began, people assumed that we would all converge upon one global culture. While the media has had an effect, complete homogenization has not occurred. And it will not. While some values spread and are adopted en-masse, cultures form within the mass culture to differentiate smaller groups of people. Style-driven subcultures are the most visible form of this, but it occurs in companies and in other social gatherings.
Techies will like her take on “embedded observers”:
While the creators have visions of what they think would be cool, they do not construct unmovable roadmaps well into the future. They are constantly reacting to what’s going on, adding new features as needed. The code on these sites changes constantly, not just once a quarter. The designers try out features and watch how they get used. If no one is interested, that’s fine - they’ll just make something new. They are all deeply in touch with what people are actually doing, why and how it manifests itself on the site.
On online communities:
Digital community participants sometimes find that they “accidentally” meet someone. People collide on Flickr because they took similar photos; the find wonderful blogs through search. These ad-hoc interactions typically occur because people are producing material that can be stumbled across, either through search or browsing. They may not intend for the material to be consumed beyond the intended audience, but they also don’t see a reason to prevent it. In essence, they are inviting moments of synchronicity. And synchronicity is energizing.
I tried to post this as a comment on this piece by James Riemermann on the Nontheist Friends website but the site experienced a technical difficulty when I tried to submit it (hope it’s back up soon!). James describes his post as a “rant” about “conservative-leaning liberal Friends,” and one theme that got picked up in the comments was how he and others felt excluded by us (for that is a term I use to try to describe my spiritual condition). Rather than loose the comment I’ll just post it here.
Hi James and everyone,
Well, I think I was one of the first of the Quaker bloggers to talk about conservative-leaning liberal Quakers back in July 2003. I too am not sure it’s anything worth calling a “movement.”
I hear this feeling of being excluded but I’m not sure where that’s coming from. When James had a really wonderful, thought-provoking response to my “We’re All Ranters Now” piece, I asked him if I could “reprint” the comment as its own guest piece. It got a lot of attention, a lot of comments. I didn’t realize you were using nontheistfriends.org as a blog these days but Robin M of What Canst Thou Say did and has added a link to your post from QuakerQuaker.org, which again is a validation that yours is an important voice (I can pretty much guarantee that this is going to be one of the more followed links). You and everyone here are part of the family.
Yes, we have some disagreements. I don’t think Quakerism is simply made up of whoever makes it into the meetinghouse. I think we have a tradition that we’ve inherited. This consists of practices and values and ways of looking at the world. Much of that tradition comes from the gospel of Jesus and the epistles between the earliest Christian communities. Much of what might feel like neutral Quaker practice is a clear echo of that tradition, and that echo is what I talk about that in my blogs. I think it’s good to know where we’re coming from. That doesn’t mean we’re stuck there and we adapt it as our revelation changes (this attitude is why I’m a liberal Friend no matter how much I talk about Christ). These blog conversations are the ways we share our experiences, minister to and comfort one another.
That people hold different religious understandings and practices isn’t in itself inherently exclusionary. Diversity is good for us, right? There’s no one Quaker center. There’s mulitiple conversations happening in multiple languages, much of it gloriously overlapping on the electronic pathways of the internet. That’s wonderful, it shows a great vitality. The religious tradition that is Quakerism is not dead, not mothballed away in a living history museum somewhere. It’s alive, with its assumptions and boundaries constantly being revisited. That’s cool. If a particular post feels too carping, there’s always the “eldering of the back button,” as I like to call it. Let’s try to hear each other from where we are and to remain open to the ministry from those who might appear to be coming from a different place. Love is the first movement and love is unconditional and accepts us for who we are.
I better stop this before I get too mushy, with all this talk of love! See what I mean about being a liberal Quaker?
Your Friend, Martin
Sometimes my Quaker Ranter posts dry up for awhile. I console myself that I’m doing enough giving out the daily reading list of Quaker posts, reading through my new old Quaker book collection (Samuel Bownas just visited the meeting I’m attending most frequently these days!) and working my new advancement and outreach job—oh, and of course there’s also the family! But you could also just follow my train of thought by looking over my shoulder at comments made at other sites. Over the last few days the Quaker blogosphere has had a number of interesting posts. Here’s a cobble-together of posts and comments that have spoken to me about the inherent Quaker snare of confusing our “Quaker faith” for God.
Over on Kwakersaur, David M shares some renewal queries for his yearly meeting. Nancy A detected a “sense an overall fatigue” in them and Beppe agreed, asking if the seemingly-simple answers to these sorts of queries require that we first have the much harder-to-come-by “understanding [of] who we are.”
One of the queries goes “What does our Quaker faith ask us to DO?” Eeeyyaa-aa-yaaaaawwwn. My favorite Quaker committee-meeting trick of late consists of replace all the “we”-like phrases with God. How about “What does God ask us to DO?” (Just a quick testimony: I love David’s work and I value his wonderful online ministry. Any time he wants to come down to Philly to tend to our flock with talk of Quaker renewal, he’s welcome!! I’m sure everyone on the Consultation and Renewal Working Group is deeper than the queries would indicate and suspect that this is an example of the Quaker corporate dumbing-down tendency that’s practically our modus operandi.)
All this ties into a great post from AJ Schwanz, Can I Say I’m Emerging If I Haven’t Emerged or Quaker If I Haven’t Quaked?,. Here’s a taste:
Part of me has thought of shedding my Quaker pin. How can I use it?: have I ever quaked with the power of God? Shedding my differentiation label certainly would support the idea that “there’s really only one church, but lots of meeting places.” Particularly in this town where the Quaker college is perceived as pretty insular, would I have different interactions with folks if I simply said “I’m a follower of Christ” rather than a “Friend”? What would I miss out on? What would be gained?
Paul L implicitly addresses the question of shedding the Quaker pin in his review of Punshon’s Reasons for Hope, where he asks if “Quakers have a unique niche to fill in the Christian and broader social landscape.”
Are we Quaker because it’s comfortable, because our friends are, because the buildings are cool and the social hour coffee hot? Or the opposite: are we Friends because we really liked Barclay’s Apology but couldn’t care less for the messyness of flesh-and-blood religious community? Another Quaker blogger recently sent me a private email in which he confided: “My main question of late to Quakers is: what is so remarkable about Quakers? I sometimes have to be a pain-in-the-ass in order to ask these questions.” That seems like both a good question and a important meeting role.
There’s something about living both within a community and outside it. The real deal isn’t in any of our human institutions, theories or notions yet it is through these that we live out our faith. Christ as transcendent everythingness and Christ as a particular guy in a particular place speaking a particular language and living a particular life. The pull between the eternal and peculiar is the very essence of the human condition. The same voice that spoke to the prophets and apostles speaks to us today, if only we have ears to hear. How can we learn to lessen the volume on our own self-kudos long enough to hear the divine whisperer?
An amazing thing has happened in the last two years: we’ve got Friends from the corners of Quakerism sharing our similarities and differences, our frustrations and dreams through Quaker blogs. Disenchanted Friends who have longed for deeper conversation and consolation when things are hard at their local meeting have built a network of Friends who understand. When our generation is settling down to write our memoirs — our Quaker journals — a lot of us will have to have at least one chapter about becoming involved in the Quaker blogging community.
A few months ago I started keeping a links blog that evolved into the “Quaker Blog Watch” (formally at home at nonviolence.org/quaker though included as a column elsewhere). This is my answer to the aggregation question that a few of us were tossing around in Sixth Month. I’ve never believed in an uberBlog that would to supercede all of our individual ones and act as gate-keeper to “proper” Quakerism. For all my Quaker Conservativism I’m still a Hicksite and we’re into a certain live-and-let live creative disorder in our religious life.
I also don’t like technical solutions. It helps to have a human doing this. And it helps (I think) if they have some opinions. When I began my list of annotated Quaker links I called it my “Subjective Guide” and these links are also somewhat subjective. I don’t include every post on Quakerism: only the ones that make me think or that challenge me in some way. Mediocrity, good intentions and a famous last name mean less to me than simple faithfulness to one’s call.
There’s no way to keep stats but it looks like the links are being used (hours after I stumble across a previously-unknown site I see comments from regular Quaker Ranter readers!). Here’s the next step: instructions on adding the last seven entries of the Quaker blog watch to your site. I imagine some of you might want to try it out on your sidebar. If so, let me know how it works: I’m open to tweaking it. And do remember I’ll be disappearing for a few days sometime soon (still waiting, that kid can’t stay in there too long.)
 |
| An early edition of “Nonviolence Web Upfront,” which debuted December 29, 1997. |
I think is less a coincidence than a confirmation that many of us were trying to figure out a format for sharing the web with others. Below is an excerpt from the email announcement for “Nonviolence Web Upfront.” The reliable Archive.org has index of Upfront’s second week, whose feature was a guest piece by John Steitz, Is the Nonviolence Web a Movement Half-Way House that sounds eerily similar to recent discussions on Quaker Ranter.
On electronic fellowships, online magazines and the freedom of this patchwork of independent cross-linked blogs: “Maybe the web’s form of hyperlinking is actually superior to Old Media publishing. I love how I can put forward a strong vision of Quakerism without offending anyone—any put-off readers can hit the “back” button. With my Subjective Guide to Quaker Blogs and my On the Web posts I highlight the bloggers I find particularly interesting, even when I’m not in perfect theological unity. I like that I can have discussions back and forth with Friends who I don’t exactly agree with. I have nothing to announce, no clear plan forward and no money to do anything anyway. But I thought it’d be interesting to hear what others have been thinking along these lines.”
 Summer visitations got an early start last month when the Northeast US Quaker blogroll converged in my back yard with no agenda to follow and no epistle to write.Front row: James, Jeffrey and visitation ringleader Amanda. Back: Ryan, Rob, Me, Theo and poor blogless Christina. |
In the meantime, there’s been fresh talk about plain language and dress this week by Johan Maurer, Claire Reddy and the Livejournal Quakers. Russ Nelson’s started a Planet Quaker blog aggregator (which includes Quaker Ranter: thanks!). LizOpp talked about field testing her upcoming Quaker identity Gathering workshop at Northern Yearly Meeting sessions and Kiara’s talked about being field tested by Liz at this year’s NYM sessions (how cool is that?!).
I’ve been geeking out on Del.icio.us, the “social bookmarking” system and on the esoteric concepts of tags, the semantic web and folksonomies. Two weeks ago I would have laughed at these neologisms but I’m beginning to see that there’s something in all this. The only outward form the regulars will see is a more accurate “Related Entries” selection at the bottom of posts (thanks to Adam Kalsey) and better visibility in selected Technorati entries (which will get less me-centric as I finish tagging my own back posts).
And of course we’re tilling the field, planting a garden, putting up laundry lines and otherwise thoroughly enjoying the first Spring in our new house. It’s bedtime, off to read the radically folksonomic adventures of Sam and My Car (it’s pure tags: “My name is Sam.” “This is my car.” “I love my car.” I’d worry that not-so-baby Theo is getting too excited by combusion engines if he weren’t even more excited by “dia-di-calschht” aka the “bicycle” Papa rides off to work on.)
By QuaCarol
Sometimes I have to lift up comments and make them their own posts. Here’s one of QuaCarol’s reply to Uh-Oh: Beppe’s Doubts: “I see this community of bloggers, reaching out to each other and connecting, when meetings (and here I venture to say “all”) are focused on keeping their pamphlet racks filled, rather than posting URLs on their bulletin boards or creating a newcomer’s URL handout.”
I’ve occasionally thought of Beppeblog’s Joe Guada as my blogging Quaker doppleganger. More than once he’s written the post I was about to write. And more than one important article of mine started as commentary to one of his insightful articles.
So I’m worried that he’s written the first of a multipart article asking Is it time to leave Quakerism. I’m worried not just that Quakerism would lose a bright Light, etc., etc, but because I know that now I’m going to have to publicly mull over the question that’s a constant background hum that I try not to think about.
A guest piece from Rob of Consider the Lillies
Rob describes himself: “I’m a twenty-something gay Mid-western expatriate living in Boston. I was inspired to begin a blog based on the writings of other urban Quaker bloggers as they reflect and discuss their inward faith and outward experiences. When I’m not reading or writing, I’m usually with my friends, traveling about, and/or generally making an arse of myself.”
A recent email correspondence confirmed that all of our wonderful websites aren’t always reaching the people who should be hearing this message. Self publishing a book is almost as easy as starting a blog so why not put together a booklet of a website’s essays? You can order the first edition of the Quaker Ranter Reader for $12.00 through Cafepress (a few dollars of each sale comes back to me to support the website). The Reader is also available from Quakerbooks of FGC.
Regular readers of Quaker Ranter will be familiar with Liz Oppenheimer’s frequent comments. My replies and email correspondence with her have inspired more than one blog posts. I’ve long known her through Friends General Conference work and through the workshops she often leads at the FGC Gatherings. She’s been exploring the conservative Quaker tradition over the last few years and is now writing a blog called The Good Raised Up.
Quaker Jane has been a regular on the Plain and Modest Dress group and now has beautifully-designed website that includes some interesting plain dress resources.
Alice Morningstar is another Plain group regular who’s now the “Public Friend” (site since closed), writing about both Quakerism and biology; see her post Why It is Essential to Publish Now (via archive.org) for why she’s public.
Lorcan is starting to get worried that I’ve never mentioned him here. He’s part of a flourishing New York City Quaker blogging group that includes Amanda’s Of the Best Stuff and Rich the Brooklyn Quaker, who’s coined the term The New Plain to describe the renewed interest in Quaker plain dress that I’ve been trying to catalog on this site.
Over a new-to-me blog called The Quaker Dharma there’s a post calling for us to The Let Our Light Shine Brightly. He makes some very good points like “It’s worth explaining what Quakerism is” and “true outreach is an act of spiritual hospitality.” He also tells a few stories. Here’s one about passionate younger religious he’s known:
I came to Quakerism from Buddhist study. I also worked for an international Buddhist organization for two years. These are experiences for which I am deeply grateful. Teachings for which I am deeply grateful. I saw twenty something year olds who took Buddhist ordination vows and shaved their heads. This was deeply moving and was a joy to share their sense of union at having committed to a path. These kids were flying to India to take teachings. The commitment level was unbelievable. Some of them went on month long silent retreats. Quakerism, especially now, in these times could speak to many. Unfortunately we hide it and thousands and thousands of people in their twenties and thirties go without a spiritual home.
I’ve been emailing back and forth with a friend who’s considering starting a blog [update: as she has, The Good Raised Up]. She’s thinking of approaching a couple of Friends to act as elders “so as not to outrun my Guide.”