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’m not sure what the point is. If you want Buddhism, yes, go to Buddhist teachers. Why would you go to the Quakers for Buddhism? The Buddhist-leaning Quakers I’ve encountered are very watered down in their approach and dont really seem devoted or into meditation. If you want to embrace all paths, fine…but to go into any depth you really need to pick one..maybe two max. It’s also possible that young people are attracted to Buddhism because its not Christianity. Sooner or later, it begins to dawn on new Quakers, that Quakerism, before it became an ‑ism, was a radical way to experience God within a Christian understanding of God, even if it was offensive to most Christians at the time. Now, maybe we could attract some young people if Quakerism actually made some demands on people. Shaving the head is a nice start. It at least shows that you are set apart and different from the larger culture. Next, we would need to have something that people are longing for.. like.. spiritual authenticity. An actual, definable path. Not just…hmmm…read a bunch of these books and have head knowledge of all the world’s religions, and have intricate knowledge of Quaker history…and boy.…girl…you’ve arrived. Ok..enough Q‑bashing. What Quakerism has given me, is a place and space to practice my own (Christian) meditation and spiritual path. Unfortunately tho, I have to keep it kind of quiet, because, Quakers are tolerant of just about any religion except Christianity. And, good grief, you shouldnt be too attached to any of those other paths that we are tolerant of, either. I guess my point is, it seems that unprogramed Quakers are skeptics that practice silence. If you get devout, meeting can turn into a less’friendly’place.
Hi Barb. You might want to rethink that new name, “Pokie mon,” I was 95% to deleting that post without even reading it as its such a spammish name.
I don’t think the Quaker Dharma is saying Quakers should be teaching Buddhism. What I took from his name and blog is that he thinks Friends have a _dharma_, that is, a “principle or law that orders the universe”:http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dharma. I think we do, only of course for Friends its called “gospel order.” We should be careful using “foreign” language, since _dharma_ and _gospel order_ refer to world views that are significantly different, but it’s useful to point out that Friends do actually have a world system and to dub it a “Quaker Dharma” creates a dissonance I find intriguing.
Yes — you’ve uncovered my barely covered cover. I chose ‘Pokie mon’ because I was ‘poking’ at Quakers, you and yes, our dharma friend. Thanks for explaining it all for me, as you see, I’m a little unsophisticated and dull. I dont think Quakers are hiding Quakerism. I think they themselves are hiding from it.
I get confused with the idea of a “Buddhist Quaker” or whatever type of religion you wish to put in front of Quaker. (What I find even more confusing are people who call themselves atheists but also consider themselves good Quakers! That makes NO sense to me.)
Why can’t Quakerism simply be based on Christianity as the George Fox wanted? What’s with the wishy-washyness that seems to permeate so much of Quakerism? Have Quakers become like Unitarians in that you can believe (or not believe) pretty much anything you want? If that is the case we will never grow as a denomination.
I agree with Pokie Mon in that you have to give young people something to believe in & make some demands of them.
OK that is my 2 cents worth. (By the way, I am a Christian who is very attracted to Quakerism but get a bit turned off by their “believe what you want to believe” attitude.)
I think Quakers are not really clear about what Quakers are! I may not be one to talk, since I left my meeting — but I was told when I joined that ‘if you feel you belong here you do’ and ‘true seekers’ are Quakers. Well, then, that includes many from all traditions! I really think it very important now that we embrace true seekers — not ones that join a meeting or a church and then stop searching — but rather, realize that just as there is “that of God in everyone” there is also “that of God in many different paths” — and thought Quakers are great in some Godly aspects, they miss the mark in others. To not recognize this, is to take away humility and become arrogant,and eventually be dysfunctional or die.
Hi Jean,
Thanks for your comment! I’m sorry to hear you got something of a mixed message on the qualification for membership. I think your Meeting did a dis-service by defining a Quaker as any kind of generic seeker; that’s not much of an identity. Maybe your Meeting meant it but maybe also they were afraid to talk about the implicit expectations?
Certainly membership shouldn’t indicate the search is over. Members should constantly be growing into their Quakerism. I think I’ve been convinced as a Quaker about half a dozen times now, each time understanding it more than before and each time feeling more comfortable with Quakerism as a world view/language/religion. This kind of growing understanding is pretty core to Quaker understandings of justification/sanctification.
It’s true that many Friends have a sort of unexamined smugness about being Quaker, as if the identity implies something unique. We’ll crow about how Friends led European-American efforts at abolition of slavery yet will forget the Friends who did that were often read out of their Meetings or that freed Africans weren’t welcome at many Quaker worship services. Also begged is the question: “well what have you done lately, Friend?” We need less ministry on “look how great we are!” and more “where do we fall short?” We do miss the mark sometimes and need to really pray for divine guidance about that.
I’m sorry you’ve left Friends and hope that you’ve found a good home elsewhere. Thy Friend, Martin
Hello everyone. Since the topic of attracting young people has come up, I thought I’d add some perspective as a young person. well, 25 isn’t so young, but I’ll imagine that ‘young’ refers to anyone under 30. At any rate, like the author of the Quaker Dharma, I came to Quakerism after learning the similarities between their practice and the buddhism I’d been practicing (dodgedly) since I was a teenager, following the lead of my mothers practice. strangely, my mother had attempted to raise me… Protestant?… but after years of being “wishy-washy” (as Rick puts it), living more of an agnostic than christian lifestyle, she converted to Buddhism.
for me, I was put off by christianity for no other than political/cultural reasons, and it wasn’t until I met some Quakers, did some research, and attended a meeting, that I began to wonder if christianity could be a possibility after all. I still have cold feet about the idea of resigning myself to the path of a quaker, and the reason isn’t that there isn’t more offered or expected. it actually has more to do with the language. granted Quaker text frees up a lot of that conscern, but consider that, despite this, christianity, by language alone, is so heavily laden with the political/cultural baggage of… well, the lifespan of the church itself, that to experience a fuller relationship with God through the christian perspective becomes almost impossible. it’s as though a veil has been placed between people in my position and the depth to which the texts and practice is intended to lead.
for myself, the only way I can overcome this obstical of symantics is by paralleling Quaker (christian) consepts with those that I understand, and have little to no baggage attached, in Buddhism. what the continued practice in buddhism becomes is a mediator, a bridge that leads past the melee, to the very essence of Quaker thought. suddenly, the initial frustration I find when pondering christian concepts fades, and in it’s place, not just an empathetic stance, but realization of their necessity. without the aid of this strikingly similar, yet culturally separate religion, Christanity is inaccesible to me.
Mary Rose O’Reilley has a book out called The Barn at the End of the World: The Apprenticeship of a Quaker, Buddhist Shepherd. I havent read it just yet, but reviews and interviews suggest she has a similar relationship with her dual (well sheep husbandry makes three) path. other text I’ve come across on the web conveys the idea that jean brings up when she says, “though Quakers are great in some Godly aspects, they miss the mark in others”. Here’s what Rhoda Gilman has to say in her essay called, “Thoughts From A Quaker-Buddhist”, found here: http://www.universalistfriends.org/uf040.html
“…So in today’s global world we see these two traditions drawn together and strengthened by each other. It is not only the obvious parallels — their rejection of divisive creeds and dogmas, their shared precepts and testimonies of peace, compassion, simplicity, right livelihood, and right speech. Quakers turning back to their own mystical roots have been drawn to Buddhism by the vitality of its practice and its direct link with living silence; Buddhists pulled from monasteries by the modern world have turned to Quakerism for its example of compassion in action and viable spiritual community. In the West and in modern societies across the East, the movement toward “Engaged Buddhism” reflects this. Here in the United States, the Buddhist Peace Fellowship joins with Quakers in proclaiming that peace is not only the goal, but the way. Here Quakers take as much inspiration from Thich Nhat Hanh and the Dalai Lama as from any Christian leader, and in Sri Lanka Quakers, for their part, provide practical guid-ance toward meeting nonviolently the flames of ethnic hatred that Buddhists deal with there.
Silence. Equanimity. Compassion. Community.
If there is hope for today’s crumbling world society, with its materialism, its runaway technology, and its religious fanaticisms, that hope lies in the shared strength of these two traditions. ”