I am a South Jersey Friend and dad with a love out of outreach and a passion for looking afresh at Friends' testimonies, language and practices. I am the publisher of Quaker Quaker, a community site for Friends, and write about online publicity, organizing and design on my business site at MartinKelley.com.
activism Posts
I don't know enough of the details of their lives to write the obituary (a Wikipedia page was started this morning) but I will say they always seemed to me like the Forrest Gump's of peace activism--at the center of every cool peace witness since 1950. You squint to look at the photos at there's George and Lil, always there. Or maybe pop music would give us the better analogy: you know how there are entire b-rate bands that carve an entire career around endlessly rehashing a particular Beatles song? Well, there are whole activist organizations that are built around particular campaigns that the Willoughby's championed. Like: in 1958 George was a crew member of the Golden Rule (profiled a bit here), a boatload of crazy activists who sailed into a Pacific nuclear bomb test to disrupt it. Twelve years later some Vancouver activists stage a copycat boat sailing which became Greenpeace. Lillian was concerned about rising violence against women and started one of the first Take Back the Night marches. If you've ever sat in an activist meeting where everyone's using consensus, then you've been influenced by the Willoughby's!
For many years I lived deeply embedded in communities they helped create. There's a recent interview with George Lakey about the founding of Movement for a New Society that he and they helped create. In the 1990s I liked to say how I lived "in its ruins," working at the publishing house, living in a coop house and getting my food from the coop that all grew out of MNS. I got to know the Willoughbys through Central Philadelphia meeting but also as friends. It was a treat to visit their house in Deptford, NJ--it adjoined a wildlife sanctuary they helped protect against the strip-mall sprawl that is the rest of that town. I last saw George a few months ago and while he had a bit of trouble remembering who I was, that irrepressible smile and spirit were very strong!
I've written before that the closest modern-day successor to the Movement for a New Society is the so-called New Monastic movement--explicitly Christian but focused on love and charity and often very Quaker'ish. Our culture of secular Quakerism has kept Friends from getting involved and sharing our decades of experience. Now that Shane Claiborne is being invited to seemingly every liberal Quaker venue, maybe it's a good opportunity to look back on our own legacy. Friends like George and Lillian invented this form. Just about each of us at the table were coming from different theological starting points, but it's safe to say we are all "post" something or other. There was a shared sense that the stock answers our churches have been providing aren't working for us. We are all trying to find new ways to relate to our faith, to Christ and to one another in our church communities. There's something about building relationships that are deeper, more down-to-earth and real. Perhaps it's finding a way to be less dogmatic at the same time that we're more disciplined. For Friends, that means questioning the contemporary cultural orthodoxy of liberal-think (getting beyond the cliched catch phrases borrowed from liberal Protestantism and sixties-style activism) while being less afraid of being pecularily Quaker.Rich the Brooklyn Quaker was recently asking about early Friends views of atonement and heaven and hell and it's a great post, but so is Marshall Massey's comment about how later Friends altered the message in distinctly different ways. The different flavors of Friends have spent a lot of energy minimizing certain parts of the Quaker message and over-emphasizing others and maybe the truth lies in some of the nuances we long ago paved over.
I have a working theory that a movement of "Convergence" will feel suspiciously liberal in evangelical circles, suspiciously evangelical in liberal circles, and suspiciously worldly in Quaker conservative circles. But that's almost to be expected. The work to be done is different depending on where we're starting from.
I don't think Friends are alone in these kinds of matters. I see this phenomenon in other religious denominations--the post-Evangelicals I broke pizza with back in 2003 weren't Quakers. But Friends might have a better way out of the existential puzzles that arise. For we (generally) believe that our action should be motivated first and foremost by the direct instruction of the risen Christ working on us now. That means we can't rely on canned answers. What worked in the past might not work now. The faith is the same. But what needs to be done and what needs to be preached is very much a here-and-now kind of proposition.
I can't help but think of Howard Brinton. Back in the 1950s his generation managed a reunification of East Coast Quaker factions that had been warring for over a century. One way they did it was hanging out together and then redefining what it meant to be a Friend. In Friends for 300 Years, Brinton argued that tests for membership shouldn't look at one's beliefs or practices. It was a truce and I'm sure it made sense at the time: there was a fairly strong consensus on what Quakerism meant and the fights at the edges over details were distracting. Fifty years later, there's little consensus among Philadelphia Friends and even those in leadership positions are loathe to talk about faith or practice except in a kind of code. I can't think of a single Philadelphia Friend who publicly expresses Quaker belief with the clarity or passion of mid-century figures like Brinton, Thomas Kelly or Rufus Jones.
What worked in the past might not work now. What sounds like old hat to to us might be very liberating for others. Convergence isn't very new. It's just keeping ourselves from ossifying into our own human concepts and staying open to the direct Christ. It's finding a way to maintain that crazy balance between tradition and the inward light. Same as it ever was.
Thomas Clarkson wasn't a Friend. He didn't write for a Quaker audience. He had no direct experience of (and little apparent interest in) any period that we've retroactively claimed as a "golden age of Quakerism." Yet all this is why he's so interesting.
The basic facts of his life are summed up in his Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Clarkson), which begins: "Thomas Clarkson (28 March 1760 – 26 September 1846), abolitionist, was born at Wisbech, Cambridgeshire, England, and became a leading campaigner against the slave trade in the British Empire." The only other necessary piece of information to our story is that he was a Anglican.
British Friends at the end of of the Eighteenth Century were still somewhat aloof, mysterious and considered odd by their fellow countrymen and women. Clarkson admits that one reason for his writing "A Portraiture of Quakerism" was the entertainment value it would provide his fellow Anglicans. Friends were starting to work with non-Quakers like Clarkson on issues of conscience and while this ecumenical activism was his entre--"I came to a knowledge of their living manners, which no other person, who was not a Quaker, could have easily obtained" (Vol 1, p. i)-- it was also a symptom of a great sea change about to hit Friends. The Nineteenth Century ushered in a new type of Quaker, or more precisely whole new types of Quakers. By the time Clarkson died American Friends were going through their second round of schism and Joseph John Gurney was arguably the best-known Quaker across two continents: Oxford educated, at ease in genteel English society, active in cross-denominational work, and fluent and well studied in Biblical studies. Clarkson wrote about a Society of Friends that was disappearing even as the ink was drying at the printers.
Most of the old accounts of Friends we still read were written by Friends themselves. I like old Quaker journals as much as the next geek, but it's always useful to get an outsider's perspective (here's a more modern-day example). Also: I don't think Clarkson was really just writing an account simply for entertainment's sake. I think he saw in Friends a model of christian behavior that he thought his fellow Anglicans would be well advised to study.
His account is refreshingly free of what we might call Quaker baggage. He doesn't use Fox or Barclay quotes as a bludgeon against disagreement and he doesn't drone on about history and personalities and schisms. Reading between the lines I think he recognizes the growing rifts among Friends but glosses over them (fair enough: these are not his battles). Refreshingly, he doesn't hold up Quaker language as some sort of quaint and untranslatable tongue, and when he describes our processes he often uses very surprising words that point to some fundamental differences between Quaker practice then and now that are obscured by common words.
Thomas Clarkson is interested in what it's like to be a good christian. In the book it's typeset with lowercase "c" and while I don't have any reason to think it's intentional, I find that typesetting illuminating nonetheless. This meaning of "christian" is not about subscribing to particular creeds and is not the same concept as uppercase-C "Christian." My Lutheran grandmother actually used to use the lowercase-c meaning when she described some behavior as "not the christian way to act." She used it to describe an ethical and moral standard. Friends share that understanding when we talk about Gospel Order: that there is a right way to live and act that we will find if we follow the Spirit's lead. It may be a little quaint to use christian to describe this kind of generic goodness but I think it shifts some of the debates going on right now to think of it this way for awhile.
Clarkson's "Portraiture" looks at peculiar Quaker practices and reverse-engineers them to show how they help Quaker stay in that christian zone. His book is most often referenced today because of its descriptions of Quaker plain dress but he's less interested in the style than he is with the practice's effect on the society of Friends. He gets positively sociological at times. And because he's speaking about a denomination that's 150 years old, he was able to describe how the testimonies had shifted over time to address changing worldly conditions.
And that's the key. So many of us are trying to understand what it would be like to be "authentically" Quaker in a world that's very different from the one the first band of Friends knew. In the comment to the last post, Alice M talked about recovered the Quaker charism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charism). I didn't join Friends because of theology or history. I was a young peace activist who knew in my heart that there was something more motivating me than just the typical pacifist anti-war rhetoric. In Friends I saw a deeper understanding and a way of connecting that with a nascent spiritual awakening.
What does it mean to live a christian life (again, lowercase) in the 21st Century? What does it mean to live the Quaker charism in the modern world? How do we relate to other religious traditions both without and now within our religious society and what's might our role be in the Emergent Church movement? I think Clarkson gives clues. And that's what this series will talk about.
Technorati Tags: quaker, quakerism, thomas clarkson, anglican, abolition, anti-slavery, joseph john gurney, christian, gospel order, practice, denomination, testimonies, catholic, emergent chruch, charism
-
This is what I call a "shoelace miracle." It's a little thing. A really little and unimportant thing. And not very impressive. But it's like this: when a three-yr-old goes to his father and holds out his shoe, and asks his father to tie his shoelace.
-
Part of what the emerging church can teach us and remind us is that we easily fall into the trap of "functional atheism" [where] we give lip service to God and to the guidance and power of God but we function as if we are doing it all ourselves.
-
Our immediate graying elders - the weighty and influential in our Quaker Society - are what we might call 'Aquarians'. The Aquarians came of age (were mostly 12 - 29* years old) that consciousness-raising Summer of Love, 1967.
-
They included Friends from meetings affiliated with Friends United Meeting and Friends General Conference, as well as Conservative and unaffiliated yearly meetings.
-
We keep things safe by keeping up the appearance of listening when in fact we're really just investing in currency. This may be why Quakers silence is still a very radical practice, there is always the chance that the cycle will be broken
-
Even Friends are squeamish these days about topics that are too controversial or --heaven forefend!-- "political." I guess there's historical precedent. Many 19th-century Fds thought that activism for the abolition of slavery was too "worldly" a pursuit.
-
There might be better written biographies of Cesar Chavez, and I'm sure at some point I'll find one, but this might be the most comprehensive biography of a man and of a movement that I have read so far.
-
It means changing the school culture in a lot of different ways. It means more parental involvement, and not everybody likes that. It means bringing the kids in as more active participants in the system.
-
Theologically, this is a powerful statement, but seen from a modern historical perspective, it's earth-shattering. This telling moves well beyond practices that acknowledge bias to what many would argue is sheer propaganda.
-
"I am a Quaker as well as a member of Cedar Ridge Community Church, a freelance journalist."
-
Reporter is Diane of Emerging Quaker blog. "A lot of the emerging church has grown out of a new emphasis on narrative theology, the story of God and God's people. How does this story connect to God's plan for the people of Baltimore? There is no formula."
-
The North Carolina minister from the old QuakerRenewal blog is back with "a conversation regarding faithfulness, life, emergence, renewal and convergence within the Society of Friends."
-
A site remembering a lifetime of activism from Ralphi's son Daniel.
-
Yeah, yeah, he's a cool skinny young guy with a kerchief on his head living in an intentional Christian community in a big city ... have we not been there and done that before? Is this a new story?
-
if you ask around, I think you'll find that a great many at liberal meetings do not experience that ocean [of light]. Much of what draws liberal Friends to one another is their shared affection for the Power that we identify with cultural "liberalism".
-
There will be a time when we can say God is with our Friends who struggle in Kenya, with our Friends we worship in Indiana, with our Friends all across NY, with our LGBTQ Friends. If our relationship with FUM has done nothing else it has shown us this.
I recently applied for a position at a well-known Quaker social justice organization and decided to put together something of an activist resume. The resume I usually circulate understandably focuses on my tech work and professional experience and tries the impossible task of downplaying the Quaker connection (I've almost heard the application being crumpled on the other end of a phone interview when I've tried to explain what an "Advance and Outreach Coordinator" does!). I should have known that in the Bizarro World that is Quaker peace activism I wouldn't even get a sit-down interview for a job I'm professionally over-qualified for, but putting together this alternative time line was kind of fun so I'll share it here.
1987: Internship, United Farm Workers. Staffed petition drive out of NYC office, planned Philadelphia-area appearances by Cesar Chavez. I even got to do a little ghost writing for Cesar!
Late 1980s: Core member of Students Against Sexual Stereotyping, Villanovans Against Racism, VCACA (Central America solidarity) and other college-based social justice initiatives.

1988-9: Editor, The VACUUM, an alternative weekly for Villanova University. Most notably raised campus awareness around issues of acquaintance rape. Such a proto-blog publication, I should repost some of those articles someday! Right: vintage picture from the yearbook.
1991: Intern, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting Peace Committee. Participated in anti-recruitment counseling, preparation of Camden NJ's Newton Friends Meeting for tutoring program.
1991: Member, Corn Rice and Beans affinity group. Street theater, etc., started vigils for first Gulf War on west side of City Hall.
1991: Founding member, Philadelphia anti-war coalition.
1992: Organizer of responses to Christopher Columbus re-enactment ships' arrival in Philadelphia. Participated in various actions that acted as core of Philadelphia Inquirer coverage (article behind paywall but starts "Hey, Columbus, ya shoulda stayed home. Shouldn't have come to America. Definitely shouldn't have come up the Delaware. The Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria... sailed into Philadelphia yesterday..., expecting a hero's welcome. Instead they got bludgeoned by the vast array of anti-Columbus forces.")
1994-6: Founding member, Philly Food Not Bombs. Collected food & served at area protests and at weekly meals in West Philadelphia.
1993: Acquisitions Editor onStopping Rape: A Challenge for Men by Rus Ervin Funk.
1994-7: Board member, New Society Educational Foundation. Served as treasurer in critical time of transition.
1995: Acquisitions Editor, With Hiroshima Eyes: Atomic War, Nuclear Extortion, and Moral Imagination by Joseph Gerson. A co-publication with the American Friends Service Committee.
1995: Acquisitions Editor, Uprooting Racism: How White People Can Work for Racial Justice by Paul Kivel. Still listed as a top-40 book on racism by Amazon.com.
1995-present: Founder, Nonviolence.org. One of the first peace-focused internet portals. Through this project served as webmaster to numerous national U.S. peace groups including War Resisters League, Fellowship of Reconciliation and Pax Christi USA.
1996: Fellowship, Friends Institute of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting to support Nonviolence.org development.
1997-8: National Committee Member, War Resisters League.
1998: Profile, New York Times, "Iraqi Crisis Increases Activity on Peace Network" (Feb 21). Headlining article in CyberTimes edition. Still have desk and bookshelves, cat was old girlfriend's.
1998: Featured Op-Ed, USAToday, "Missiles Aren’t the Answer" (Nov 16th).
1998: Featured Guest, Oliver North Radio Show (Nov 16). To my everlasting regret, Ollie had a guest host on Mondays and I was eviscerated by his fill-in!
2000: Video/Web Transfer Editor, Philadelphia Independent Media Center. Edited and transfered raw footage of the Republican National Convention to the Philadelphia Indymedia.org website. I should dig up my protest videos and post them sometime.
2005: Fellowship, Clarence and Lilly Pickett Endowment for Quaker Leadership Program. Named after long-time AFSC Executive Director and his wife, fellowship supported development of new online magazine.
2006: Organized media campaign to support members of Christian Peacemaker Teams kidnapped in Iraq. Created syndicated news feeds for both activist and Quaker audiences.
Related: professional resume, workshops and publications list, list of organizations I've worked with, LinkedIn profile.
Just a little note to everyone that I've blogged a couple of posts over on Nonviolence.org. They're both based on "peace mom" Cindy Sheeran's "resignation" from the peace movement yesterday.
It's all a bit strange to see this from a long-time peace activist perspective. The movement that Sheehan's talking about and now critiquing is not movement I've worked with for the last fifteen-plus years. The organizations I've known have all been housed in crumbling buildings, with too-old carpets and furniture lifted as often as not from going out of business sales. Money's tight and careers potentially sacrificed to help build a world of sharing, caring and understanding.
The movement Sheehan talks about is fueled by millions of dollars of Democratic Party-related money, with campaigns designed to mesh well with Party goals via the so-called 527 groups and other indirect mechanisms. Big Media likes to crown these organizations as the antiwar movement, but as Sheehan and Amy Goodman discuss in today's Democracy Now interview, corporate media will end up with much of the tens of millions of dollars candidates are now raising. Sheehan makes an impassioned plea for people to support those grassroots campaigns that aren't supported by the "peace movement" but this reinforces the notion that its the moneyed interests that make up the movement. I'm sure she knows better but it's hard to work for so long and to make so many sacrifices and still be so casually dismissed--not just me but thousands of committed activists I've known over the years.
There are a few peace organizations in that happy medium between toadying and poverty (nice carpets, souls still intact) but it mystifies me why there isn't a broader base of support for grassroots activism. I myself decided to leave professional peace work almost a decade ago after the my Nonviolence.org project raised such pitiful sums. At some point I decided to stop whining about this phenomenon and just look for better-paying employment elsewhere but it still fascinates me from a sociological perspective.

