outward form Posts

An interview with Raye, a member of Ohio Yearly Meeting Conservative who serves on their Electronic Outreach Committee. You can also watch it on QuakerQuaker: Quaker Video and Electronic Outreach.

Raye: Ohio Yearly Meeting holds our yearly meeting in Barnesville Ohio--some people know us as those Barnesville folks. We have an electronic Outreach Committee and that includes the oversight and ministry associated with our website. We spend time thinking about how to open up to people who might be interested in Friends' ways and might want to know more about us whether or not they've ever read the Journal of George Fox. We're trying to expand our witness, if you will.

One of the questions that has come up in this electronic outreach group is: what types of communication or video are useful for someone to get to know us but also respectful of the fact that we do worship and that worship is a spiritually intimate time. We're trying to bridge and deal with respecting the worshippers, the Friends themselves, to not put on a performance and yet to try to communicate what it is that is edifying in practice and worship.

Martin: How do you give newcomers a taste of Quakers without directing it too much? If you just have that silent empty box it's hard for newcomers to know what should be filling that box.

Raye: One of the things Friends have done for hundreds of years is to publish, to keep journals and to share that. But that's not all there is to the Friends experience. There are those quiet times and those moments of ministry that we believe are Spirit-inspired. Many of us wish we could give people a little taste of that because that doesn't show up in a lot of published writings. That spontaneous and timely, and at times prophetic, witness that we see in our Meetings. We have considered digital video as a way to do that.

Martin: I love the video possibilities here. Video can be a way of reaching out to more people.

Raye: It's not just anything that can be written. Certainly the writings that have been published are very helpful in getting some sort of a glimmer of where we have been, or in some cases where we are headed or where we are. But there is nothing like that experience of being with Friends in meeting. It doesn't always happen but there are these moments called a covered meeting or a gathered meeting where everybody seems to be in the same place spiritually and when seems to be messages and gifts coming through people. That's difficult to get across.

We're hoping that with video we can discuss these kinds of things after the fact. We don't want to turn it into a spectator sport or performance.

Martin: Authenticity is a key part of the Quaker message. You're not practicing what you're going to say for First Day or Sunday. You're sitting there and waiting for that immediate spirit to come upon you.

Raye: We don't know when that will happen. There are meetings where everybody is very quiet, where there's a sense of that spirit and unity but it may be an outwardly quiet meeting. I have been in meetings where someone stood up and began to sing their message or a psalm or someone had a wonderful sermon that was perfect for the moment. These things happen but we don't know when they will.

I wrote this in Eighth Month 2004 for the Plainandmodestdress discussion group back when the red dress MacGuffin made it's appearance on that board.

I wonder if it's not a good time for the Margaret Fell story. She was one of the most important founders of the Quaker movement, a feisty, outspoken, hardworking and politically powerful early Friend who later married George Fox.

The story goes that one day Margaret wore a red dress to Meeting. Another Friend complained that it was gaudy. She shot back in a letter that it was a "silly poor gospel" to question her dress. In my branch of Friends, this story is endlessly repeated out of context to prove that "plain dress" isn't really Quaker. (I haven't looked up to see if I have the actual details correct--I'm telling the apocryphal version of this tale.)

Before declaring her Friend's complaint "silly poor gospel" Margaret explains that Friends have set up monthly, quarterly and yearly meeting structures in order to discipline those walking out of line of the truth. She follows it by saying that we should be "covered with God's eternal Spirit, and clothed with his eternal Light."

It seems really clear here that Margaret is using this exchange as a teaching opportunity to demonstrate the process of gospel order. Individuals are charged with trying to follow Christ's commands, and we should expect that these might lead to all sorts of seemingly-odd appearances (even red dresses!). What matters is NOT the outward form of plain dress, but the inward spiritual obedience that it (hopefully!) mirrors. Gospel order says it's the Meeting's role to double-guess individuals and labor with them and discipline them if need be. Individuals enforcing a dress code of conformity with snarky comments after meeting is legalism--it's not gospel order and not proper Quaker process (I would argue it's a variant of "detraction").

This concern over legalism is something that is distinctly Quaker. Other faiths are fine with written down, clearly-articulated outward forms. Look at creeds for example: it's considered fine for everyone to repeat a set phrasing of belief, even though we might know or suspect that not everyone in church is signing off on all the parts in it as they mutter along. Quakers are really sticklers on this and so avoid creeds altogether. In worship, you should only give ministry if you are actively moved of the Lord to deliver it and great care should be given that you don't "outrun your Guide" or add unnecessary rhetorical flourishes.

This Plain and Modest Dress discussion group is  meant for people of all sorts of religious backgrounds of course. It might be interesting some time to talk about the different assumptions and rationales each of our religious traditions bring to the plain dress question. I think this anti-legalism that would distinguish Friends.

For Friends, I don't think the point is that we should have a formal list of acceptable colors--we shouldn't get too obsessed over the "red or not red" question. I don't suspect Margaret would want us spending too much time working out details of a standard pan-Quaker uniform. "Legalism" is a silly poor gospel for Friends. There's a great people to be gathered and a lot of work to do. The plainness within is the fruit of our devotion and it can certainly shine through any outward color or fashion!

If I lived to see the day when all the Quakers were dressing alike and gossiping about how others were led to clothe themselves, I'd break out a red dress too! But then, come to think about it, I DO live in a Quaker world where there's WAY TOO MUCH conformity in thought and dress and where there's WAY TOO MUCH idle gossip when someone adopts plain dress. Where I live, suspenders and broadfalls might as well be a red dress!

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.

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.

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.

Well since Kwakersaur is inaugurating the I don't have anything to post meme, I'll chime in that I don't either. Actually I've written two and half essays but realized they're both really for myself. This is how it happens sometimes. I've long noticed this phenomenon in fully-formed verbal ministry that I know I'm not supposed to deliver and it feels as if such restraint is sometimes healthy on the blog. The message will reappear in other forums I'm sure, most likely next month's Gathering workshop with Zachary Moon.

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.)

For those who can't name God in their lives, it must be just a bit bizarre to come week after week to participate with a group of people praying for God's guidance. But that's okay. I think all that is good in our religious society come from the Great Master. We are known by our fruits and the outward forms of our witnesses constantly point back to God's love. This is the only real outreach we do. I'm happy spending a lifetime laboring with someone in my community pointing out to the Spirit's presence in our midst.

I like to rant. I like to break down Quaker sociology. But often I'm quiet about simply testifying to how Christ's love comforts me, guides me, elders me.