Johan Maurer: Whose faith? Whose practice?

Johan Mau­r­er brings up a ques­tion in a post about what was the Lon­don Year­ly Meet­ing’s book of Chris­t­ian Faith and Prac­tice. He asks whether our prac­tices should be treat­ed as mod­els we’d expect oth­er Chris­tians to follow.

I sup­pose that in either case, Chris­t­ian or Quak­er, the pre­vail­ing assump­tion was that these books are for inter­nal use among Friends. This is who we are, more or less. But what I like about the title Chris­t­ian Faith and Prac­tice is anoth­er inter­pre­ta­tion entire­ly, one I have no per­mis­sion or evi­dence to pro­pose: this way of faith and life is not just for us; it’s rec­om­mend­ed for all Chris­tians.

I’d argue a strong yes to this. When I think about what ancient Quak­er odd­i­ties might still be rel­e­vant, one of the ques­tions I ask myself is whether we could argue that the whole church should also adopt the prac­tice (how­ev­er unlike­ly that might be in real­i­ty). If it’s just some Quak­er canard, we can toss it into an antiq­ui­ty dust­bin. But if all Chris­tians should be fol­low­ing the prac­tice, then let’s set the example.

I like Thomas Clarkson’s his­tor­i­cal account of Friends par­tic­u­lar­ly because he’s not writ­ing for a Quak­er audi­ence. I get the feel­ing he’s hold­ing our prac­tices up for scruti­ny, as if to say that maybe every­one should be fol­low­ing them and indeed, his paci­fism and abo­li­tion­ism were great­ly influ­enced by the Friends he met in his work.

Of course this wit­ness to oth­er Chris­tians sort of falls apart if we don’t con­sid­er our­selves Chris­t­ian. If online dis­course is any indi­ca­tion, there are large num­bers of Quak­ers who are rather obliv­i­ous that almost all of our Quak­er iden­ti­ty has a bib­li­cal basis (selec­tive, of course, and also inter­pret­ed, debat­ed and chang­ing). Quak­erism is seen as some­thing that just ran­dom­ly popped up in the world. None of the ear­ly Friends would have thought that.