Belief (in anything) and belief (in nothing)

February 27, 2018

So Isaac Smith is back with the third install­ment of his grow­ing series, “Dif­fer­ence Between a Gath­ered Meet­ing and a Focused Meet­ing” and this time he’s ref­er­enc­ing two writ­ers on Quak­er mat­ters, Michael J. Sheer­an and yours tru­ly.

In my pre­vi­ous posts, the dis­tinc­tion between gath­ered and focused meet­ings seemed con­nect­ed to one’s reli­gious out­look, and thus relat­ed to the divide between Christ-centered and uni­ver­sal­ist Quak­ers that has bedev­iled our faith for cen­turies. But as Sheer­an and Kel­ley argue, the more fun­da­men­tal divide in the lib­er­al branch of Quak­erism is between those who seek con­tact with the divine and those who don’t.

My post is, as Smith puts it, “near­ly fif­teen years old,” which is about the length of a social gen­er­a­tion. I’m not sure if I’m in a good posi­tion to pon­tif­i­cate about what has and has­n’t changed. Much of my Quak­er work is with inter­est­ing out­liers, either one-or-one or as part of a loose tribe of Friends who pas­sion­ate­ly care about Quak­erism and are will­ing to go into the weeds to under­stand it. I have very lit­tle recent expe­ri­ence with com­mit­tees on local levels.

One use­ful con­cept that I’ve picked up in the last fif­teen years is that of “func­tion­al athe­ism.” This bypass­es a group’s self-stated under­stand­ings of faith to look at how its decision-making process actu­al­ly works. An orga­ni­za­tion that is func­tion­al­ly athe­ist might be full of very devout peo­ple who togeth­er still decide actions in a com­plete­ly sec­u­lar way. I would guess this has become even more the norm among the acronymic soup of nation­al Quak­er orga­ni­za­tions in the last fif­teen years. In that time a lot of bright ideas have come and gone which flashed briefly with the fuel of donor mon­ey but which did­n’t cre­ate a self-sustaining momen­tum to keep them going long term. Think­ing more strate­gi­cal­ly about what peo­ple are seek­ing in their spir­i­tu­al lives might have helped those cast seeds land on more fer­tile grounds.

The Dif­fer­ence Between a Gath­ered Meet­ing and a Focused Meet­ing (3)

Bonus: the 14-year-old com­ments on my piece include some gen­tle whin­ing about Friends Jour­nal between myself and a reg­u­lar read­er at the time. Now that I’m its senior edi­tor I’m sure there remains plen­ty to grum­ble about.

Gathered vs focused Meeting part 2

February 26, 2018

Isaac Smith is back adding some nuance to his pars­ing of the dif­fer­ences between Quak­er wor­ship experiences:

If you’re swept up in a net, you’re off bal­ance; you don’t have the same cer­tain­ty about your­self and your sur­round­ings as you did before. Part of what it means to be gath­ered is that uncer­tain­ty, that trust in some­thing even if you don’t ful­ly under­stand it.

https://theanarchyoftheranters.wordpress.com/2018/02/26/the-difference-between-a-gathered-meeting-and-a-focused-meeting‑2/

Breath of the Ancestors

February 26, 2018

When I think of Friends in Africa, I gen­er­al­ly pic­ture the large East African year­ly meet­ings in Kenya and Ugan­da which trace their begin­nings to three evan­gel­i­cal Friends who arrived in Kenya in 1902 and set up a mis­sion in Kaimosi.

In this mon­th’s Friends Jour­nal Paul Rick­etts pro­files a small­er Quak­er out­post on the Atlantic coast in Ghana. A group of Amer­i­cans trav­eled there last year as a del­e­ga­tion of the Fel­low­ship of Friends of African Descent.

Ghana was also the depar­ture point of mil­lions of enslaved Africans head­ed toward death and mis­ery in the West­ern Hemi­sphere. Paul takes us to infa­mous Elmi­na Cas­tle, where the ships were loaded with chained human car­go. I always enjoy sto­ries of Quak­er inter­vis­i­ta­tion but this one is espe­cial­ly poignant.

Quaker vision discussion on Reddit

February 25, 2018

Red­di­tor havedan­son has start­ed a thread on Quak­er vision:

Our faith is any­thing but respectable. So why do we act like it now? Why do we play respectabil­i­ty pol­i­tics? Why are we ashamed to offend or want to be seen as the good peo­ple? Or are we more con­sumed with cor­rect­ing each oth­er than with chang­ing the world?

Quak­er vision
byu/havedanson inQuak­ers

Living by the Sword

February 25, 2018

Blog­ger Mark Wut­ka looks at guns and mass shoot­ings in light of the gospels’ warn­ings about “liv­ing by the sword.”

What are oth­er things that we might hold in a fear­ful death grip that are spir­i­tu­al­ly killing us? Are there peo­ple, insti­tu­tions, ideas, phys­i­cal objects that we must have? Are there things that inter­rupt our love of God or of our neighbors?

The new traveling ministries

February 25, 2018

Quak­ers are a bit infa­mous for our opaque acronyms but FWC­C’s is worth remem­ber­ing. The Friends World Com­mit­tee for Con­sul­ta­tion bridges togeth­er Friends across the­o­log­i­cal and geo­graph­ic distances.

Tonight I got to hear a pre­sen­ta­tion on the trav­el­ing min­istry corps host­ed by FWC­C’s Sec­tion of the Amer­i­c­as. I was phys­i­cal­ly in the audi­ence but you can watch too via the mag­ic of Pen­dle Hill con­fer­ence cen­ter’s livestream:

For more bite-sized videos, you can check out the minis­eries they spon­sored with Quak­er­S­peak.

Can Quakerism Survive?

February 24, 2018

Some­times I’m remiss at actu­al­ly shar­ing arti­cles I’ve worked on as part of my duties as Friends Jour­nal’s edi­tor. It’s espe­cial­ly iron­ic this week giv­en that one of the most talked-about recent Quak­er arti­cles comes from the Feb­ru­ary FJ issue.

Don McCormick­’s piece has a bold title: Can Quak­erism Sur­vive? He talks about thr decline that many Friends geoups have been expe­rien­ing and won­ders who it is that might have. vision for twenty-first cen­tu­ry Friends.

The arti­cle has gar­nered over eighty com­ments. The range and depth of that con­ver­sa­tion has been hum­bling as as edi­tor. But this is a good cross-section of visions of Quak­erism. An excerpt from McCormick:

Over the past 40 years, I have been part of and seen orga­ni­za­tions that had high ideals and did good work but were focused on inter­nal dynam­ics and paid lit­tle atten­tion to threats to their exis­tence. As a result, they went under. I wor­ry that our year­ly, quar­ter­ly, and month­ly meet­ings will also.