Comments on: Sheehan thoughs over on Nonviolence.org

By: Barb

Barb — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 11:40:23 +0000

Martin — you are so wry and sly. 150 proof, homemade. In addition to NASCAR, I also organized the Million Women March, etc. The googler is onto something.…I am from good Hick stock. Not Hicksite…Hick. I will read Hamm’s book next. Thanks for the recommendation. I run hot and cold with my interest in Q‑ism. But the history, the god wrangling and wrestling, it’s fascinating. Or the lack thereof. No one comes to religion easy these days. thanks for sharing your journey on your last post. I am coming to the idea that the original sin was idealism. Just when I think I’m a thoroughly entrenched realist (or cynic, a woman of the world, a whiskey drinker, etc) I realize that my cynic springs from my deep inner idealist zealot. But how to kill the inner idealist, without killing the inner girl scout too? The cynic also springs from wounds that need to be tended to. I guess I need both of them, both tempered by time and the Spirit. Well, I have to get back to nascar. zoom zoom, gimme some of that rye.

By: Martin Kelley

Martin Kelley — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 07:07:00 +0000

Hi Barb,
How funny, you must not have stumbled across the raging discussion about Chuck’s book “currently happening over on Rich Acetta-Evan’s blog”:http://brooklynquaker.blogspot.com/2007/05/review-of-chuck-fagers-without-apology.html. Sixty-eight comments as I write this! I read parts of Chuck’s book a few years ago. I remember finding it engaging, thought-provoking, a little biased, etc. I’d be careful labeling yourself a Gurneyite based on Chuck’s description.
If you want to delve deeper into that side of Quakerism, I might suggest Thomas Hamm’s “Transformation of American Quakerism,” a mostly-nineteenth century history of the Orthodox side of Friend, one big piece of which became the Gurneyites. The G’s weren’t numerically strong in Philadelphia but they became very influential in the twentieth century. I’d argue they’re the major architects of modern liberal Quakerism, though few modern liberal Quakers would claim them–everyone wants to be a Hicksite now.
I should dig out “Without Apology” maybe, see what use you’re referring to.
BTW, vis-a-vis today’s post about the strange google visit: around the same time someone came to my site on the search about kids clothes someone else googled your full name followed by “nascar owner” and “this post”:https://www.quakerranter.org/for_other_uses_see_light_disambiguation.php came in at number 27. Are you really a Nascar owner?! Wow, now there’s a liberal Quaker stereotyped smashed!

By: Barb

Barb — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 11:26:05 +0000

Martin -- thanks for your Cindy post. I know this is totally off topic, but I am getting interested in Quakerism again. I'm reading an engaging, witty, hard to stop reading booklet on Liberal Quakerism by Chuck Fager called 'Without Apology'. Have you read this? What do you think of it? For me, it explains so much, going back thru the history of Q-ism and the American splits. I have a lot more respect for the liberal position, because Fager spells it out clearly. It is useful for quoting and in discussion with newbies who are getting their feet wet in Q-ism. I realize, if I am to be catagorized under Q terminology, I might be considered a Gurney-ite....something I'm not sure I'm comfortable with. However, becoming a Q is a life long prospect for me, if I stick with it. More important for me, tho. is not to become a Q, but grow into maturity in the Spirit, and as long Q-ism aids that for me, I suppose I will continue. And hopefully, I will have opportunities to give back to that which has nurtured me.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 02:42:48 +0000

@Patrick: I’m not quite willing to write off what she was doing as unreal. She certainly inspired a number of people. If she were a Friend and I had been asked to serve some oversight role, I would have tried to understand if the headiness of being in the media spotlight were acting as any sort of snare.

By: Patrick Stanton

Patrick Stanton — Thu, 31 May 2007 11:39:31 +0000

Martin,
Well, what can we say? Cindy linked up with the Democratic Party groups and they used her for what they could. Now she can see the truth behind the “antiwar” stance of the Party…She may, after a season, return to the kind of action you discuss. This will be her entry into real activism, and we should be happy to welcome her…
Your Friend in Jesus,
Patrick Stanton
Burlington (VT) Meeting
adventtent@yahoo.com