"So why did early Friends actually engage in corporate discernment? They already had community, without seeking it, amongst themselves. Early Friends understood that God does not just address and teach individuals as individuals: God also addresses and teaches His people as a people."
Some know that I am doing research on Quakers and community and reading journals of early Friends and the communities they established as they pushed out into the wilderness that was early America… So, keeping that in mind, please consider responding to a few simple queries: What was the meaning of forming the “Religious Society” of Friends? What is the meaning of belonging to a Religious Society of Friends for us today?
I want to be a person of God. I want my faith community to aid me in becoming a person of God. I want, in my faith community, to be able to use the word “God” without someone immediately following up with a comment about how uncomfortable they are with that word. I do not like listing our testimonies as a way of defining ourselves. I don’t like the SPICE acronym. And I don’t like suggesting that what we strive for is personal integrity rather than Truth.
we wear plain clothing, and engage in an alternative economy as much as we can, in order to promote what we believe are the values that best reflect the character of Jesus and early Christ-centered communities. It is a voluntary public witness to our Quaker testimonies. We hope not to inspire others to dress plain, but to think seriously about the world around them, and develop their own community driven public witness to peace, justice, and the salvific character of Jesus the messiah.
Everything that being a Friend has led me to has been counter-intuitive to the prevailing culture of individualism. Where my society would call me to be a staunch individualist in all areas of my personal and working life, my faith calls me to be a member of community.
There are aspects of our sexuality about which we as Quakers have community expectations and standards – ways we hold each other accountable for using our God-given gifts responsibly. I can’t, however, tell you where the boundary is between acceptable and unacceptable. If we can’t articulate where the boundaries are, how do we avoid crossing them? We stay in tune with God, with ourselves as individuals, and with our partners. We identify elders, mentors, peers and loved ones with whom we can talk through the things that confuse us.
When I first came to Quakers, I experienced the insider/outsider divide, and would have fled, had I not had a strong sense of calling. I was astonished at how self-congratulatory some Quakers were about the simple fact of being Quaker. Pride. I wouldn’t be surprised if a century from now Quakers won’t look back at this period of their history with embarrassment or shame.
I had been coming to this meeting on and off for three years—and yet almost no one even recognized me. That there is the core group of people at any meeting, that they do it all, and complain about how hard it is to get more people involved. Yet, they can be so standoff-ish. That no one attempts to talk with others after meeting.
QUOTE: I hope you’ll consider the possibility that neither you nor the Quaker community is “bad” or “wrong” for not having already looked at this more, or not having created more age/race/social class diversity. I hope you’ll also consider that our faith community has a lot to rejoice in, in terms of the stand that we have taken for equality and the ways that has influenced us.Would you be willing to invite people to participate in ways that will help our community’s base of support* include people who are new or whose age, social class, or race is different from your own?
