Comment by Kirby Urner on 9th mo. 24, 2015 at 9:56am

Howard, yes, your synopsis seems apt. 

Our PSCC is not a mouth piece for "all Friends" and does not boss the Meeting regarding what actions it should or should not take.  Rather, it provides opportunities, to sign this, go to that meeting, attend such and such a march, without demanding or insisting anyone do so.

PSCC is also about organizational memory.  What initiatives has our meeting supported in the past, when it has chosen to co-sponsor or put it's name to something?  To whom have we made donations, of how much, of what kind? 

With all the turnover we have through all slate positions, it's important to preserve such knowledge and PSCC becomes a logical repository for a lot of it.  A Meeting that makes commitments needs a way to follow through.

Most of those active on our PSCC work with other groups besides, such as Veterans for Peace, Recruiter Watch, AFSC, FCNL, or in my case maybe the Buckminster Fuller Institute (BFI) and Food Not Bombs (FNB). 

Our members are perhaps more likely to lead Interest Groups on topics they care about.  AFSC will maybe organize a panel discussion with invited speakers around some movie documentary and so on.  That might be an evening event on a week night, with the public invited.

Where PSCC may impact the finances of the meeting, and where I, for one, have suggested tighter coordination with Finance Committee, is regarding the matter of hosting versus renting.  To host in lieu of charging rent means providing an in-kind donation of meeting space.  We have a nice heated building with WiFi and lots of groups rent from us -- a primary source of revenue.  We're a "million dollar meeting".

When our clerks had to renege on a commitment to give our building over to some conference organizers in 2014, the organizers pointed out we had already rented to them in the past for smaller meetups, so why the sudden change?  The organizers tried to paint us as under the control of a militant GLTBQ minority that included outside agitators, suggesting they were forcing our hand.  They had warned the clerks of these militants as a part of their persuading them to keep the deal secret, contrary to Quaker process.

Two months later (June 2014), these same secret-deal-prone clerks were shepherding Nominating's proposal that PSCC be "shelved" for two years.  This was over the objections of Oversight, the clerk of which later resigned (the ex oficio Ast. Clerk then assumed his role).  Nominating, with the power to stop naming people to any committee it didn't like, seemed the least appropriate committee to be targeting my PSCC (I was on it at the time of the proposed shut down).

To use a Star Trek analogy, now that we were under attack from the RadFem website [1], the next step was to consider dropping our shields.  It seemed to me that those on the bridge had a sudden death wish.  The NPYM PSCC had sent a delegation to our business meeting begging us to not commit our flagship meetinghouse to RadFem.  Were these the militant agitators the clerks had been warned about?  Some had come from Seattle.  Tears had been shed.  Many hearts were hardened.

After we decided, no, we'd rather keep our PSCC operational (it then took about six months to restart), I suggested that, in hindsight, we should have been making greater efforts to figure out what groups were renting our building versus what events we were hosting.  That's too big and complicated a job to leave to the Hearthkeeper (paid role), Clerk and Ast. Clerk.  It's also not obviously a Property Management concern -- not solely -- as we're talking about ideological matters, not just logistical or janitorial.

The founders of our meeting were very pro-AFSC and AFSC used to have an office right in our Stark Street building.  Ergo even though AFSC moved its offices in the 1980s, we have historically given that NGO free access to our facilities.  But should that be the only NGO with such privileges?  Might we want to pro-actively *offer* facilities to groups we're in sympathy with?  That's where PSCC could have input.

For example, like St. David of Wales (Episcopalian) we allowed Food Not Bombs to use our kitchen every week from about 2 PM to 6 PM for a year.  FNB brought bicycle trailers full of fresh salvaged produce to our kitchen, prepped and cooked it, and served it in a nearby park, for free, to all comers. 

Although Friends were invited to join in these operations, and one or two did, partly out of curiosity, the most deeply involved Friend was myself, the one with the building key.  If FNB were to leave a messy kitchen, I was the one to complain to.  All we needed was a single go-between.

Based on prior experience, and our run-in with RadFem, which made it all the way to the New Yorker magazine, I have suggested that a flagship big city meeting such as ours, empower its PSCC to research and stay on top of "building use" as a part of its job description.  This should help us avoid unwittingly renting to rage groups and remind us that hosting (not charging rent) is a way to make a difference.
Also, because PSCC members tend to be into networking and social action, I have suggested that PSCC also serve as a resource to Friends wishing to learn more about social media.  PSCC members are probably more likely to use a wikis, listservs, Twitter, Facebook etc. than Friends on average, so I would steer newcomers to PSCC if they're clearly looking to build those types of skills.

[1]  https://radfemsrespond.wordpress.com/60-2/

Comment by Keith Saylor on 9th mo. 24, 2015 at 9:57am

Hello Mike. Would you please explain what you mean by the "much" that does not happen?

Comment by Keith Saylor on 9th mo. 24, 2015 at 10:08am

Jim, I know your analogue goes in another direction, however, as I soon as I read it, these words came to me immediately.

It is compelling to me that you do not need a club to play chess but you do need one to set up meetings and committees. In the same way, you do not need a religion or religious group to play in Heaven but you do need you to establish meetings and committees.

Comment by Jim Wilson on 9th mo. 24, 2015 at 10:29am

Good Morning Keith:

We don't see eye to eye on many things and I'm fine with that.  From my perspective, and drawing on my Buddhist background, you seem to be attached to emptiness.  My view of Christianity is that it is a religion of incarnation; that is to say God became a specific human being.  This mimics God at the moment of creation in Genesis where he looked on creation and saw that it was 'good'.  Notice in Genesis there is the movement from chaos to form; it is the form that is good.  In a similar way, I think that the formation of Meetings for Worship, and Yearly Meetings, etc., was a good thing and something that is completely in keeping with the ultimate vision of the Divine Presence.  I see no conflict where you see a deep divide.  I cannot think of a way to resolve such a basic difference, particularly online where these kinds of communications are easily misunderstood.

It is true that you don't need a club to play chess.  You don't need an association to garden.  But it has been my experience that community has a significant role to play.  In a chess club I can learn from others strategies I might not have thought of on my own.  In a gardening club I can learn approaches and techniques from others that will assist in my own gardening.  And there are more intangible benefits such as friendship built on shared interests.  And in Meeting for Worship my sense of the Presence of God is qualitatively different from when I practice silent worship on my own.  

Your view strikes me as an example of the hyper-individualism which is so corrosive of community.  Since I don't know you, except through online communication, I don't know if this perception is accurate.  I am only communicating how your online posts strike me.  Again, we see things differently and I think that is a good thing.

Comment by Forrest Curo on 9th mo. 24, 2015 at 1:34pm

"Eternity is in love with the productions of time" -- and that's what keeps 'emptiness' from devolving into nihilism or 'individualism' (whatever that means, aside from not needing a committee to tell one what one knows?)

One God --There's diverse reception of that actuality-in-progress from diverse individuals -- but ultimately, so far as you're tuned into that, you're playing along with the same conductor as the rest of the orchestra, including whatever Meeting you play with. And sometimes you end up playing a different part in what they're playing; if you're too busy listening to the people next to you, you might miss the note they need you for...

But to leave the socio-economic-political witness of a Meeting to individuals who are not part of its worshipping -- or to any committee (except for administering what the Meeting has already agreed to) -- that's pure Charles Ives!

Comment by Howard Brod on 9th mo. 24, 2015 at 2:12pm

Keith, Jim, and Forrest,

For me, your discussion here has "witnessed" to what can be the best of liberal Quakerism, which has always (since its distinct emergence in the mid 1800s) so valued Christian mysticism, as well as mysticism from all spiritual traditions.  A liberal Quaker meeting can be a place that appreciates the mystics within the meeting, and a place where the mystics can experience something propelling from the group's expectant waiting worship together.  I have also found that just the presence of a deep mystic within a meeting is indeed a witness to the divine presence at all times.  It is quite a blessing.

The mystic may not need the meeting for fulfillment of the 'presence'; but the meeting is surely blessed and helped towards that same state of joy and eternal community just by weekly association with the mystics among them.

For the rest of us: the weekly expectant waiting worship with no leader, no pastor, no form, no doctrines, and no distractions - provides us a glimpse of the reality Jesus experienced as he enjoyed community with all and in all places.  And perhaps one day for a myriad of reasons, we too will travel to that heavenly place.

So, I don't see an either/or here.  A liberal Quaker meeting at its best is a place where all can minister to each other with what the Spirit has witnessed to them.  And anyone there is free to accept or reject what they are provided by all among them.

Our only obligation whether we are the giver or receiver in any exchange, is to remain open to the potential of Love and Light that surrounds us and is in us - whether we are aware of it or not.

Comment by Mike Shell on 9th mo. 24, 2015 at 6:50pm

Friend Keith,

I wrote: "My present meeting is so small that everything is 'committee of the whole'...which means not much happens."

We have a small meeting of attenders (and fewer members) who bring social concerns to meeting yet rarely take a worship-centered approach to discerning if or how meeting should take action on any of those concerns. Instead, Friends voice concerns, we have a "political" discussion, and the process most often devolves into a suggestion that Friends who share the concern act individually.

Lacking spiritual centeredness, we almost never come to unity on collective action as a witness of the meeting...except maybe to donate some amount of money to a cause.

It tends to be more of an "ain't it awful" discussion group than a spirit-led meeting.

Thanks for a good question.

Mike

Comment by Howard Brod on 9th mo. 24, 2015 at 7:19pm

Kirby,

Your meeting's PSCC sounds like a wonderful resource to the community your meeting is in, as well as a wonderful resource for Friends in your meeting.  I was so impressed reading your comment and seeing how much they do for all in such a giving, humble way.

Comment by Keith Saylor on 9th mo. 25, 2015 at 12:24pm

Hello Jim,

I have played chess my entire life. My father says since I was 6 years old although I don't remember. In all that time, I have never been a member of a chess club. Yet, I have never lacked for people with whom to play chess. In the playing of chess I have communed with other chess players. Formal chess communities were and are of no value to me. 

I am dwelling in the Light and the Light is dwelling within me whenever I go and in any circumstance in my life. Jim. That light that once incarnated in one human being is now incarnate within me and within all human being. I am in thanks for the historical Jesus Christ as I am in thankfulness for receiving the historical Jesus' Presence within me. I am his Presence even as I write these words. I and the Presence of the one historical Jesus are one through his historic sacrifice. The promised second coming is manifest within me and within all human beings according to their measure. Jesus Christ is come within illuminating my conscious and informing my conscience. His Presence is my teacher in all things and in all events. I am conscious in his Presence and know eternal life here on earth. In the second covenant, I Am not in or bound to outward forms for consciousness and identity. I am inward Presence itself which now anchors my conscious and informs my conscience rather then outward forms and practices. 

I am dwelling in the Light and know no predication. I am neither Quaker nor Buddhist, liberal nor conservative, religious nor secular, individual nor communal, by the power of the incarnation of Christ's Presence within me I live in and through the Name of God. The Name is no longer incarnate within one historical human being, it is in the whole of human being and is the authority in all things. 

This life incarnate is radically different from a life predicated by outward forms. This life incarnate knows and experiences in all places and in all circumstances what outward religious forms mediates with and through various similitudes. This life incarnate is unmediated. It is a new way of being and perceiving. In this unmediated life, through the Incarnation itself,  the expired outward forms which once had a role to play in the first covenant no longer have value and are shadowy reflections that overshadows the continued and sustained immediate experiencing incarnate Life which is gifted to human being upon the sacrifice of the historic Jesus Christ.  

I am in gratitude for being that is incarnate by Presence itself. I am given to speak to Name directly unmediated outward intellectual forms, it is not for me to expect that any will find the speaking cordial. By the power of Presence within, I hope the unmediated Name will fill the conscious and inform the conscience of all human being that hear and read the Name.

Comment by Olivia on 9th mo. 26, 2015 at 4:55pm

Hello friends!

What a noble collection of Spirits all hashing it out we have here...

Kirby, I'm very glad for the work of your PSCC.  It sounds very meaningful for you, and very fulfilling.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• Next ›
• Page