Comment by Keith Saylor on 10th mo. 22, 2015 at 5:46pm

Patricia. You have shared Fox's characterization of the controversy between the founding Quakers. You have shared your characterization of the controversy between the founding Quakers. You have shared Terry Wallace's characterization of the controversy between the founding Quakers. You have not shared the words and thoughts of those on the other side of the controversy. 

At this time, I am interested not in how people (the establishment forces) characterized those on the other side of the controversy. I am already aware of the arguments used to excuse the establishment of outward forms among the gathering of Quakers and to lead them "back into that which they were lead out of." These are Rogers words directly. I am in the process of opening, to all who have an interest, what those on the other side of the controversy have to say and to let them say it in their own words. Rogers makes it clear that he intended his historic document not just for the people of his time but for those in the future. It is time their case is heard in its entirety and in their own words. 

Rogers addresses all those issues you have elucidated he answers the characterizations you have presented, which will be publishing in my blog here on QuakerQuaker.

I will let the other founding Quakers who conscience was against being lead back into that which they had been lead out of speak for themselves over the coming months. 

 

Comment by Keith Saylor on 10th mo. 22, 2015 at 6:23pm

Patricia. You wrote to Howard saying: "seeking the Love and Light of Christ is not enough." There is much I could say about this comment. However, I just have a question. Will you point me to the place in the bible wherein Jesus says seeking him is not enough? We know he says completely following the ten commandments is not enough. Well here's another question while I am at it. Is living him enough?

Comment by Howard Brod on 10th mo. 22, 2015 at 8:02pm

Keith,

I can not wait to read your published information regarding the early Friends and William Rogers.  I believe that especially liberal Quakers will be very receptive to this information at this point in time.  Many liberal meetings are tired of the forms and traditions that add no value to the Spirit-led life.  They need just a little information to have the courage to take that leap deep into the Spirit and let go of their remaining forms.  It is the business of liberal Quaker meetings that is wearing Friends out.  In this, the twenty first century, we long for a simple message that directs us within to simply the Love and Light that awaits us.  It is our natural state, just waiting for us to embrace it whole-heartedly.

I watched the evening news tonight, and the Spirit of Christ came ever more clearly into my being.  The world does not need beliefs, it does not need dogma, it does not need religion, it does not need intellectualizing God, and it does not need idolizing the Bible.  It simply needs that eternal Love that knits all of creation together - if we will only let it do so.

Comment by Keith Saylor on 10th mo. 22, 2015 at 11:25pm

Howard. Your words are inspiring and a source of strength. I hope it doesn't cause you discomfort when I say I love you in the spirit in of Jesus Christ himself who is the true hope and guide in all things. I hold you and your Meeting in the Light every day. My heart is overjoyed by the power of your Meeting's witness. The power of the inshining Light is the power of Living Love ... not of our doing but of our receiving. 

The journey of opening the words of those founding Quakers who would not be gathered back into that which they were lead out of by the inshining Light itself, is going to be fatiguing in the demand of time over and above my daily activities. Also, it will be fatiguing enduring mis-representations and mis-characterizations, as those who value the outward way and who use individual and societal short-comings like "pervasive spiritual emptiness" as an excuse to preach-up outward forms as a remedy or stop-gap step out to temper adherence to the inward Principle itself. The day will come when enough of us will not blink and instead of buckling in the face of excuse after excuse for more and more adherence to outward forms, we will deepen down even further into the inward Light itself and hold to our faith in and experience of the living unmediated Inshining that we know through personal experience is sufficient in all things to illuminate our path. On that day the inshining will become an outshining candling and beaconing those who are burdened by spiritual emptiness. We will not tell them to follow us or any other person or outward form, but encourage them by the Light in our conscience and conscience to turn in their minds to the Light in their conscience and to have faith in the promised grace they have inherited. 

Comment by Jim Wilson on 10th mo. 23, 2015 at 10:37am

A final comment:  Keith, I think you misunderstand what I am saying.  I am happy that you have found a way and a path and an understanding which is effective for you, and for others as well.  I genuinely have no problem with that.  What I am responding to is your posts appear to demean those who rely on forms, traditions, etc., as their means for living in the light.  You come across as dismissive of those kinds of approaches.  It appears that you are saying your own understanding is, in some way, above, or more complete, because it does not rely on outward forms.  I don't see it that way.

If I want to serve tea to someone I need to serve it in a cup.  The cup might be round or square, tall or wide, red or blue, ceramic or glass, etc.  If I simply pour the tea onto the floor no one will be able to drink it.  If I simply pour the tea into someone's hands I will scald those hands.  

The function of forms is to act as a 'cup of light' so that others may partake.  It's not a big deal.  It's not a betrayal of a primal insight.  It's not harmful or deforming.  It meets people where they are and offers them assistance.

Again, I have no quarrel with those, like you, who do not any of these forms.  Congratulations!  But I am not one of those people.  I just wish you would be more generous and understanding towards ordinary people and their limitations.

Comment by Diane Benton on 10th mo. 23, 2015 at 11:40am

Jim, I am not aware of any ordinary people with limitations.  Every one of us has the capacity to be who we are intended to be.  Those of us who know that are compelled to proclaim it.  The first experience of receiving the Light into one's conscience is a shattering of the self image.  Only as one waits in the Light is the dross burned away.  Turning away from the pain is turning away from God.

Comment by Howard Brod on 10th mo. 23, 2015 at 11:50am

Jim,

While I certainly agree with your expressed views on the value of forms as a tool, I think we are at an important cross-roads as liberal Quakers (I can't speak for other Quaker traditions that I am not a part of).  That cross-roads is one of 'giving up' the idolizing of forms as somehow sacred.  Our worship (for most liberal Quakers) is devoid of form except for the 'expectant waiting' itself.  Now, in this 21st century, our challenge is to simplify and eliminate the forms surrounding the organization, structures and traditions of our meetings.  These have become a burden to many; or to use a modern vernacular - they are a "turn-off'. 

Those newcomers first attracted to liberal Quakerism are looking for an egalitarian group of spiritual seekers.  And they experience that when they join us in our 'expectant waiting' worship.  Soon, however, they witness an idolizing of Quaker tradition (vestiges of plain language, reverence for a rigid and over-used permanent committee structure, elders, and a treatment of non-members as not equal partners in our spiritual life as a meeting community), as well as a subtle hierarchy in the operation of our meetings.  Some form is necessary to function in this world - even on a spiritual plane.  Yet, it is a human tendency to over-apply structure everywhere.  And the truth is that many newcomers complain that it is hard to break into the click of our liberal meetings.  That is simply because there is so much to learn regarding all these implied 'rules' before newcomers are allow to fully participate.  And all of this worship of structure does not fit our core purpose of bringing 'Love and Light' to a world in need of it.

I am fully convicted and convinced that all of this needs to change as quickly as Quakerly possible; the less reliance on forms we can bring about, the more we will become a spiritual community that modern seekers will flock to.  Why?  Because the less form and structure we have, the freer the Spirit is to operate among us in all facets of our meetings' life and in the individual lives of those associating with us as one of us in the Spirit. 

How can we recommend our own testimony of Simplicity to people for their personal lives - when we as the Religious of Society of Friends are so awful at embracing it in the operation of our own meetings at all levels?

My meeting has begun to remove every bit of structure and form that is not necessary to bring 'Love and Light' to everyone - with good results.  I suggest everyone take this same effort to their own meetings.  You will find it is a wonderful spiritual journey for your whole community to be on.

Comment by Keith Saylor on 10th mo. 24, 2015 at 9:28am

Diane. Those words you wrote are an anointing that nurtured a deepening into the Light itself and a blanketing quiet peace gathers into its rightful place.

Comment by Diane Benton on 10th mo. 24, 2015 at 7:31pm

Keith, just having the original text in a plain, modern font without all the "dirt" on the page is quite a blessing.  Having your paraphrase gives added dimension.  Quite an undertaking!

Comment by Keith Saylor on 10th mo. 25, 2015 at 1:53am

Hello Diane,

Thank you. Please feel free to cross check my re-typing of the original text for mistakes and my paraphrases for incorrect or misleading renderings. I'm sure I will make some. It will not be even a little embarrassing to me if you make my mistakes known. I'm not asking you to commit to it. Just when you have the time and inclination and if you are willing. Anything would be appreciated.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page