Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by William F Rushby on 12th mo. 27, 2013 at 5:24pm

Gene Hillman wrote: " And if INFPs are the Quaker type we Quakers should not be concerned that not more are attracted to our faith. It is the same God, and we all have different ways of worship."

Tags:

Several years ago the notion was advanced that Mennonitism generates something called the "nonresistant personality".  This notion never really took hold, for which I am thankful.  I have known many Mennonites who did NOT have nonresistant personalities!  (By the way, Watchman Nee warned us against those who feign "gentleness", which in reality can be a strategy for manipulating others.)

My reaction to Gene Hillman's notion of a Quaker personality type is the same.  I hope it's not so!  And I do worry about Friends' declining numbers and seeming inability to "get it together" in a religiously (or spiritually, if you prefer) competitive world.  Our now departed Friend Lewis Benson argued that Christian faith, as Friends traditionally understood it, can speak to the deepest spiritual needs of all people!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Forrest Curo on 12th mo. 27, 2013 at 8:15pm

There's room for considerable skepticism as to what such tests measure -- My guess would be 'self-concept.' Self-concept will, of course have a lot to do with how a person becomes; and certainly it means something that Pendle Hill staff would fit overwhelmingly into a certain pattern; being 'intuitive' would be a natural element in that pattern. From my time there (loved it!) I expect it would drive an extrovert inside out... Pendle Hill, of course, is far from a representative sample of Friends. There seem to be plenty of talk-your-ear-offs who think an hour of ceremonial silence is good for them before they open up their mouths for fellowship & munchies; and who am I to say they're wrong?

Whether God orchestrates His worshippers according to Jungian theory (unlikely unless God is a Jungian, which I doubt sincerely) I do observe that people sort themselves in ways appropriate to whatever feeds them best at the time, and that would indicate frivolity for those in frivolous states of mind, solemnity for the grumpy, etc... But does He wave a baton at the various sections: "Intuitive Thinkers! A little louder, please; I'm hardly hearing you at all!"? Do 'silent worshipers' do subsonics or ultrasonics -- or simply 'other'?

What my wife observed years ago, describing it as 'Quaker smugness' -- seems to be a class thing. [She's gone Episcopalian since then, but it's with a pretty down home congregation in one of our interesting neighborhoods.] That is, much of our political thinking seems appropriate to members of a class that really could influence public and governmental policies, as I suppose some of us did for awhile. In such a mindset, ordinary humans don't find much of a place except as targets of the prominent members' generic benevolence... Does it matter to God whether such an organization flourishes or languishes? Maybe not.

But the original intention of Friends, to restore the church to what it had been around the time of Jesus' earthly career -- would not be a haven for introverts, or a podium for extroverts -- rather a body, in which different types could share what they did well, nourish each other spiritually and in all other ways needed for the mission of making the Gospel known... This is not a goal that appeals much to the Comfortable, which goes a long way to explain why we've become what we've become.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William F Rushby on 12th mo. 28, 2013 at 1:16pm

Well put, Forrest!
 

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion