Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by David McKay on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 12:53pm

Hello Quaker Monk —
Sorry if I missed labelled your contribution as "complaining" but there was something in the tone.

And yes I agree — appointing people to committees is an excellent way to silence them. It is also a way of integrating the outliers so that they may contribute as insiders rather than outsiders to the system.

Your "defrocked Methodist minister/lawyer" may have found a true home within Quakerism — but I'm not there to judge. A Methodist who turns to Quakers is I think seeking the energy (the Spirit) promised by Methodism but which is often trapped by the "3 songs and a sermon" you speak of.

What I do appreciate in your posting is an awareness that this thread on outreach evangelism or whatever else we want to call that thing is all rather moot if we don't actually have something to bear witness to. It is only good news if we have something to offer as different from what people will find at some other church, or some non-church group, or even in a bottle or a bed.

I am currently worshiping in a traditional Protestant church and not a Quaker meeting. And from time to time I feel agitated by the lack of depth there/here. And I know that niggle in part is real — that a lot of my fellow worshipers wouldn't know God if they met him anymore than Baalam when his donkey stopped him in the road. But I also know that part of that niggle is also me in the way they process life. Too much of my sense of who I am comes from defining myself against others and that too has a cost.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Quaker Monk on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 1:30pm

David McKay said:

Interesting how you try to negate me and my comments.

You are correct you are not in the Quaker meeting I attend.  The clerk wants the meeting to  be a programmed meeting and to be  a Quaker Reverend.  Its an easy take over.  It would be more trouble for him to  get credentials again with the Methodists.  Less than 10 people go to the meeting and they could care less about outreach into the community.   However, you make comments on what you do not experience.

I think it is good that you are in a traditional Protestant church.   Its where you belong since it is apparent that is what  you are called to do.  As I say there are many 3 songs and sermon steeple houses.  They provide a social service.  I attend a Methodist Bible study.  The people there know I am a Quaker and enjoy my insights and the preacher is a personal friend even though we have vast disagreement,  This preacher complains of the abuse shown to him by his Bishop who doesn't care about anything but MONEY.   I don't attend his Sunday service because he has a mean spirited angry God that must be flattered and buttered up weekly.  The Methodist God is hard up for money and  rules by guilt.  I guess if that brings people to the Spirit somehow that is ok for them. That is their business not mine but I feel sorry for them.

Sounds like you are in the right place for yourself.  My comments stand as before.   Quakers are apathetic and unwilling to publicize themselves or even uphold the Light.   I find no peace in arguing with you or people in the meeting I attend.  You are where you want to be and sniping at me doesn't change it.

Hello Quaker Monk — Sorry if I missed labelled your contribution as "complaining" but there was something in the tone.

And yes I agree — appointing people to committees is an excellent way to silence them. It is also a way of integrating the outliers so that they may contribute as insiders rather than outsiders to the system.

Your "defrocked Methodist minister/lawyer" may have found a true home within Quakerism — but I'm not there to judge. A Methodist who turns to Quakers is I think seeking the energy (the Spirit) promised by Methodism but which is often trapped by the "3 songs and a sermon" you speak of.

What I do appreciate in your posting is an awareness that this thread on outreach evangelism or whatever else we want to call that thing is all rather moot if we don't actually have something to bear witness to. It is only good news if we have something to offer as different from what people will find at some other church, or some non-church group, or even in a bottle or a bed.

I am currently worshiping in a traditional Protestant church and not a Quaker meeting. And from time to time I feel agitated by the lack of depth there/here. And I know that niggle in part is real — that a lot of my fellow worshipers wouldn't know God if they met him anymore than Baalam when his donkey stopped him in the road. But I also know that part of that niggle is also me in the way they process life. Too much of my sense of who I am comes from defining myself against others and that too has a cost.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by William F Rushby on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 1:34pm

Hello, David McKay!  I think you hit on an important point concerning evangelism/outreach (or whatever one wants to call it) when you highlighted having something important to share with the audience one is trying to reach.  I have only passing experience with pastoral Friends, so I am not well qualified to say anything about what they have to offer.

I do know about unprogrammed Friends, and believe that they need to do lots of work on their own message and meetings before they can have much success in drawing others in.  Having been "released" involuntarily from a meeting my wife and I were instrumental in founding, we began attending a conservative Mennonite mission church in 2002.  This group has been quite successful in attracting converts, even though its outreach is far from perfect.  The contrast with our previous meeting is stunning.  Our former meeting is now down to two resident members AFAIK, whereas the Mennonite group has become an established church with between 50-70 attending, and is ready to build a meetinghouse.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Forrest Curo on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 2:33pm

God seems to have ideas of God's own, as to what sort of practices are appropriate to which people at which time, and what they can reasonably expect to accomplish/gain in the process. That is, we see different people preferring different forms of worship, and doing the same forms differently, and making whatever mistakes suit them at the time. We can have hopes of our own about that; but letting those hopes become expectations is just another good way of fussing oneself.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Forrest Curo on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 2:46pm

That is, when we see a particular event happening, when we see people doing a particular thing: That will not necessarily embody God's ultimate intention for us. But this looks like a good Quaker bet:  it ought to turn out being a step on the way to that intention.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Quaker Monk on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 3:40pm

The original question, "What do you call your Quaker outreach effort?"  is a good one.  Programmed paid clergy have a vested interest in getting more and bigger churches to pay them for their efforts.  Non-programmed meetings have no interest in getting new members except to offer a direct path to the Spirit.  Most programmed meetings are very good at their efforts at reaching out to the community.  Conversely, I guess the non-programmed meetings believe that the Spirit and silent worship  is worth the effort.

Its a shame there are not  more responses to this question by non-programmed Quakers.  I am glad you asked the question, perhaps Quakers will consider more what they are NOT or REFUSING to do outreach.  Maybe they will stop being complacent.  If George Fox sat in the Church of England and did nothing, then we would not be having this discussion.  Its a shame that Quakers at local and national level depend on hireling preachers to answer this question for us.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Quaker Monk on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 3:51pm

William F Rushby said:

I agree with you fully.  We Quakers are at fault for spending time running after social and environmental issues and NOT taking care of members or trying to explain to the public why we are Quakers.  I think it is wonderful that you still even look at Quaker sites.  You were treated poorly.  I am glad you found the Mennonites and they are meeting your needs.  I haven't been written out of my meeting.  I just see no reason to attend since they wrote Christianity out of the Faith and Practice and are seeking to be programmed.   The clerk just ignored the Friends that had concerns about these issues.  No reason to go.  I can be a Quaker monk.   The monthly and yearly meetings don't care.   Friends Journal is a social work and environmental journal, so they don't care.   They cant strip you or me from the teachings of the Book of John, George Fox, and Woolman.  Of course they can ignore these teachings but then are they really Quaker?  Best wishes, The Quaker Monk.

Hello, David McKay!  I think you hit on an important point concerning evangelism/outreach (or whatever one wants to call it) when you highlighted having something important to share with the audience one is trying to reach.  I have only passing experience with pastoral Friends, so I am not well qualified to say anything about what they have to offer.

I do know about unprogrammed Friends, and believe that they need to do lots of work on their own message and meetings before they can have much success in drawing others in.  Having been "released" involuntarily from a meeting my wife and I were instrumental in founding, we began attending a conservative Mennonite mission church in 2002.  This group has been quite successful in attracting converts, even though its outreach is far from perfect.  The contrast with our previous meeting is stunning.  Our former meeting is now down to two resident members AFAIK, whereas the Mennonite group has become an established church with between 50-70 attending, and is ready to build a meetinghouse.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Quaker Monk on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 4:11pm

Forrest Curo said:

God seems to have ideas of God's own, as to what sort of practices are appropriate to which people at which time, and what they can reasonably expect to accomplish/gain in the process. That is, we see different people preferring different forms of worship, and doing the same forms differently, and making whatever mistakes suit them at the time. We can have hopes of our own about that; but letting those hopes become expectations is just another good way of fussing oneself.

Well said, however its just the traditional Quaker way of shutting discussion down and not addressing the issue.  It really is ok that you don't care enough to discuss it.  Its ok to do nothing. Nobody cares about Quakers or even know what we do.  People know more about Masonic rituals than they do about Quaker silent meetings.  The Mason sure have more members.  If Quakers like you want to sit around and do nothing you will be in majority of Quakers.  At least Quaker preachers want more church members.  In fifty years it wont be a problems at all the Quakers will go they way of the Shakers,  extinct.  So be real quiet and fearful of being a Quaker.  What do you call your outreach committee?  Nothing, you refuse to do it.  It doesn't matter what you sit around on argue about in business meeting, no onw cares at the local, state, or national level.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Forrest Curo on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 4:52pm

We should take an... um, affirmation of secrecy -- and then people would want to know more about us?

I've never been happy with the situation; I've just observed over many years of trying to change it that most of my Meeting's members are there because they prefer that situation the way it is. They don't envision new members as sources of new perspectives and talents, but as potential burdens to the group we know and threats to its ways.

Hence my wife has returned to a down-home church in her childhood Episcopalian denomination, & I've been vacationing with a live Meeting, a little further away, in the same city. It works better than trying to make anyone or anything do something out of character.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kirby Urner on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 5:10pm

Heh, I just told a group of #WILPF ladies at their meetup / luncheon I had no real worries about the Quaker brand fading. Earlham, AFSC, Golden Rule... we're set, and Multnomah is brimming with new people. Call me complacent. I'm bullish on Friends.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Quaker Monk on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 5:13pm

Forrest Curo said:

We should take an... um, affirmation of secrecy -- and then people would want to know more about us?

I've never been happy with the situation; I've just observed over many years of trying to change it that most of my Meeting's members are there because they prefer that situation the way it is. They don't envision new members as sources of new perspectives and talents, but as potential burdens to the group we know and threats to its ways.

Hence my wife has returned to a down-home church in her childhood Episcopalian denomination, & I've been vacationing with a live Meeting, a little further away, in the same city. It works better than trying to make anyone or anything do something out of character.

So why did you discount my comments?   I state the obvious about the knowledge about Quakers but you mock me.  Don't feel bad about it.  It doesn't matter what you or I think.

  Does the meeting you attended know why you are not going?   Have you written a letter or email to you your meeting about it?   Mine knows why I am not there.  Have you called and talked to the editor of Friends Journal telling how you feel?  Have you written the yearly meetings to express your concerns?  Have you written emails or letters to the preachers at Friends United about their actions to split Quakers?  At least you are reading and writing here.  I have done all the above and I am trying to get a non-programmed meeting started in my local area.  I am not afraid to tell people about Quakers and to confront people like you. 

My original comments still stand.  I see no one who can refute them.  Quakers are complacent in their own meetings.  We don't care to tell people about our unique style of worship.  We don't care about those disenfranchised from the Spirit in other religions, thus we will slowly die out.

The Quaker Monk

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Quaker Monk on 6th mo. 25, 2016 at 5:35pm

Kirby Urner said:

Heh, I just told a group of #WILPF ladies at their meetup / luncheon I had no real worries about the Quaker brand fading. Earlham, AFSC, Golden Rule... we're set, and Multnomah is brimming with new people. Call me complacent. I'm bullish on Friends.

Well how nice for you.  It meets your local needs.  Who cares about other areas that it doesn't.

Friends Service Committee?  Have you called the organizations that they spend there money on?  I have.   No one working at these places knows they are working for a Quaker organization.  I tried to contact the people running these places and never got a return call.  None carried the Friends or Quaker name.  Conversely, I was on the Board of Directors of Catholic Social Services and no one doubted it was run by Catholics or represented Catholic values.  I tried to contact the CEO  of AFSC to discuss it no reply, but I would get 2 to 3 emails a month from this organization wanting money.  Who cares where it goes and what they do with it.  No Quaker or Friends mentioned in what they do.

Earlham College.  Nice at least they don't call themselves George Fox University.  The Fighting Quakers football team?  Really.   They make Quaker preachers and give lip service to the soft, still sound of Sprit.  Nice college and campus.  How do they promote Quaker silent worship?  They don't.

Oh you don't mention how the North Carolina Yearly Meeting is being ripped to pieces by liberal and conservative "Quaker" preachers.  The liberals would  feel much more comfortable with Unitarian Universalists.  The charismatics are really just non-denominational holiness churches.  Neither are Quakers and haven't been for quite some time.  The Non-programmed meetings in North Carolina just watch them fight in silence.  Yep, you are doing just fine in North Carolina.

I would say you are living the dream.  Dream on but Reality is not what you portray.  I would agree you are bullish.  In fact, I would promote the thought you are full of bull.  I  think George Fox would agree with me and would not be afraid to say it.

The Quaker Monk

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page