What does it mean to be a member of a Quaker meeting?

May 2, 2024

Friends Jour­nal’s May issue on “Mem­ber­ship” is out. In my open­ing col­umn I talk about some of the dif­fer­ent types of mem­bers, offi­cial and unofficial:

As the clerk of a small meet­ing, I find myself fre­quent­ly jug­gling these mul­ti­ple cat­e­gories of mem­ber­ship. When we had plumb­ing issues a few months ago, there were lots of emails with a core half-dozen reg­u­lars who I can depend on to help with logis­tics and con­tacts with local con­trac­tors (this group is so con­sis­tent that when I go to send a mes­sage to one, my email pro­gram asks me if I want to include all the others).

When there’s an event com­ing up, the email list expands to include a small group of recent new­com­ers who make it to wor­ship a few times a month. Every so often I look over this list to see if there’s some­one who’s dropped away, and I’ll take a minute to write them a spe­cial email ask­ing how they are and invit­ing them to attend. I would hate for a semi-regular to drop away and think we hadn’t noticed.

There’s also a wide con­stel­la­tion of peo­ple who attend once in a prover­bial blue moon. Some are mem­bers of near­by meet­ings who occa­sion­al­ly hit us up for a change of pace. Oth­ers are local his­to­ry buffs who will come to hear a par­tic­u­lar speak­er but make sure to come ear­ly because they like their once-a-year Quak­er wor­ship. Few of these vis­i­tors will ever become reg­u­lars but they prob­a­bly know some­one who might, and their word-of-mouth rec­om­men­da­tion could help con­nect a new seek­er with our small band.

When it’s time to send out the annu­al fundrais­ing appeal, I’ll reach out to anoth­er, rather spe­cial class of mem­bers, those at a dis­tance, many of whom I’ve nev­er met. They might hail from one of the found­ing fam­i­lies of the meet­ing; per­haps they grew up there them­selves and have fond mem­o­ries. It might be easy to for­get about these mem­bers but that would be a mis­take, as they remind us of the long line of faith­ful ser­vants who have kept this spe­cial com­mu­ni­ty going in the past.

A Mem­ber­ship That Is Ever Flow­ing

I even give a shoutout to the red-shouldered hawk fam­i­ly liv­ing in one of our sycamore trees.

Look­ing back in the archives, we’ve been putting out an issue on mem­ber­ship every four years: Mem­ber­ship and the Gen­er­a­tion Gap in 2012, Almost Quak­er in 2016, Mem­ber­ship and Friends in 2020. I’m actu­al­ly sur­prised at the clock­work pre­ci­sion of our issues, but there’s a good rea­son we keep com­ing back to it. The def­i­n­i­tion of who “we” are is an essen­tial part of our self-identification as Friends. Pret­ty much every­thing we do (or fail to do) reflects our implic­it assump­tions about who’s in and who’s out. Many, per­haps most, of the debates that roil Friends have mem­ber­ship as an element.

Links

May 2, 2024

In 2020, online wor­ship went from a fringe nov­el­ty to a mass phe­nom­e­non. It’s def­i­nite­ly an option that’s here to stay and British Friends have now inte­grat­ed one online wor­ship group ful­ly into the month­ly meet­ing struc­ture (has any oth­er year­ly meet­ing done this already?). It’ll be fas­ci­nat­ing to see how this con­tin­ues to develop.

I was remiss in shar­ing the March Quak­ers Today pod­cast, which looked at Quak­ers, Birds, and Jus­tice. Friends have long been espe­cial­ly inter­est­ed in the nat­ur­al world. One of the inter­vie­wees is Rebec­ca Hei­der, who wrote A Quak­er Guide to Bird­watch­ing in last mon­th’s issue of FJ.

Rightwing Quaker-lovers in the Washington Post

April 15, 2024

It’s so bizarre that some of the peo­ple most rock­ing the old do-no-wrong Quak­er mytholo­gies today are non-Quaker polit­i­cal con­ser­v­a­tives. Exhib­it A has to be Chris­t­ian nation­al­ist Abby Abildness’s obses­sion with William Penn but this week The Wash­ing­ton Post pro­filed “anti-woke” ding­bat Kali Fontanil­la (non pay­walled link).

She told her stu­dents how Quak­ers formed some of the first anti-slavery orga­ni­za­tions in Amer­i­can his­to­ry. How Quak­ers boy­cotted sug­ar, cot­ton and oth­er goods pro­duced through slave labor. She spoke about how Quak­ers lacked offi­cial cler­gy and advo­cat­ed spir­i­tu­al equal­i­ty for men and women.

She did not men­tion that 19th-century slave­hold­ing Quak­ers some­times offered finan­cial com­pen­sa­tion to the enslaved peo­ple they freed. Or that, in 2022, British Quak­ers com­mit­ted to make repa­ra­tions for their past involve­ment in the transat­lantic slave trade and colonialism.

Asked about this, Kali said in an inter­view that she knows not all Quak­ers were per­fect, and that some owned slaves, but that her les­son was meant to give a con­trast and a bal­ance to the “overem­pha­sis” on repa­ra­tions com­ing from the left. She also not­ed that some Quak­ers have become “very left-leaning now.”

So does this mean we’ve ret­conned the Under­ground Rail­road as a right-leaning enter­prise? Per­haps. I think inten­tion­al­ly con­fus­ing polit­i­cal terms like left and right and play­ing dumb about his­to­ry of U.S. polit­i­cal par­ties chang­ing posi­tions is part of the so called “anti-woke” agen­da. It also an attempt to dele­git­imize modern-day Friends who might a) know their his­to­ry (sur­prise!, there were eigh­teenth cen­tu­ry Friends advo­cat­ing repa­ra­tions) and b) have well-informed and con­trary opin­ions.

I’m glad the arti­cle does actu­al­ly push back at some of the Fontanil­la’s half-truths but it’s bad jour­nal­ism to put the counter argu­ments near the end of the arti­cle where casu­al read­ers might miss them. 

It’s even worse jour­nal­ism to not have both­ered to inter­view a Quak­er his­to­ri­an. When pro­fil­ing some­one spew­ing inac­cu­rate infor­ma­tion, it’s com­mon jour­nal­is­tic prac­tice to let them go on for the first three or so para­graphs — enough time for them to incrim­i­nate them­selves — and then bring in some experts to pro­vide a series of quotes that will take down the pre­ced­ing non­sense. Just a few min­utes on the phone with a legit his­to­ri­an of ear­ly Quak­er slave­hold­ing and abo­li­tion — and some bet­ter pac­ing — would have made this a far bet­ter arti­cle. The main­stream press real­ly needs to com­mit to prac­tice aggres­sive­ly fact-based report­ing, even on throw-away pro­file arti­cles like this, even if it risks being called woke.

As I’ve said many times before, there’s a lot of lot of things to be proud of in Quak­er his­to­ry but we’ve also got­ten a lot of things wrong. Our posi­tions on issues like slav­ery, native rela­tions, and prison reform all have had mixed results. In the past it was com­mon for Friends to over-emphasize and over-mythologize the good, as these modern-day non-Quakers con­tin­ue to do. Nowa­days some Friends over-emphasize the bad his­to­ry, which also has its prob­lems. I think it’s impor­tant to embrace both so we can under­stand how our tra­di­tions have led us to past dis­cern­ments that were rad­i­cal­ly lib­er­a­to­ry and also how our process has back­fired on a num­ber of issues.

John Andrew Gallery: The Gospel Model of Fatherly Love

April 15, 2024

I got to talk with fre­quent Friends Jour­nal author John Andrew Gallery this week. His lat­est arti­cle for us explores a gospel mod­el of par­ent­hood. I most appre­ci­at­ed his take that many of the fig­ures in the para­bles were not nec­es­sar­i­ly metaphor­i­cal fill-ins for God but faith­ful peo­ple already liv­ing in the pow­er of the king­dom. I’ll be chew­ing on his take on the prodi­gal son’s for­giv­ing father for awhile.

There’s a page in Friends Jour­nal with oth­er recent author chats. You can sub­scribe to the Friends Jour­nal YouTube chan­nel and watch inter­views going back to 2011 all our Quak­er Author Chat playlist.

Links

April 14, 2024

We’re look­ing for arti­cles on rela­tion­ships for the Sep­tem­ber issue of Friends Jour­nal—fam­i­ly rela­tion­ships, roman­tic ones, men­tor­ships, or spir­i­tu­al Friends.

Pen­dle Hill’s The Seed pod­cast has a great inter­view with Adria Gulizia this week. Some good stuff. Here’s a sam­ple: “Peti­tions and demands is how the world works. That’s how the polit­i­cal sys­tem works. That’s not how the reli­gious Soci­ety of Friends is sup­posed to work. And yet, they felt like the stakes are too high to do things the Quak­er way. ‘We can’t do it the Quak­er way.’ ”

Real­ly great arti­cle in The Verge about the cables that route inter­net traf­fic across the oceans and the peo­ple who keep them in repair. Well writ­ten, amaz­ing­ly illus­trat­ed, with grip­ping per­son­al stories.

Quakers and “the Church”

April 11, 2024

Johan Mau­r­er exam­ines a clas­sic Quak­er dilem­ma from a new angle. Are we some­thing unique and rad­i­cal or are we just anoth­er brand of Chris­tian­i­ty? Describ­ing Britain Year­ly Meet­ing, in par­tic­u­lar, though it could describe many Lib­er­al Quak­er spaces:

In par­tic­u­lar, Chris­t­ian lan­guage and God lan­guage are often held at arm’s length. Quak­ers’ eth­i­cal dis­ci­ple­ship (a.k.a. the “tes­ti­monies”) are held in high regard but are often described with­out ref­er­ence to their Chris­t­ian ori­gins. The cus­toms and folk­ways of meet­ing for wor­ship and meet­ing for busi­ness are like­wise faith­ful­ly main­tained but their con­nec­tions with what ear­ly Friends called “Gospel order” are often not emphasized.

This is one of those def­i­n­i­tion­al conun­drums that have no easy answers. For me per­son­al­ly, yes, I’m part of the larg­er church. I think pride is often at the root of some of our denials. Ear­ly Friends also expe­ri­enced cor­rupt­ed and hyp­o­crit­i­cal estab­lished church­es but did­n’t aban­don the project so much as call for a renew­al back to basic prin­ci­ples. The his­to­ry of Friends is our insti­tu­tions like­wise get­ting fre­quent­ly mired in insu­lar think­ing and moral cor­rup­tion but being drawn back by prophet­ic fig­ures call­ing us to do bet­ter. That said, the spark of the Quak­er mes­sage is the call to lis­ten to the inward Christ and that can eas­i­ly be done (and is fre­quent­ly done) by peo­ple out­side the Quak­er movement.

There’s a live­ly dis­cus­sion of Mau­r­er’s post hap­pen­ing on Red­dit if you’d like to share your two cents.

Prophets and Reconcilers

April 6, 2024

John Lam­p­en, writ­ing in The Friend, makes a use­ful dis­tinc­tion between two modes of Quak­er peace­mak­ing.

Friends who are called to be prophets can’t be neu­tral; they iden­ti­fy some­thing which is wrong and speak out clear­ly against it. Those who rec­on­cile are heal­ers; they look for com­mon ground on which con­tes­tants can meet, find agree­ment, and hope­ful­ly put the past behind them. Both roles are nec­es­sary; both are impor­tant aspects of Quak­er witness.

Lam­p­en argues that we are called to both of these forms of peace­mak­ing but that they exist in a ten­sion that often requires us to choose one at a time and he shares sto­ries of rec­on­cil­i­a­tion work he did in North­ern Ireland.

https://​the​friend​.org/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​/​p​r​i​n​t​/​s​t​r​a​i​g​h​t​-​n​o​t​-​n​a​r​r​o​w​-​j​o​h​n​-​l​a​m​p​e​n​-​a​d​d​r​e​s​s​e​s​-​s​o​m​e​-​m​i​s​c​o​n​c​e​p​t​i​o​n​s​-​o​v​e​r​-​t​h​e​-​p​eac