A new video from Quaker historian Gwyn:
Connecting with nature is about more than just exercise or tranquility. As Quaker author Doug Gwyn shares, even in the 17th century, Quakers were concerned about our disconnection with the natural world and what it would mean for the future.
http://quakerspeak.com/what-does-quakerism-teach-about-connecting-to-nature/
A deep dive into a controversy more complicated than it first appears, “A Teacher Made a Hitler Joke in the Classroom. It Tore the School Apart”:
At a meeting with administrators about the incident in late February, members of the high school’s Parents Association said that keeping Frisch would send the message that the school didn’t take anti-Semitism seriously. Another parent told Lauder that this was not the first time Frisch had said or done something inappropriate.
Emily Provance is back talking about the disconnect between different Quaker subcultures:
In other words, as far as your personal experience tells you, Quaker meeting is supposed to be about fun and excitement — but suddenly, you’re seeing planning and structure instead. Quaker meeting is supposed to be about light-heartedness — but suddenly, you’re seeing methodical rule-following. Quaker meeting is supposed to be about playfulness — but suddenly, you’re seeing cautious cooperation.
Last month I talked a little bit about the problem when Quaker youth culture and meeting culture don’t quite line up.
Are we shortchanging truth?
Friends, if our Quakerism is not prophetic, if it fails to speak truth to power, then what’s the use of it? If it is not grounded in an apocalyptic vision, a conviction that the Kingdom is at hand, then what do we have to offer the world?
Thoughts after listening to the latest edition of the podcast:
So we can imagine Mark Zuckerberg and his assistant both wearing t‑shirts and jeans, but one of them buys from, say, DKNY or Kenneth Cole, while the other buys from Target or Wal-Mart. This would count as a responsible form of plain dress, per Barclay.
In the NYTimes, a fascinating piece on filter bubbles and the ability of Facebook “superposters” to dominate feeds, distort reality, and promote paranoia and violence.
Superposters tend to be “more opinionated, more extreme, more engaged, more everything,” said Andrew Guess, a Princeton University social scientist. When more casual users open Facebook, often what they see is a world shaped by superposters like Mr. Wasserman. Their exaggerated worldviews play well on the algorithm, allowing them to collectively — and often unknowingly — dominate newsfeeds. “That’s something special about Facebook,” Dr. Paluck said. “If you end up getting a lot of time on the feed, you are influential. It’s a difference with real life.”
A great many general-interest Facebook groups that I see are dominated by trollish people whose visibility relies on how provocative they can get without being banned. This is true in many Quaker-focused groups. Facebook prioritizes engagement and nothing seems to get our fingers madly tapping more than provocation by someone half-informed.
Formal membership in a Quaker meeting is a considered process; for many Quaker groups, public ministry is also a deliberated process, with clearness committees, anchor committees, etc. On Facebook, membership consists of clicking a like button; public ministry, aka visibility, is a matter of having a lot of time to post comments. Public groups with minimal moderation which run on Facebook’s engagement-inducing algorithms are the public face of Friends these days, far more visible than any publication or recognized Quaker body’s Facebook presence. I written before of my long-term worry that with the rise of social media gatekeeping sites, we’re not the ones writing our story anymore.
I don’t have any answers. But the NYTimes piece helped give me some useful ways of thinking about these phenomena.
The recording clerk of Britain Yearly Meeting looks at five ways we can keep our worship spaces active and visible:
We can often get very loyal to our meeting places, and I think that’s natural. We’ve often had some of our most profound personal experiences there. They are important places of community and worship, and they can and do work hard for us. But our loyalty to them doesn’t mean that they’re going to work for everyone, and if they’re not going to become ‘steeple houses’, then I think it’s important that we look at them every now and again and ask ourselves some questions.
http://www.quaker.org.uk/blog/5‑ways-to-make-quaker-meeting-houses-work-for-the-future
Interesting application of business theory to different types of Quaker cultures:
Did you identify the culture type of your Quaker faith community — more specifically, the portion of that community where you spend the most time? It’s possible that yours might be a pretty even tie between two culture types, but it’s less helpful if you say “we’re not really any of these.” Identify one or two that seem relevant and work with it for a few minutes here. Nobody’s looking over your shoulder.
I’m particularly intrigued by her placement of the children’s program culture outside of the ones she assigns her meeting. I’ve met teens who grew up embedded in Quaker youth culture who are surprised when they hit adulthood and realize that they don’t connect with any of the adult activities. Back in the day I was part of Young Adult Friends programs that were partly attempts to continue that Young Friends culture in place in a twenty-something context. Acknowledging that there are sometimes fundamental cultural differences at work seems like a good start. Also, don’t miss Emily’s piece in the current Friends Journal, The Grief and the Promised Land.
Navigating Differences: An Application of Cultural Theory
www.nytimes.com 