Showing posts with label AFSC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AFSC. Show all posts

2021/04/24

Schmoe, Floyd W. (1895-2001) - HistoryLink.org

Schmoe, Floyd W. (1895-2001) - HistoryLink.org
Schmoe, Floyd W. (1895-2001)
By Kit Oldham
Posted 2/25/2010
HistoryLink.org Essay 3876


Floyd Schmoe's life, which more than spanned the twentieth century, was shaped by his love of nature and by his equally passionate commitment to helping those afflicted by war and injustice. A child of the Kansas prairie, Schmoe fell in love with the high mountains and inland seas of the Pacific Northwest where he lived most of his long life. He studied forest and marine ecology, became the first park naturalist at Mount Rainier National Park, headed a science academy, and lectured and wrote on science and nature. A Quaker, Schmoe was a lifelong peace activist -- his FBI file labeled him a "rabid pacifist." He gave up teaching and research to work full time aiding Japanese Americans interned during World War II. As a conscientious objector in World War I he had built homes for war refugees in France and a generation later he built homes for survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In his 90s, he traveled to Tashkent and poured concrete to help build a peace park there while leading the effort to create the Seattle Peace Park.

Prairie Home

Floyd Wilfred Schmoe was born in Johnson County, Kansas, on September 21, 1895, the second of Ernest and Minta Schmoe's five children. The family had a small farm about a mile from a rural crossroads in eastern Kansas called Prairie Center. They were members of the Religious Society of Friends, commonly known as Quakers, and the Quaker traditions of nonviolence, social justice, and service to others guided Schmoe throughout his long life. (Not all the family shared his pacifism: Floyd's younger brother Othel "didn't follow the family line, and he joined the Marines" [Elmer Good interview]; some of Floyd's nephews also served in the military.)

For Floyd, a commitment to nonviolence was deeply linked to his love of nature. Even as a child growing up on a farm where butchering livestock and hunting were commonplace, he abhorred the killing of animals. Floyd also preferred wandering the fields and creeks, collecting bugs, snakes, mushrooms, and rocks, to doing his farm chores, which led to tension with his father. Schmoe recalled that it was his mother who encouraged his interest in nature and with whom he shared a love of art and music.

As a young boy, Floyd was fascinated by the one tall tree nearby, a white pine planted in the farmyard by his pioneer grandfather a half century earlier. When he was 12 or so, a chance meeting with a Yale forestry student opened up the possibility of a career working with trees and forests as an alternative to life on the farm. The Yale student's description of Northwest forests, reinforced by his parents' account, a few years later, of the huge trees and high mountains they saw when they visited the 1909 Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition in Seattle, inspired Floyd with the idea of someday living and working in the region.

When Floyd was in his teens, his parents sold the farm and moved the family first to the town of Miami in northeast Oklahoma and then to the Ozark Mountains of Arkansas. Floyd attended two years of high school in Miami, staying in a rented room during the school year after the family moved on to Arkansas. He completed high school in Wichita, Kansas, living with an aunt and uncle there. In the high school library, he encountered the nature writing of John Burroughs (1837-1921), which reinforced his desire to pursue forestry as a career.

Seattle and World War

However, instead of doing so immediately, after graduating in 1916 he enrolled at Friends University, a Quaker college in Wichita. It did not offer courses in forestry, Schmoe wrote later in an unpublished biographical sketch (Schmoe Papers, 1/1), "but I stayed on there one year, taking a bit of art and science, in order to remain near a girl I had decided was of equal interest." That was Ruth Pickering. Like Floyd, she came from a Quaker farm family. Floyd and Ruth met in high school. By the end of his year at Friends they were engaged. In the fall of 1917, Floyd moved to Seattle to study forestry at the University of Washington, while Ruth, a talented pianist, remained at Friends University pursuing a degree in music.

Schmoe was captivated by his first glimpses of Puget Sound, from a Great Northern train on his way into Seattle, and of Mount Rainier, which loomed so large above downtown that he initially thought he could hike to it from Seattle in a day. But before he could explore the sound or mountain, America's entry into World War I intervened. Deeply committed to nonviolence, with his draft number coming up, Schmoe applied to work with the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), which a group of Quakers had just organized to provide conscientious objectors an opportunity to do relief work in Europe as an alternative to military service.

In May 1918, Schmoe sailed to France with a large group of AFSC volunteers. Soon after arriving, he volunteered to assist a Red Cross ambulance unit and carried stretchers non-stop for 30 hours at the battle of Chateau de Thierry. Notwithstanding many accounts from later years (including an earlier version of this essay), Schmoe was not an ambulance driver and he spent only a few days with the ambulance unit. Most of his 14 months in Europe was devoted to work assisting war refugees. While the fighting continued, he traveled across France helping to build prefab homes and converting army barracks for refugee families to live in. After the Armistice he helped convoy a train carrying medical supplies and food to Poland.

With all the homeward-bound ships full of troops, there was no transportation for civilians and it was not until July 1919 that Schmoe was able to return home. Floyd and Ruth Schmoe were married the next month and immediately set out by train for Seattle and the University of Washington, where Floyd continued his forestry studies and Ruth, who had gotten her music degree, took liberal arts courses. Before the fall semester was over, they were out of money.

Living in Paradise

Schmoe remained fascinated by Mount Rainier, so when a fellow student reported making good money as a climbing guide on Rainier, he applied and was hired as a guide for the following summer. That interview also led to a more immediate, and unique, opportunity for both Floyd and Ruth: serving as winter caretakers for Paradise Inn high on the mountain. The job was not for everyone. The inn was buried under 30 feet of snow and the position was open because the previous two-man crew had abandoned the post after a drunken binge.

Nevertheless, after an arduous climb through the snow from Longmire, the couple spent six contented months alone together in the massive inn until the snow melted and the road reopened in July 1920. Floyd studied the natural surroundings, chopped wood, and made weekly trips to Longmire for supplies and mail, Ruth cooked and played the inn's piano, and together they explored the Paradise Valley on skis. In his memoir of their time on the mountain published 40 years later, Schmoe wrote, "Luckily Ruth and I found no difficulty in employing our time creatively, and the most creative thing we did that year, by all odds, was to start a family" (A Year in Paradise, 49). Their son Ken was born that September.

After working the summer of 1920 as a mountain guide, as he would the following summer, Schmoe continued his forestry classes at the University of Washington, but he was becoming increasingly dissatisfied with their focus on timber as a commodity rather than the wilderness conservation and recreation that he was interested in. Another chance encounter led him to the New York State College of Forestry at Syracuse, which offered courses in ecology and recreational forestry. An automobile executive he guided at Mount Rainier told him about the program at Syracuse and helped pay his way there. Schmoe and his family spent a cold school year in Syracuse while he completed his degree. As soon as he graduated in 1922, they returned to Mount Rainier, where he was hired as a park ranger.

For the next six years the family lived in the park, at Paradise in the summer and at Longmire in the winter. Schmoe devoted a lot of his energies to the park naturalist program, preparing exhibits and giving natural history talks to park visitors. By 1924, he had been named Mount Rainier's first full time park naturalist. Even before that, in July 1923, he inaugurated Nature Notes, a newsletter describing the park's wildlife, trees and flowers, and current conditions, writing hundreds of articles over the next six years.

Natural History Educator

Before long, Schmoe expanded his natural history education work beyond the boundaries of the park. His alma mater invited him back to Syracuse to speak about the National Park Service and he was soon making regular cross country trips to lecture on wildlife and conservation. Over the years, he built up a regular series of lecture stops and his natural history writing appeared in a range of publications. In 1925 he published his first book, Our Greatest Mountain, an account of Mount Rainier that "served as an unofficial park handbook" (McIntyre).

Floyd loved the mountain and his job, but by 1928 he and Ruth decided that an isolated ranger's cabin was not the best place to raise their growing family, which now included Esther (born in 1924) and Bill (1927) in addition to Ken. (Their second child, Beth, died within days of her birth in January 1923 when deep snow prevented the doctor from reaching Longmire.) The opportunity to return permanently to Seattle, where they had already built a small house near Lake Washington and where they remained connected to the Quaker Meeting, came when Schmoe was asked to head the newly formed Puget Sound Academy of Science.

Henry Landes, Dean of the University of Washington College of Science, had long wanted to establish a scientific society on campus. In 1928 he asked Schmoe to serve as director of the new academy, which would offer a program of lectures and field trips and produce a monthly publication. The director's salary was not large, and even that minimal pay was dependent on Schmoe's success in signing up enough dues-paying members, which he achieved in large part through a popular children's program. To help make ends meet, Schmoe also worked part-time as an assistant in the forestry school. Despite then having only a bachelor's degree, he eventually became an Instructor of Forest Biology even as he pursued an advanced degree of his own in marine biology, studying at the university's Oceanographic Laboratories (later Friday Harbor Laboratories) in the San Juan Islands.

Island Ecology

While he did so, the family (which now numbered six with the birth of the Schmoes' youngest child, Ruthanna, in 1934) spent several idyllic summers living on a sailboat and a tiny islet. Soon after returning to Seattle, Schmoe had borrowed money to buy and restore an old cutter-rigged sloop, the Linda, that he found rotting in a Lake Union shipyard. He hoped to recoup the money by taking high school students on educational cruises to Alaska, but after one successful season the Depression ended the market for summer cruises. Instead, Schmoe's beloved boat became the family's summer home as he pursued his underwater research.

While cruising the archipelago, the family spotted and fell in love with tiny Flower Island, located just off Lopez Island's Spencer Spit and easily visible from passing ferries. They claimed "squatter's rights" on the island (which did not even appear on the tax rolls) and used it as a base for exploring the San Juan archipelago in the Linda. On the low reef extending from Flower Island Schmoe built an underwater observation post where he spent long hours observing, recording, and photographing the reef ecology. The observation post and his photographic methods became the subject of his 1937 master's thesis.

Not long after he completed his thesis, Schmoe's scientific endeavors took a back seat to his work opposing the outbreak of war and assisting those affected by it. Schmoe was one of several pacifists who gained some notoriety for organizing demonstrations on campus against American involvement in World War II and the lend lease program under which the U.S. provided military equipment to Britain, Russia, China and other countries. He, Ruth, and other area Quakers worked with the AFSC (as he had during the First World War) to collect food and clothing and help resettle Jewish refugees fleeing Europe through Asian ports.


Standing With Japanese Americans

Schmoe was particularly concerned that war with Japan would lead to harsh consequences for Japanese Americans who included, as he frequently pointed out, friends, neighbors, colleagues, and students. When the backlash against the Pearl Harbor attack confirmed his fears, he threw himself into efforts to oppose discriminatory measures and especially the calls to remove Japanese from the community. After Executive Order 9066 authorized the forced removal or internment of all Japanese, including American citizens, on the West Coast, he worked tirelessly to assist those affected by the order.

Schmoe was able to devote himself full time to that work because the Puget Sound Academy had folded and his teaching position in the College of Forestry ended. With enrollment dropping and Schmoe "getting considerable adverse publicity for protests and demonstrations etc. against the war," he told an interviewer years later, "I guess the Dean was quite willing to let me go" (Lewis, 37). By the spring of 1942, Schmoe was heading a new regional office of the AFSC that he and others helped organize in Seattle to assist Japanese facing removal.

One of Schmoe's first projects, working with several fellow Quakers on the faculty, was to help Japanese American students at the University of Washington transfer to schools where they could continue their education (those who moved outside the exclusion zone along the West Coast were not subject to internment). Until the exclusion order took effect in March 1942, several young Japanese Americans worked with Schmoe at the AFSC assisting Japanese families. Two of them, in addition to their own subsequent accomplishments, went on to play important roles in Schmoe's life. Aki Kato Kurose (1925-1998) became a revered Seattle public school teacher, a peace activist, and Schmoe's lifelong friend. Gordon K. Hirabayashi (1918-2012), who unsuccessfully fought the exclusion order all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and won legal redress four decades later, married Esther Schmoe.

As Japanese families from Western Washington were moved into what Schmoe and many others called concentration camps, he and his remaining staff worked with a handful of other local church leaders to assist those in the camps and help look after the property they had been forced to leave behind. For the remainder of the war, Schmoe divided his time between the Seattle AFSC office and internment camps, especially Minidoka in Idaho where most Washington residents had been confined, along with Heart Mountain in Wyoming and Tule Lake in northern California. Ruth accompanied him on trips to the camps and, in Seattle, on visits to Japanese patients at Firland Sanatorium and other medical institutions, whose families were prohibited from visiting them. Schmoe's efforts earned him government surveillance and an FBI investigation, which ultimately concluded that, although he was a "rabid pacifist," visiting and photographing internment camps was not illegal (Schmoe, "From Relocation...").

When the war ended, Schmoe continued working with the AFSC to assist internees as they came home from the camps, sometimes in the face of considerable hostility from former neighbors. He organized work parties to help returning Japanese residents repair homes damaged by neglect or vandalism, replant gardens and farm fields, and replace stolen tools and furnishings. Even as he continued helping Japanese Americans, Schmoe increasingly focused on doing something for the Japanese of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which had been devastated by American atomic bombs.

Houses for Hiroshima

Schmoe abhorred all war, but he considered the bombings, which killed many thousands of civilians, "an atrocity, even in warfare" (Elmer Good interview). Having built houses for those made homeless by World War I and more recently, along with his family, done most of the work on their new house overlooking Lake Washington, he came to the conclusion that building homes for bomb survivors would be more meaningful than merely apologizing. After trying unsuccessfully to convince the national AFSC office to sponsor a home-building project in Hiroshima, Schmoe set out to organize the Hiroshima project on his own.

Finding it difficult to gain permission to work in Japan, he began by moving part way there when a friend offered him a position teaching at the University of Hawaii for the 1946-1947 year. In Hawaii, Schmoe also headed an AFSC program sending food and clothing to Japan. He got his first opportunity to go to Japan himself in 1948, when he brought 250 milk goats to supply milk for orphanages and hospitals as part of the Heifers for Relief project. He visited Hiroshima, viewing the devastation and making contacts that helped him set up a volunteer home-building work camp the following year.

To fund the project that he dubbed "Houses for Hiroshima," Floyd and Ruth mailed an appeal to their Christmas card list, raising several thousand dollars. In the summer of 1949, Schmoe and three other Americans sailed to Japan with building materials and food and medical supplies for the Hiroshima hospital. With the assistance of many Japanese volunteers, and some skilled craftsmen whom they paid, the group built two duplexes to house four homeless families. Hiroshima Mayor Hamai and other city officials actively supported the project, and the four homes were turned over to the city housing authority, which selected the occupants from the 3,800 families who applied.

For the next four summers, Schmoe returned to Japan to build homes for families who had lost theirs in the bombings. Working largely with local volunteers, the project constructed a total of about 20 houses in Hiroshima and another 12 in Nagasaki. Many of the buildings were multi-unit and several were community houses, so altogether Houses for Hiroshima helped to house close to 100 families.

Korea and Sinai

While Schmoe was helping to rebuild Japan, the Korean War was devastating that country. After the Korean Armistice ended the fighting in 1953, the United Nations Korean Relief Agency invited Schmoe to help war refugees there. He set up Houses for Korea, funded by the U.N. and private donations, and selected the Yongin Valley, where fighting in 1950 had destroyed 75 percent of the homes, as the area that the project would assist. From 1953 through 1956, Houses for Korea built homes, dug wells, repaired roads and irrigation systems, and set up a free clinic to provide medical care.

In 1956, Schmoe's attention was drawn to the victims of yet another conflict. When Britain and France bombed Egypt in 1956 following the nationalization of the Suez Canal, 4,000 families in Port Said were displaced. Egyptian President Gamel Nasser planned to resettle them in the Sinai Desert (in part to assert Egyptian control over the area, which Israel had invaded during the fighting). At the urging of Gordon and Esther Hirabayashi, who were working at American University in Cairo, Schmoe formed Wells for Egypt in 1957 to help develop the oasis of El Arish where some of the refugees were settled. He raised money to purchase a pump for the oasis well and nursery plants to start an orchard, and spent several weeks helping plant the orchard.


Writing and Travel

After working in the Sinai, Schmoe flew to Nairobi and traveled by boat back down the Nile to Cairo where Esther and her family were living. The Sinai project marked the end of 17 years of full time, though rarely fully paid, aid work. Schmoe "retired" in 1958 to devote himself to writing. He had already followed Our Greatest Mountain with several more books, including Japan Journey in 1950, describing his 1949 house-building trip. A Year in Paradise, one of his most enduring works, appeared in 1959. It recounts the time Floyd and Ruth spent at Paradise on Mount Rainier in 1920 and their trip around the mountain's Wonderland Trail a few years later when son Ken was a toddler.

Schmoe turned to another of his favorite places in For Love of Some Islands, published in 1964. It centers on a family reunion in 1961 when Floyd, Ruth, and their four children, now accompanied by four spouses and 12 children of their own, returned to their beloved San Juan Islands, interspersing Schmoe's descriptions of and ruminations on the islands' natural history with family adventures, beginning with his construction of a glass-bottomed houseboat from which he and his grandchildren could observe underwater life.

Ruth Schmoe, who had had heart trouble for some years, died in 1969. Despite the loss of the person he called "the greatest thing that ever happened to me" (Lewis, 60), Floyd kept up an active and productive life. Later in 1969, he and his son Ken traveled in Asia. The following year he traveled again, surprising friends when he returned home remarried. He and Tomiko Yamizaki, who had worked for AFSC in Tokyo and years earlier was one of the first Houses for Hiroshima volunteers, met and married in Paris, then traveled through Europe and Africa.

Schmoe continued to travel, write, and undertake new projects well into his 90s. As he did so, his age and accomplishments brought him a degree of celebrity. Responding to a frequently asked question about his longevity, he told one interviewer:


"First, be very careful in the choice of your ancestors. That's one reason I reached 90. And always have something important to do tomorrow" (Angelos).

Peace Parks

In 1987, assisted by other members of Seattle's University Friends Meeting, Schmoe began clearing brambles and trash from a vacant lot near University Bridge across the street from the meeting house to create the Seattle Peace Park. The following summer he traveled with other volunteers from King County to Tashkent (one of Seattle's many sister cities, then part of the Soviet Union, later the capital of Uzbekistan) and at age 92 poured concrete in 100-plus degree heat to help build a peace park there. Later in 1988 Schmoe went to Japan, where he became the second recipient of the Hiroshima Peace Center's Peace Award.

Schmoe used the money from his Peace Award to help fund completion of the Seattle Peace Park, which was dedicated on August 6, 1990, the 45th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing. The small park contains a bronze statue of Sadako Sasaki (1943-1955) of Hiroshima, who died at age 12 of leukemia caused by the bomb, holding a paper crane. Before her death Sadako folded origami paper cranes, attempting to reach 1,000, which according to legend would grant her health. People have been folding cranes ever since as a sign of peace and the statue is often draped with them.

Schmoe's energy and health declined after his son Ken died in a freak accident in December 1996 when a snow-covered tree fell on him. But until the end of his life Schmoe retained his curiosity about the natural and human world and had "something important to do tomorrow" -- usually a long list. Even with all he had accomplished he felt he should do more, telling an interviewer a year before he died:


"Each day I pray ... and I beg forgiveness for my neglect of all those who I could not help" (Barber, "One of History's Voices…").

Floyd Schmoe was 105 when he died in Kenmore on April 20, 2001, leaving 54 living descendants (three surviving children, 15 grandchildren, 34 great-grandchildren, and two great-great-grandchildren) and a legacy of helping others that spanned four continents and more than eighty years.This essay made possible by:


4Culture King County Lodging Tax

Floyd Schmoe (1895-2001), building a house in Hiroshima, Japan, October 4, 1952

Courtesy Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum

Floyd Schmoe on Hiroshima, interviewed by Elmer Good, Seattle, 1998

Courtesy Densho Digital Archive

Floyd Schmoe on mortality, interviewed by Elmer Good, Seattle, 1998

Courtesy Densho Digital Archive

Floyd Schmoe (1895-2001), Mount Rainier National Park naturalist, demonstrates "Nature Coasting," 1920s

Courtesy Mount Rainier National Park Archives

Floyd Schmoe (1895-2001), first full-time naturalist at Mount Rainier National Park, 1920s

Courtesy Mount Rainier National Park Archives

Paradise, Mount Rainier National Park, July 23, 2005

Photo by Colleen E. O'Connor

Flower Island with Spencer Spit and Lopez Island in background, June 2, 2003

HistoryLink.org Photo by Kit Oldham

Ruins of waiting room entrance station at Minidoka Relocation Center, Minidoka National Monument, Hunt, Idaho, 2004

Photo by Paula Becker

Floyd Schmoe (1895-2001)

Courtesy World Peace Project for Children

Sadako Sasaki Peace Child (Daryl Smith, 1990), Seattle Peace Park, February 28, 2010

HistoryLink.org Photo by Kit Oldham
Sources:

Floyd Schmoe, A Year In Paradise (Seattle: The Mountaineers, 1999); Schmoe, For Love of Some Islands (New York: Harper & Row, 1964); Schmoe, "Seattle's Peace Churches and Relocation" in Japanese Americans: From Relocation to Redress ed. by Roger Daniels et al. (Seattle: University of Washington Press, [1986], 1991), 117-22; Schmoe, "Construction of an Under-Seas Observation Post and a Method of Under-Water Photography" (master's thesis, University of Washington, 1937); Floyd Wilfred Schmoe Papers, Box 1, Folders 1-3, 33; Box 2, Folders 4-7; Box 8, Folders 23, 25; Box 12, Folders 1, 25-28; Box 13, Folders 9, 14, 17, Accession No. 496-8, Special Collections, University of Washington Libraries, Seattle; "Oral History Interview No. 21," American Friends Service Committee, transcript of Kitty Barragato interview of Floyd Schmoe on February 25, 1989, copy in possession of American Friends Service Committee, Philadelphia; "Floyd Schmoe Interview I & II," Densho Digital Archive, transcripts of Elmer Good interviews of Floyd Schmoe on June 10 and June 22, 1998, copies in possession of Densho Digital Archive, Seattle (www.densho.org); Rose Lewis, "Floyd and Ruth Schmoe: Idealism, Service, Adventure and Commitment in Two Quaker Lives" unpublished typescript dated May 1998, copies in possession of Rose Lewis, Salem, Oregon, and of University Friends Meeting, Seattle; Lewis, notes of interviews with Bill and Lillian Schmoe (July 21-22, 1998) and Inez Schmoe Voorhees (May 19, 1998), copies in possession of Rose Lewis, Salem, OR, and of University Friends Meeting, Seattle; Lynn Thompson, "Vet's Dream: Military Museum," The Seattle Times, June 30, 2004 (http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/web/); Ray Rivera, "Floyd Schmoe's Lifetime of the Heart Remembered," Ibid., April 30, 2001; Marc Ramirez, "A Prime Activist: Creator of Seattle Peace Park is Dead at 105," Ibid., April 24, 2001; Paula Bock, "Floyd Schmoe -- 101 Years Of Peace And Action," Ibid., September 14, 1997; Alex Tizon, "Sharing Hope for Peace," Ibid., March 30, 1997; Constantine Angelos, "At 94, He's Busy Building A Peace Park -- Many Join His Effort," Ibid., July 12, 1990; Mike Barber, "In the Midst of Wars, He Sought Peace and Justice," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 27, 2001 (http://www.seattlepi.com); Barber, "One of History's Voices for Peace and Justice," Ibid., January 1, 2000; Vanessa Ho, "He Lived in Peace, He Rests in Peace after Tree Falls," Ibid., December 31, 1996; Judi Hunt, "Floyd Schmoe Isn't Ready to Rest until There Is Peace," Ibid., March 18, 1995; Paul Swortz, "Park Emerges from Dump Site: Volunteers Plan Peace Tribute," Ibid., July 24, 1987; Bob McIntyre, Jr., "Floyd W. Schmoe," Mount Rainier National Park Nature Notes website accessed January 22, 2010 (www.nps.gov/archive/mora/notes/schmoe.htm); "Houses for Hiroshima," Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum website accessed January 22, 2010 (www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/virtual/VirtualMuseum_e/exhibit_e/exh0708_e/exh070807_e.html); "About AFSC," American Friends Service Committee website accessed February 18, 2010 (http://www.afsc.org/ht/d/sp/i/267/pid/267); HistoryLink.org, The Online Encyclopedia of Washington State History, "Hirabayashi, Gordon K. (b. 1918)" (by David Takami) and "Seattle Tashkent Peace Park in Uzbekistan is dedicated in Tashkent and at Seattle Center on September 12, 1988" (by Priscilla Long) http://www.historylink.org (accessed February 17, 2010).
Note: This essay was revised and substantially expanded on February 25, 2010.

Friends Service Unit in Korea: 1952-57

Friends Service Unit in Korea: 1952-57

Friends Service Unit in Korea: 1952-57

In the aftermath of the Korean War (1950-53), The Friends Service Unit (FSU) – a joint arm of the British Friends Service Council (FSC) and the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) – provided humanitarian and medical aid to refugees and others affected by the war.

War between North and South Korea broke out in 1950.  By January 1951, six million people (one third of the Korean population) had become refugees.  Thirty thousand children were in orphanages and as many again were without shelter.  The UN was providing food relief and carrying out mass inoculations against diseases such as smallpox and typhoid.  Nevertheless, tuberculosis was rife.

In October 1952, the UN invited civilian organisations, including the Quakers, to help with relief efforts. Jonathan Rhodes from the AFSC and Lewis Waddilove from FSC visited South Korea, and identified Cholla Pukto, where there were two hundred thousand mainly North Korean refugees, and Kunsan, where there were thirty three thousand, as areas where Friends could be of most use.

In July 1953, a ceasefire was signed, and Frank and Patricia Hunt arrived to set up the Friends Service Unit, setting up base in Kunsan.  In October, an international team of doctors, nurses and a physiotherapist arrived from England, Ireland, Scotland, Sweden, Norway and the USA. They lived in a Korean house and operated out of the provincial hospital.

Kunsan Hospital had been left unfinished after the Japanese withdrawal from Korea and had then been bombed by the Americans.  There was little equipment, no heating, no running water and only intermittent electricity. The AFSC shipped relief supplies of food, medicine and bedding. Social workers from the USA and Norway began to assess welfare needs. Warm clothing and bedding were distributed by local volunteers.  Milk stations were set up serving hot milk and vitamins to children and pregnant women.

Over the winter, the priority lay in dealing with malnutrition.  However, plans were being drawn up for the rehabilitation of refugees.  American Quaker Floyd Schmoe, who had been helping with reconstruction work following the bombing of Hiroshima in Japan, set up Houses For Korea - a building project that provided refugees with the materials and training to construct their own houses.  Schools were started in the camps, with Korean teachers paid for by the FSU.  Adult literacy classes were started for war widows, and games of volleyball and basketball were organised.

Sewing machines were brought, and the war widows opened tailoring shops, a dry cleaners, and a business making soya bean curd.  Goats, bees and seeds for planting allowed the refugees to supply some of their own food.

In cooperation with the UN, Friends ran a training school for Nurse Aides.  They restored the Pathology lab at the hospital and trained lab technicians. David Ward, the physiotherapist, helped to fit prosthetics, made by local craftsmen, to those who had lost limbs in the war. A nurse, Ann Sealey, and a doctor, Jean Sullivan, started an antenatal and midwifery service.

The FSU started an outpatients’ service for sick children and opened a children’s ward in the hospital, where the children were looked after by a House Mother.  In some cases, children had been abandoned by their families and Friends arranged adoption with families in America.

The Korean authorities had little money to pay hospital staff and locals’ salaries were often paid in part by the FSU.  Throughout the time the FSU operated, the AFSC continued to provide vital medical supplies.

The FSU continued to operate until 1957, under the leadership first of Geoff Hemingway (1953-56) and then under Robert Grey.

Floyd Schmoe Korea

Floyd Schmoe


Related Articles
Quakers in Korea

Floyd Schmoe

1895 - 2001

A sixth generation Quaker, Floyd Schmoe was born in Kansas but lived most of his life in the Pacific Northwest of the USA. He was both a forest ecologist and a marine biologist. In the course of relief work carried out in six separate wars, he was shot at, but never carried a gun.

In 1917, he was studying forestry at Seattle University when the US entered the First World War. Schmoe applied to the newly formed American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) for alternative service in Europe. He briefly joined a Red Cross ambulance unit as a stretcher bearer, then spent fourteen months building pre-fab homes and converting army barracks to house war refugees.

Returning to the US, he completed his studies and was hired as a park ranger at Mount Rainier in Washington State. He wrote a regular newsletter describing the wildlife and flora, and in 1924 became the park’s first full time naturalist.

In 1928, he joined the University of Washington as an instructor in forest biology, while at the same time pursuing a master’s degree in marine biology.

At the outbreak of the Second World War, he organised demonstrations against American involvement in the war and worked with the AFSC to help Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi occupied Europe. After 1942, he became particularly concerned with the plight of Japanese Americans interned following the attack on Pearl Harbor. He gave up his academic career to head a new regional office of the AFSC. One of his first projects was to help Japanese American students to transfer to schools further east where they were allowed to continue their education. He and his staff worked alongside other church leaders inside the internment camps and also acted to protect the property of those interned. His work led to an FBI investigation, which labelled Schmoe a ‘rabid pacifist.’

Schmoe particularly abhorred the dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, calling it "an atrocity, even in warfare." Believing that building new houses for those whose homes had been bombed was a more meaningful response than any apology, he tried to persuade the AFSC to sponsor a house-building project. When that failed, he set about organising his own project, Houses for Hiroshima.

Finding it difficult to get permission to work in Japan, he moved initially to Hawaii, where he ran an AFSC programme to provide food and clothing to Japan. In 1948, he visited Japan for the first time, reviewing the devastation in Hiroshima and bringing with him 250 goats to provide milk for hospitals and orphanages.

Having raised several thousand dollars from friends and family, Schmoe and his wife brought building materials, food and medical supplies to Hiroshima in 1948, and with the help of local volunteers and craftsmen, built houses for four homeless families. Over the next four years, Schmoe helped build twenty houses in Hiroshima and a further twelve in Nagasaki, housing almost a hundred families.

In 1953, Schmoe heard about the refugee crisis in Korea resulting from the war there. He sailed from Japan, bringing building materials and building expertise, and set up Houses for Korea. Between 1953 and 1956, Houses for Korea worked with local people to build homes, secure water supplies, repair roads, and build and run a free medical clinic in Kyonggi Province.

In 1956, following the nationalisation of the Suez Canal, 4000 families from Port Said in Egypt were displaced, some of whom were resettled in the Sinai Desert. Schmoe organised Wells for Egypt, raising money for plants and a pump for a well, and helping to plant an orchard.

After 17 years working largely as an unpaid volunteer, Schmoe retired in 1959 to write. In 1987, at the age of 92, he began work with colleagues, clearing land at the University of Seattle to create a Peace Park. The next year, he travelled to Tashkent in Uzbekistan to help build a peace park there, before going on to Japan to receive a Peace Award from the Hiroshima Peace Centre. Schmoe used his award money to fund the completion of Seattle Peace Park, which opened on Hiroshima Day, 6th August 1990.

Schmoe died in 2001, aged 105.
Print this article




Further Reading and Credits
EXTERNAL LINKS

1997 Seattle Times article about Floyd Schmoe, then aged 101
Essay by Kit Oldham, on HistoryLink.org, including audio interview with Floyd Schmoe


2021/03/10

History of Korean Quakers By Bo-Kyom Jin

History of Korean Quakers By Bo-Kyom Jin

1. History of Korean Quakers

After the Korean War, some British and American Quakers came to Korea for rehabilitation programs. After the overseas workers had left Korea, some of the Korean assistants of the programs held the first Quaker Meeting in 1958 and some American Friends who worked at the international Cooperation Administration in Seoul supported them. Meeting began with silent worship for thirty minutes, and about an hour was given for study and fellowship.

FWCC encouraged Seoul Friends to build relationship with Japan Yearly Meeting or with Honolulu MM and two of the Koreans became Quakers whose membership belonged to Honolulu Meeting in 1958. Historically, Japan and Korea have had a difficult relationship since Korea was colonized and devastated by Japan. So it was difficult for us to intervisit for some time. The same year, AFSC energetically tried to bring some Koreans to the seminars and work camps in Japan and Korean Friends began to participate in the program. As the result of their visits, correspondence with Japanese Friends began taking place. In 1961, FWCC began sponsoring some visitors and Friends in residence in Korea and Seoul Friends requested a direct and official relationship with FWCC. The Meeting then had about thirty regular attenders and study programs were actively carried out and FWCC helped strengthen its links with overseas Friends.

In 1964, with the help of overseas Friends, a meeting place for the Seoul Friends was purchased after having had to change places of worship ten times in 6 years.“Seoul Friends Meeting Monthly Newsletter” was published in 1966. The Meeting decided to take up the leper village in Tandong as its main service project. The visiting Friends from Japan, USA, Australia and England, have strengthened us very much. Every Sunday, Bible study was led by Sok Hon Ham, who was a widely recognized spiritual leader in Korea.

In 1967, Seoul Meeting became a Monthly Meeting under the care of the FWCC. The visit of the Chairperson of FWCC, Douglas Steere and his wife Dorothy in 1967 and his public lecture at the YMCA with about one hundred people in the audience meant a great deal in Quaker outreach. At the same year, Sok Hon Ham left Korea for the USA to attend the Greensboro Gathering and the tenth triennial meeting of FWCC.

After the meeting, he attended the Pacific Yearly Meeting, studied at Pendle Hill and visited many Friends Meetings and Friends in the United States and Japan. International Quaker contacts such as work camps, travel and study abroad(at Pendle Hill or at Woodbrooke in England), participation in Quaker conferences, an inter-visitation program with Japanese Quakers, and numerous visiting friends contributed greatly to nurturing Korean Friends during the 1970s and 1980s and are still an enriching experience to us.

In 1980, SMM was active having a study group, outreach activities and raised a voice of conscience under the dictatorship of military government. Under the leadership of Sok Hon Ham, Seoul MM flourished with members and attenders at its height numbering close to fifty. In 1988, a second floor was added to the meetinghouse to meet the demand of the growing memberships. In 1990s, Seoul MM went through a dark period after the demise of Sok Hon Ham. Fortunately, since 2000, Seoul MM has revived some of its vitality.

2. State of the Meeting

Over the past year our number of members has decreased from 20 to 10. Some of the attenders are Americans who are married to Koreans In the past few years, a worshipping group began to meet regularly and more than 10 F/friends continues to gather every week in Daejon (a city 2 hours far from Seoul) They have established a vibrant, worshipping and studying community. We used to have a retreat annually but there were no retreats in 2007/8 because of the absence of initiatives or the decrease of members. Vocal ministries are rare in Seoul MM and sometimes I feel eager for vocal ministries in my Meeting. In addition, the financial situation of SMM has gotten worse mainly as monthly donations decreased.

Since 2007, AVP programs have been introduced by a Korean Friend (Jonghee Lee) and co-facilitated by her and German Friends (including Ute Caspers). Most of the participants were NGO activists. A Direct Education workshop facilitated by George Leakey from the USA was also held in Seoul last year. We are planning a Korea version of Faith and Practice. I know you have made your own Faith and Practice and hope that Australian Friends will give some useful advice to us.
Last year we had quarterly gatherings named Family gatherings. The intention is for us to invite our family members who are not Quakers and sing together and share food and fellowship. We have an annual gathering (business meeting and fellowship)

3. Committee activities

We have Peace Service committee, Learning committee, Outreach committee, library and website committee, Facilities care committee, Finance committee. Our committees are not fully functioning partly due to shortage of manpower but we are thankful that we could maintain this Meeting and carried out some service activities.

From the beginning of the Korean Quaker history, service work was emphasized. As a first step, medicines were supplied to two Tuberculosis patients beginning in 1961 for two years. Work camps for orphans and the blind, In 1964, a house for leper patients was built. Emergency food was supplied in 1960s. In 2003, the
Meeting participated in an anti Iraq War demonstration and actively raised funds to help anti Iraq War activists’ organizations. The meeting now supports Foreign Migrant Workers Center , Ssi-Al Women’s Center, and the Anti-Mine Association. Since the Korean War, landmines that were buried during the war have become a threat to civilians but those victims haven’t been cared enough by Korean government.

Our program consists of Business Meeting every 1st Sunday; George Fox Journal reading 2nd Sunday; Pendle Hill pamphlet discussion group every 3rd Sunday; Bible reading group every 4th Sunday.

4. Children in the Meeting

Child care issues emerged again during the 2008 annual meeting. At present, a few children attend the Meeting irregularly and SMM is going to assign F/fs to take care of them during the worship in case children come.

5. International Contacts

Sister Meetings : 
Canberra/Australia, 
Kapiti/ New Zealand, 
JYM Hosted 2005 AWPS Section Gathering.

Korean Friends have attended international Friends gatherings including Bhopal, India gathering and Auckland and Dublin Triennials.

Epilogue :In December 2008, Seoul Friends had their annual meeting to review the past year and to think about and plan 2009. We are thankful that we could maintain this tiny meeting and that our worshiping group is getting more active. 

2021/02/26

What is a Quaker Ministry? (What Isn’t?) – Jon Watts

What is a Quaker Ministry? (What Isn’t?) – Jon Watts




Jon Watts

Quaker Songwriter & Video Maker


About
Blog
News
Music
Videos
Contact


What is a Quaker Ministry? (What Isn’t?)


For the past 5 years, I have been writing songs about Quakers, blogging about Quakerism, making videos about Quakers, vlogging about Quakerism, and traveling amongst Friends, sharing my music and my thoughts.

Now I have arrived at a turning point. The original call that I felt to commit to music was for five years. I knew that I would then stand back and re-evaluate, ask the hard questions, and change course if I felt called to.



I have decided to do this re-evaluation publicly, posting a “state of the art” report on my website and asking the query: “How can Jon Watts continue to be of service, considering his natural gifts and passions?”

…and, considering the current state of the art, “How can he be financially supported in this work?”

I have received more messages than I could have imagined, most of them encouraging me to continue, helping me to brainstorm financing, and affirming the value of my work.

I have also received a few messages of discouragement in my continuing along this path. These concerns seem to focus on my use of the word ministry.

And while I continue to be in private dialogue with these particular Friends about my continued use of this word, I thought that it was also worth exploring publicly.
What is “Ministry”?


Quakers believe that everyone has access to that of God within them. This is why we worship in silent waiting on 1st day mornings, and why we do not have hierarchical structures managing our corporate decisions. Our goal is to allow God to lead our congregation, and to decide our business. We can each be a channel for the voice of the Spirit, if we listen and humble ourselves.



Thus our congregation is traditionally not led by a single minister on 1st day mornings, but instead we wait until God selects the minister. Who will stand up this Sunday and be filled with the Spirit’s message? We don’t pretend to know.

Many of us, as Quakers, have the experience at one time or other of being selected to be the vessel for the Spirit in a worship setting. We often find that we have human resistance, human obstacles to overcome in order to faithfully deliver the message that has been given us.

It is a labor of love, for when we are faithful to the message we have been given, we are clothed in righteousness. Friends can be stirred, uncomfortable, hurt, liberated, and can have any number of other responses to our ministry, but when we know that the message has truly come from the Spirit, we can trust that God has a plan for healing transformation, and we can know that it might not look like we would expect it to.

This is a seriously valuable tool that Quakers have cultivated for inward transformation and for cultural transformation. Deep listening. Getting low. Opening one’s heart and ears to messages of Truth from unexpected sources.

 Trusting.

What is “Entertainment”?

I have been recording and releasing my own music since I was a Senior in high school (that was 2001 for those of you keeping score). After self-releasing 4 albums of my own music and organizing a handful of shows featuring my songwriting, I stood back and looked at myself as an artist.

Who was I writing songs for?
Who was benefiting from my efforts?
Who was my biggest fan?

The answers, as I examined each of these questions, were all “me”.

It was seriously uncomfortable to examine myself in this way, but also somewhat liberating: I found that I was building myself up with, hiding behind, and providing myself validation with… my music. My pursuing music was fundamentally self serving.

And I was not unique. We live in a culture of celebrity. In place of our actual deity, we raise up deities out of our midst and worship them on our magazine covers. We fundamentally believe that they are better, more deserving, worth our studying them.

Those of us with a void in our chest where self-love is supposed to be can tend to see this as an opportunity. If I could just raise myself up to be deified, then I could feel loved, valuable, OK.

In the age of the internet, it is getting easier and easier to see who falls into this category. Who is desperately calling for our attention? Who is trying to raise themselves up to a higher status by making themselves into a celebrity? We are correct to be dubious of anyone who seems to be acting from this motivation.

And it doesn’t take an enlightened person to realize that the “celebrity-solution” is a myth. Just read an interview with someone who has attained celebrity. Look behind the veil of their public presentation to the true state of their lives, their relationships.

What we learn is that the self-love void cannot be filled by anything external. It is un-salvable, infinitely able to consume external validation and transform it into self-doubt. The self-doubter might be able to fill their void briefly by attaining celebrity, but it will come back. And it will be hungrier.

I know I labeled this section “what is entertainment” and then talked about the state of entertainers, but this truly is the price of our sitting back and passively expecting to be entertained: self-obsessed ego monsters, living on a pedestal and consuming our attention to feed their insatiable egos. A mad cycle.

We call it “self-serving”, but really this kind of behavior serves no one. Only destruction. The unraveling.

Drawing a Line

But what does this all mean for me? Does rejecting our culture of celebrify-ing artists mean that I should reject an artistic path altogether?



Any endeavor that does not serve a community is an empty endeavor. But could my music be a service?

(Could celebrity, for that matter? This is maybe another blog post)

In 2006 I turned to the model of Quaker ministry to inform my making music. Getting low. Being humble. Only writing songs that felt like a message from the Spirit. Knowing that the message is not my own. Attempting to be a vessel. Releasing my agenda, knowing that my own perspective is severely limited. Letting go and letting God.

(It is worth mentioning that these are very difficult practices, especially with the culture all around pressuring us to frame everything with the self at the center. I don’t claim to be perfect or even consistently successful in my experimenting with holding these practices as a musician.)

I picked up my music again after I was made low in this way. The first album I recorded was solely meant to be of service: exploring stories of Early Quakers and putting them to song. Inviting other Quakers to come into the studio and play on the album. Listening to the Spirit, being held accountable by a support committee.

And indeed, it was anything but an empty endeavor. It was powerful. We were all broken apart, remade. Including myself as artist. Especially myself as artist. Our faith was deepened.

But when I went out into the world to share this Spirit-given ministry with the wider world of Friends, I immediately ran into a wall of feedback: I was told, “Open your eyes more, be more engaging and less prayerful”. In other words, “Entertain us!”

Oh! What paradox!

“Giving Ministry” VS “Having a Ministry”

Quakers have long held a common practice of recognizing Friends amongst us with a clear call to ministry. Often these would be the Friends in our Meetings who would speak often, or who would speak passionately, or most faithfully.

Recognizing a ministry means coming together as a community to acknowledge one Friend’s particular gifts, recognizing their potential service to the congregation (possibly to the wider body), coming together to help cultivate their faithfulness in using their gifts, to support them and to hold them accountable to the Spirit.




Over the years, that practice of recognizing ministers amongst us solidified into a list of criteria for Friends Ministers.
A Friends minister travels with an elder.
A Friends minister is rooted in a Monthly Meeting.
A Friends minister travels under a temporary “concern”.
A Friends minister travels with a traveling minute from their home Meeting.

Etcetera

The only way that I know all of this, though, is because I’ve studied history.

Most modern liberal Quaker Meetings have no practice of recognizing ministers. No practice of supporting ministers, cultivating faithfulness in their use of their gifts, no practice of publicly acknowledging the gift of ministry, no practice of writing or receiving traveling minutes.

“The Burden of Vision”

Those modern Friends who have felt a call to ministry therefore have a difficult choice in front of them:
Go out into the world on their own, lacking the structures of support and accountability.

-or-

Wrestle with their home Meeting, putting off their call to ministry until such time as their congregation comes together to re-claim the tools of recognizing ministers. This is a process that can happen over the course of years or not at all.



To ask a Friend with a call to ministry to first teach their home Meeting how to recognize ministers… this is a difficult thing to ask of a budding minister. I have seen more than a few calls to ministry ignored or burned up in this process of wrestling with the lack of tools in home communities.

I want to take a moment to honor those Friends who have faithfully and patiently waited or laid down a call to ministry as their Meeting discussed (or didn’t discuss!) their relationship with supporting ministers.
All or Nothing?

I have not chosen the path that I just described.

In the past five years I have gone in and out of periods of having support committees. I have no traveling minute, just a smattering of supportive words from different Meetings and institutions that I have played for. I travel with an elder when I can, which ends up being about half the time. I maintain my own finances, booking, and website, and I have moved every so often, meaning that my local Meeting is often not very familiar with me or my work.

I would be the first to say that this is clearly not the ideal circumstance for a Friends minister.

But where does the responsibility lie?
Should I drastically change my trajectory, considering that no local Friends organization is holding me accountable and supporting my ministry?

(ie stop blogging, writing and performing about Quakers? What are the wider implications of this conclusion? Any blogger who writes about Quakerism should be a formally recognized minister? Anyone who posts on Facebook? Any Friend who writes a song and uploads it to youtube? Where do we draw this line?)
Should I continue exactly as I have been, blogging, vlogging, writing music, performing, only stop calling it a ministry?

(Is this just a matter of semantics? In trying to keep our understanding of ministry pure are we deaf to the new ways that ministry is rising amongst us? Is it responsible of me to not at least attempt some accountability to Friends considering my level of visibility?)
Or should we recognize that my circumstances are thematic for a new age and transition our institutions accordingly into practices that are more faithful considering the realities of the modern age?
All of the above?
Something entirely different?

Thank you for your faithful consideration of this issue, Friends. I would love to hear your thoughts.Posted onOctober 18, 2012CategoriesBlogTagsQuakers

WATCH MORE!




8 thoughts on “What is a Quaker Ministry? (What Isn’t?)”

Julian Brelsfordsays:
October 18, 2012 at 9:33 pm


Jon –In response to your questions, let me ask you to consider a couple things. Take what you like. Get rid of the rest.  
  1. Consider making the west philly Quaker community your home community. You’ve moved a few times, yes, but having a home community is pretty nice. Why not us? 
  2. Two, consider making music for money. You know those highly profitable musicians? The ones who make plenty of money? Maybe they’re ministers. Maybe they’re not, who knows? Maybe it’s completely possible for your to charge money for your music, and have it be ministry. 
  3. Lastly, think about non-arts jobs as ministry. You know, serving coffee, doing whatever it is that people who work in an office do, or the kind of job people like you and me know how to get. If you did that stuff, could you make it ministry? How bout the people who are doing it right now? 
What makes it ministry or not-ministry?
Reply

Julian Brelsfordsays:
October 18, 2012 at 9:36 pm


PS — i didn’t mean to suggest that you should do something other than use donations of money / food / place to sleep at night as one of the primary sources of resources to keep on keepin’ on. Consider that as well.
Reply

Chuck Fagersays:
October 19, 2012 at 1:13 am


Jon,

Some feedback:

First, I think your understanding of the “solidified criteria” for “recognizing” ministry among Friends has been subjected to a narrow, obsolete, and often dysfunctional perspective.

You write: “Quakers have long held a common practice of recognizing Friends amongst us with a clear call to ministry.”

Actually, this “practice” is by no means as “common” as this statement suggests, especially over the past century. The FGC branch specifically rejected it by the mid-1920s. And in the pastoral branches “ministry” has been equated with ordination in the larger Protestant sense, which is not the same thing at all.

In recent decades, some Friends, much influenced by romanticized remnants of a Wilburite Orthodox perspective, have worked to resurrect this “common practice” model. But this project has had more rhetorical success than actual practical impact. It works for a few people, in limited settings, but not many, and not widely. And personally I don’t think it will get much further in our actual community life. I regard it as about the same as saying we should all return to one version of plain dress, or take up riding in buggies like the Amish. Ain’t gonna happen, for better or for worse. The most its continued advocacy can do is sow controversy and potential division among a group which already has enough challenges.

You write: “Most modern liberal Quaker Meetings have no practice of recognizing ministers. No practice of supporting ministers, cultivating faithfulness in their use of their gifts, no practice of publicly acknowledging the gift of ministry, no practice of writing or receiving traveling minutes.”

That’s right; and there are good reasons for this. For one, today’s meetings are not built the way the Orthodox-Wilburite (or O-W) groups were — and not even the surviving Conservative groups are now built that way either, really. Modern liberal meetings exist within a social-cultural setting worlds apart from that of the small O-W subculture, one that is evolving further away from it.

For another, I contend that the branches that became FGC had good and sufficient reason for rejecting this model. True, they have not done well at building a replacement; but resurrecting the onetime “common practice” is not in my view the remedy, and your experience corroborates that observation.

You write: “The only way that I know all of this, though, is because I’ve studied history.”

I respectfully suggest that the major histories of Quakerism present a very limited and often quite skewed view in regard to this “common practice.” I have published essays explaining why, to which I can send you links if you’re interested.

You write: “To ask a Friend with a call to ministry to first teach their home Meeting how to recognize ministers… this is a difficult thing to ask of a budding minister. I have seen more than a few calls to ministry ignored or burned up in this process of wrestling with the lack of tools in home communities.
I want to take a moment to honor those Friends who have faithfully and patiently waited or laid down a call to ministry as their Meeting discussed (or didn’t discuss!) their relationship with supporting ministers.”

Here’s something to consider: the experience you describe is more true to much Quaker history than the romantic O-W notion. In fact, in the heyday of the “solidified criteria” and “common practice,” these were as often used to squash and stifle ministry — especially innovative or disturbing ministry — as to encourage it.

An important example: Lucretia Mott, who traveled widely as a minister, preaching not only against slavery and for women’s rights, but also for reform within the Quakerism of her time. She was subjected to repeated attempts to silence and even disown her; I have documented half a dozen of these. She was shrewd enough to fend these off, but paid a steep price in personal distress (mainly concealed from the outside world). Her persecutors were representatives of a hidebound Quaker establishment who were determined to shut out the kinds of “ministry” she embodied (and for which most Friends today honor her memory), and were skilled in applying the “common practice” as a tool of repression.

Mott’s experiences of this repressive side led her to be among the first to call openly for the dismantling of this “common practice” and its authoritarian superstructure. Many other such examples could be adduced. I’ve written further about this also. Mott’s views ultimately prevailed among liberal Friends, and I believe the benefits thereof far outweigh the costs.

You write; “In the past five years I have gone in and out of periods of having support committees. I have no traveling minute, just a smattering of supportive words from different Meetings and institutions that I have played for. I travel with an elder when I can, which ends up being about half the time. I maintain my own finances, booking, and website, and I have moved every so often, meaning that my local Meeting is often not very familiar with me or my work.
I would be the first to say that this is clearly not the ideal circumstance for a Friends minister.”

I’m not so sure. It sounds like your semi-independent and often changing circumstances are by no means unusual, especially in artistic pursuits. Maybe it’s about as ideal as you can expect. After all, are you mindful that Friends for two thirds of their history formally condemned such artistic pursuits as yours? Are you grateful the threat of disownment for making music has now been removed?

Yes, there’s more to do: it is clear the liberal RSOF has not yet figured out how to formally incorporate such arts into its community life. (The Fellowship of Quakers In The Arts documented this evolution in an aptly-named booklet, “Beyond Uneasy Tolerance.” A sample of it is here: http://fqa.quaker.org/uneasyquo.html )

But could this be as much an opportunity as a problem? (I think so.)

You write: “Most modern liberal Quaker Meetings have no practice of recognizing ministers. No practice of supporting ministers, cultivating faithfulness in their use of their gifts, no practice of publicly acknowledging the gift of ministry, no practice of writing or receiving traveling minutes.”

You are right about this situation. But again, it seems to me as much liberating as bewildering. It’s an opportunity, even an imperative, to think “outside the box” of the dysfunctional O-W model. And I wonder why you are so sure that your task is to re-educate the liberal meetings which don’t want to revive the O-W model that they should do so. I thought your “ministry” was to make music with and among Friends; that’s not the same thing.

As for your need for support, it depends on what “support” amounts to. If you mean solidarity with other Friends who have leadings in line with yours, in fellowship with whom you can find stimulation, comfort, and discernment, why not seek out or create such structures outside monthly meetings?

Especially if you are still moving frequently, the “monthly-meeting-as-the-center-of-everything-Quaker” notion is simply not able to provide such continuity of fellowship and discernment. Indeed, it may never do that for many of us. (That’s a major reason why the Fellowship of Quakers in the Arts was created in the early 1990s, as an alternative support structure.)

But if by “support” you mean that a monthly meeting disburses funds from its treasury to pay the expenses associated with your pursuit of your artistic endeavors, this too seems to me an obsolete idea, for several reasons.

One, the practice was never very widespread; most traveling ministers paid most or all of their own expenses, except for hospitality offered by some Friends along their journey.

And two, when in modern times the idea has been surfaced as a way of enabling a leading to become a kind of livelihood, it has run smack into widespread opposition to the practice of hireling ministry that is characteristic of most liberal and Conservative meetings.

This opposition is not just prejudice. It is deeply rooted in the history that led to the dismantling of the “common practice” of recording ministers, even if most modern liberal Friends are ignorant of the history they affirm. And this disinclination to such support is not going away any time soon.

In the past decade, for instance, I saw one such a struggle drag on for several years in Baltimore YM, over a proposal to “embrace and release” a Friend who had a leading to work among Native Americans. In the end, the project petered out, and has not been renewed. There was simply not a sense of the meeting to do such a thing, especially as it would be a precedent for additional proposals.

And finally, at the “bottom line,” few liberal Meetings today have the budget to undertake such financial support. This lack of resources was already true for most liberal Meetings even before the economy crashed. Now, in the ongoing depression, it is doubly, triply true: the money isn’t there.

Look around, if you doubt: in the formerly wealthy Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, the number of hireling staff is in very steep decline, due to huge financial reverses. Then go upstairs at Friends Center: AFSC is but a shadow of itself a decade ago. Down Arch Street, FGC has cut staff slots too. Guilford College laid off sixteen staff and faculty this fall. In New Hampshire, the Meeting School shut down completely. Can you not read the signs of the times?

So what, in light of this, do I suggest that you do? In a previous message, I pointed to some other examples of how Friends pursued creative leadings in challenging outward environments. I won’t repeat them here, but only underline that as these other Friends made the best of their circumstances, and ask: could it now be part of discernment for you to find your own way to your own “best,” which may not fit your “ideal”?

For instance, would you be better served by working to create or join an artistic Friends support network, one that could relate to monthly meetings but is not limited to them? (After all, you speak of receiving many encouraging messages; could these “messengers” become the base of your ongoing “support group”?)

Next, can you figure out how to be both artistically productive and financially responsible for yourself in an environment where Monthly Meetings and other Quaker groups have neither the wherewithal nor the inclination to take on that task?

You conclude your reflection with this thought:

“Or should we recognize that my circumstances are thematic for a new age and transition our institutions accordingly into practices that are more faithful considering the realities of the modern age?”

Frankly, this sounds like a much more promising line of inquiry and reflection. I commend it to your further attention.
Reply

Kitt Reidysays:
October 19, 2012 at 1:38 am


These are really good questions, Jon. I have similar questions for myself.

And I feel that these questions deserve more space and care than this tiny little box can hold.
Reply

Laurasays:
November 23, 2012 at 5:30 pm


I hope this blog post may be useful: http://www.stevelawson.net/2012/11/why-dont-you-have-a-proper-job/
Reply

Karen Kellersays:
July 12, 2014 at 11:03 pm


Jon, I am researching the Quakers. I came across this article/blog……….I do hope you worked out the way the Lord would take you.

I discovered I am related to Quakers going back to the 1600……….I am grateful to know the DNA of puritans is part of my make up. I am from Australia and thought my DNA that of convicts.
Reply

Mark Smithsays:
November 1, 2017 at 6:45 am


Hi Jon

I came across this page when researching Quaker Ministry. I’ve included a quote in my video Seeking Faith & Practice – My First Ministry ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-XM0M8FnTI ). Thank you for describing ministry so well. Take care.

In friendship

Mark
Reply

Bill Samuelsays:
January 4, 2020 at 2:19 pm


Contemporary Quakers, you seem to be saying, are not going to provide the community support needed to enable you to live out your call. This is probably true. And almost all faith groups degenerate over many generations, so Quakerism is at an age for which that is to be expected.

However, you may be able to find other people with whom you could form a local community which would mutually support each other’s calls. Don’t try to attach it to an existing institutional structure. Learn from other such communities in existence, and build something that is creative and lifegiving. Network rather than fo