영성, 몸-마음, 젠더, 생태, 평화 Scapbook

2022/07/20

What People Really Want from Church and Quaker Meeting

August 1, 2018

By Donald W. McCormick

Ideeply love Quakerism and don’t want it to die out, but the number of North American Quakers has been steadily decreasing for three decades. According to statistics from Friends World Committee for Consultation, Quaker membership in the United States and Canada grew modestly over the middle part of the twentieth century to peak at 139,200 in 1987. The latest Quaker census in 2017 counted 81,392 U.S. and Canadian Friends, a loss of over 40 percent. A report published by Earlham School of Religion in 2005 concluded, “If these downward trends in the Society’s membership were to continue unchecked, American Quakers would become extinct sometime late in the twenty-first century.”

We can reverse this downward trend, and this is likely to involve learning from the experience of other churches. A good tool for doing this is the Reveal for Church survey: an extremely large survey of over 2,000 churches and 500,000 congregants. (To find out more about this survey, go to revealforchurch.com or listen to their podcast.)

What do people want from church?

At the core of the survey is an important question: What do people want from church? The answer to this is key to understanding why people join a church. The respondents’ answers are inspiring. Fifty-four percent said that the thing they most want is spiritual guidance, and over 30 percent said they want fellowship.

The survey defined a church that offers spiritual guidance as one that does the following:

provides a clear pathway that helps guide congregants’ spiritual growth

challenges congregants to grow and take next steps

has church leaders who model and consistently reinforce how to grow spiritually

helps congregants to understand the Bible in depth

helps congregants to develop a personal relationship with Christ

Churches that provided this were generally vibrant and had high levels of congregant satisfaction.

When I read this, I asked myself if we Quakers are providing the equivalent of this type of spiritual guidance. Do newcomers and others see us as meeting their spiritual needs? If they do, do they see this right away, or does it take a while? To answer these questions, I had to learn more about the “clear pathway” that the Reveal literature described. Although Quakerism has great wisdom in the area of spiritual guidance, at first it seemed that it was inconsistent with the spiritual guidance described in the survey. I thought of how listening to and heeding the Spirit may lead one Quaker to refuse to pay any taxes that contribute to war and another to become an army chaplain. It didn’t seem like we Quakers were following one clear pathway. Also, my initial understanding of the Reveal survey model of spiritual guidance didn’t fit with the kind of models of lifelong spiritual growth and maturity that I used to cover when I was a professor teaching courses in psychology of religion.

Then I looked more closely at what the Reveal researchers meant by a “clear pathway” and I realized that their idea of it isn’t so much a nuanced model of lifelong spiritual growth as it is something much more basic and doable. It’s the kind of thing that would get you off the runway of the spiritual path and into the air. It isn’t intended to guide your spiritual plane all the way to its destination. Understanding this, I began to see how a Quaker version of this could be crafted.

Classes that challenge you to take the next steps along a clear spiritual pathway

In the survey, churches that provide spiritual guidance communicate the path, the next steps, and the challenges in different ways. The most common model is a set of four afternoon classes that make up what is probably the most popular adult education curriculum in churches today. It comes from a church known for phenomenal growth: Saddleback Church, headquartered in southern California. In 1980, 40 people attended their first worship service; today over 22,000 people attend weekly services.

The first class covers the church, membership, how to live in accordance with God’s purpose, and the church’s plans for the future. At the end of the class, you are challenged to be baptized and to apply for membership.

The second class is about the path of spiritual maturity and techniques for developing four habits needed for spiritual growth (prayer, Bible reading, tithing, and fellowship). After this class, you are challenged to practice these habits.

The third class is about finding your spiritual gifts and choosing how you will use those in ministry, that is, in serving the church and others. At the end, you are challenged to put these into practice.

The fourth class is about evangelism. At the end you are challenged to begin sharing your faith.

The classes constitute a clear pathway that starts with membership and leads to spiritual maturity, ministry, and evangelism. Each time you finish taking a class, you are asked to accept the challenge at the end of it. The next steps involve putting into practice what you just learned and taking the next class.

Fellowship is the other major thing that people want from church. In the churches from the Reveal survey, it is primarily experienced in small groups of eight to ten people who meet weekly to learn about spiritual matters and to get to know fellow parishioners. These groups are places where people know you, know what’s going on in your life, and know what matters to you. If you wind up in the hospital, it’s the members of your small group that come over and visit, that take care of your kids when you’re in there, and that bring you meals while you are still getting back on your feet after having been discharged. And you are glad to do the same for all of them.

The classes described in the Reveal literature get people moving on their spiritual journey quickly. These churches make their expectations clear right away. They let you know that you are expected to embrace Christ (if you haven’t already); join a small group; and to take the classes that show the path, provide you with next steps, and challenge you to grow spiritually

When you do this, you begin to experience the two main things that people want out of church—spiritual guidance and fellowship. This makes people want to keep coming back.

Can Quaker meetings provide this kind of fellowship and spiritual guidance?

How can newcomers to Quakerism experience a similar kind of fellowship and spiritual guidance without watering down the Quaker experience?

One way would be to encourage newcomers to join a small group and take a comparable set of courses. This would involve reorganizing the way that we introduce people to Quakerism, not changing what Quakerism is.

Newcomers could be encouraged to participate in a small group early on. People want a spiritual home where they experience a sense of belonging, where people care about them and they feel like they fit in. In other words, they want real spiritual community. It can be difficult to feel included in a meeting that has long-term social bonds; small groups can help with this. I should point out that in many meetings, we are already providing the kind of fellowship described in the Reveal survey through the excellent Friends General Conference (FGC) Spiritual Deepening program.

Classes that offer a clear pathway, next steps, and challenges

In addition to fellowship, a meeting could offer classes that form a path, that provide next steps, and that offer regular challenges. Below is one possible way of doing that. (I don’t mean this suggestion to be definitive; there are many other ways that these kinds of classes can be organized.)

The first class could provide a short overview of Quakerism as a whole, but spend most of the time on the meaning of meeting for worship and what to do when you’re in it. At the end, participants could be challenged to take the next steps: regular participation in meeting for worship and enrollment in the next class.

The second class could focus on personal spiritual practices such as prayer, meditation, and discernment of leadings. Since the process of discernment can be both individual and corporate, group processes like clearness committees, spiritual accountability groups, and meeting for worship on the occasion of business would also be included. At the end, participants could be challenged to take the next steps: regular engagement in personal spiritual practice, participation in business meeting, and enrollment in the next class.

The third class could be about learning about Quakerism in more depth. It could present some information about Quakerism and offer ways to continue learning about it (e.g., reading Faith and Practice on a regular basis, or participating in quarterly meetings, yearly meetings, the FGC annual gathering, Pendle Hill programs, etc.). At the end, participants could be challenged to commit to some ongoing form of study.

The fourth class could focus on service: serving the meeting (e.g., serving on a committee), directly serving those in need (e.g., feeding the homeless), or activism (e.g., creating systemic change by working for peace, justice, or sustainability). At the end, participants could be challenged to commit to some form of service.

At the end of the four classes that make up this beginner’s path, participants would have most of the tools they need to start living the Quaker life. These are also tools that they can continue to use for the rest of their lives.

Meeting spiritual needs

There is a thirst for greater spirituality in Quaker meetings. I say this for two reasons. The first is because of dissatisfaction with Quaker meetings that have shied away from their spiritual and religious center; this was a common theme in the over 100 online comments about my February Friends Journal article, “Can Quakerism Survive?”

The second reason is that in recent moving and influential speeches, both Parker Palmer and Ben Pink Dandelion called for embracing and communicating the spiritual and religious core of Quakerism.

The model presented here shows one way to help satisfy the spiritual thirst of newcomers by introducing them to the spiritual core and spiritual guidance that they want from a meeting.

People in Quaker meetings and those interested in Quakerism aren’t that different from the people who took the Reveal survey. We Quakers have something to learn from the survey about what people want from church and how to provide it. People may show up at our doors because of various outreach activities, and they may like their initial encounter with Quakerism because various methods from FGC’s Welcoming Meetings program are being used. These are both important, but people won’t keep coming back to meeting if they don’t see how it addresses their needs for spiritual guidance and fellowship. All three activities—outreach, welcoming, and meeting people’s spiritual needs—are essential. If one is missing, the other two won’t get very far. But together, these three activities can defeat the trend of declining membership. Quakerism can grow, and meetings can become more vibrant.

class

discernment

February Friends Journal

FGC

form

ministry

North American Quakers

prayer

Saddleback Church

use

Features

Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)

Donald W. McCormick

Donald W. McCormick, donmccormick2@gmail.com, is a member of Grass Valley Meeting in Nevada City, Calif. He is director of education for Unified Mindfulness, a company that trains mindfulness teachers. The senior editor of Friends Journal described his February article, “Can Quakerism Survive?,” as “the most talked about article in recent history.”

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Get free news and updates from Friends Journal and our QuakerSpeak video series.

Name:

Email:

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Receive weekly updates on new FJ stories and features

Name:

Email:

Current Issue

Vocal Ministry

June-July 2022

Simple Living Beyond the Thrift Store - Friends Journal

Simple Living Beyond the Thrift Store

January 1, 2018

By Philip Harnden

Graphic of someone rolling a ball of money up a hill.

How many times at Quaker gatherings have you seen this bumper sticker? “Live Simply So That Others May Simply Live.”

That message seems ready-made for Quakers, with our thrift-store wardrobes, our decluttered homes, and our plain meetinghouses. When we practice simple living, we collectively say a resounding no to the consumerism, materialism, and waste of modern industrial society.

But how often do we ask ourselves whether our simple living actually does enable other people to live? By living simply, do we really touch the lives of other people in the places where they hurt the most? And how attainable is a simple lifestyle for most Americans today?

Friends are well aware of the heavy environmental strain that consumerism puts on our planet, and we know that materialism has fed a rat-race culture of dissatisfaction and craving. But even those of us familiar with the failures of our economic system can recognize its successes. Clearly, vast numbers of Americans live comfortable, vibrant lives full of opportunities that could scarcely have been imagined by their own grandparents.

In his recent book The Wisdom of Frugality, Emrys Westacott turns a sympathetic eye toward simple living and its virtues. But he also explores the counterarguments put forward by informed and sincere people who value the longer and healthier lives, the greater social mobility, and the wider vocational options that economic growth has afforded them. He notes, for example, that simple living can descend into miserliness if penny-pinching and constant attention to prices, discounts, and bargains make us preoccupied with money. Or we may become intolerable zealots for a pious frugality. More importantly, Westacott raises the argument that simple living encourages people to accommodate themselves to the exploitations and inequalities of America’s economic system. Advocacy of frugality “could be seen as telling people not to ask for a bigger piece of the pie, but to learn instead the joys of living on crumbs.”

Some Quakers, too, have noted the limitations of simple living. In the December 2002 issue of Friends Journal, Friend Keith Helmuth wrote that simple living is not enough when it entails only “individually practicing incremental good works in the expectation that, cumulatively, they will result in significant, society-wide change.” He found “no convincing evidence that the kind and scale of change needed will emerge from an accumulation of incremental lifestyle changes.”

If nothing else, these perspectives can keep us humbly aware of the limitations of simple living, lest we become preoccupied with our personal purity. Our chosen practices may be sensible, satisfying, and even spiritually fruitful for us. But how might we move our simple living beyond the thrift store—beyond an individualized focus on decluttering, downsizing, and personal frugality?

Peter Maurin, co-founder of the Catholic Worker movement, used to say that he wanted to build a society “where it is easier for people to be good.” Perhaps we Quakers can move beyond a thrift store mindset by shifting our focus toward building a society where it is easier for people to live simply.

In his book Graceful Simplicity, Jerome M. Segal takes a fascinating position that may surprise—and even irritate—some Quakers. He contends that sometimes simple living advocates “take as their starting point a dubious thesis: that we Americans have more money than we need, and that we are the victims of ‘artificial desires’ inculcated by advertising and the general press of our consumerist culture.” Segal believes that “this characterization of American life, while perhaps accurate for the top 10 or 15 percent of the population, largely misreads the life situation of most American families.”

He continues:

Contrary to those who offer advertising, consumer culture, or even human nature as an explanation of why we never feel we have enough, I argue that we have created a very inefficient society—one in which our very real and legitimate economic needs can be met only with high levels of income.

Segal’s perspective may come as a jolt to those of us who see affluence, overindulgence, and materialism as the problem and simple living as the solution. He argues that by focusing our attention on personal consumption—trying to convince ourselves and others that we do not need all that “stuff”—we mistakenly suggest that a comfortable life is readily attainable if people would just buy less. But fixating on personal consumption in this way overlooks the larger reality that certain basic needs—such as transportation, housing, and education—are disproportionately expensive in America. These expenses present major obstacles to living simply, especially for low- and middle-income families.

Segal is saying, in effect, that people will be convinced to live a more simple life, not by our bumper stickers, but only when certain legitimate needs are within reach of a modest income. He maintains that the high cost of basic necessities in America has given us a society where it is harder for people to live simply.

One of the heavier burdens of modern American life is transportation. In 2014, it represented 17 percent of household consumer expenditures, second only to housing. Transportation also provides a good illustration of what Jerome Segal calls a decline in the “social efficiency of money” in our society:

[An] economic system operates most gracefully when it satisfies the needs of the population with the least expenditure of income. The social efficiency of money, the ratio of need satisfaction to income, is a measure of such gracefulness, and it tells us the extent to which a society makes simple living feasible. When it is high, then with modest incomes, needs can be met; when it is low, needs can be met only if income is high.

Segal points out that the money we now must spend on certain categories, such as transportation, will not buy us nearly as much as it once did. That money is “inefficient,” partly due to various social transformations. For example, it did not cost much for my grandmother to walk to her local fish market or green grocer or shoe cobbler. But today most of those neighborhood stores have disappeared, so I must drive to the mall or the supermarket for my shoes and groceries.

For most Americans outside of urban areas, automobiles are now a necessity, not a luxury. In two-income families, even a second car may be needed. These expenses are not necessarily the result of a greedy impulse to keep up with the Joneses. In fact, they may be caused by changes we applaud: Women are no longer confined to the home; they have their own careers and need their own transportation.

Because of such social transformations, I must devote more of my budget to transportation than my grandmother did, even though my household earns a lot more money than hers. A small proportion of her dollars paid all her transportation needs; it takes a larger proportion of my dollars to meet my transportation needs. So even though I have more money, it does not stretch as far. When it comes to transportation, my money is not as “efficient” as hers was.

Social transformations have played a role in this change but so have legislative priorities and economic policies. For example, our dependence on the automobile came about partly because, beginning in the 1930s, leaders of the nation’s auto, oil, and tire industries lobbied relentlessly for highway funding from state and federal governments. Meanwhile our nascent public transportation system stagnated. Today the burden of buying, maintaining, insuring, fueling, repairing, and driving our own individual vehicles falls on each of us. In terms of transportation, we have inherited a society where it is harder for people to live simply.

By far the heaviest economic burden on mainstream American households today is housing. Research by Pew Charitable Trusts found that in 2014 the typical middle-income homeowner household spent 25 percent of its income on housing. Renters had it even worse, with lower-income renter households spending close to half of their pretax income on rent. Besides that, the threat of eviction hangs over these renters, who typically have no cash reserve to pay the rent when unexpected emergencies arise.

In “Forced Out,” his 2016 article in the New Yorker, Matthew Desmond wrote about the eviction of renters in Milwaukee: “There are sheriff squads whose full-time job is to carry out eviction and foreclosure orders. Some moving companies specialize in evictions, their crews working all day long, five days a week.” Desmond found that, in Milwaukee’s poorest black neighborhoods, twice as many female renters get evicted as male—and nine times as many women get evicted in the poorest black neighborhoods as do women in the poorest white neighborhoods. In the same way that incarceration is defining the lives of black men, eviction is shaping the lives of black women. Poor black men get locked up, says Desmond; poor black women get locked out.

Matthew Desmond has helped build affordable houses with Habitat for Humanity, and he calls such efforts “incredibly important.” But he cautions that addressing the housing shortage with volunteer carpentry alone has limitations: “I don’t think we can build our way out of this problem totally.”

Some Friends have, like Matthew Desmond, generously devoted time to building Habitat houses, sometimes using skills honed by simple living. But the breadth of the problem calls us to move beyond hammers and nails to also become advocates for legislation and public policies that will effect widespread change. Habitat’s own CEO, Jonathan T.M. Reckford, has addressed the importance of such advocacy work: “The housing need is far too great to build one house at a time. But that need can be met if we use our voices and not just our hammers.”

A number of Friends meetings around the country are already involved in issues of affordable housing, with several operating their own low-rent housing units. In addition, we have individual Quakers with backgrounds in housing advocacy. The experience of these knowledgeable Friends can draw us into the work of building, not just individual houses, but also building a society where it is easier for people to live simply in affordable, comfortable homes.

Athird burden on American households involves education. Along with housing, education is our biggest source of debt today, with mortgages and student loans dwarfing auto loans or credit card debt. We may be tempted to blame personal debt on what Rebecca J. Rosen calls the “earn-and-consume hamster wheel” that seems to trap so many Americans. But in “The Circles of American Financial Hell,” published in The Atlantic, Rosen explains:

At its core, this relentless drive to spend any money available comes not from a desire to consume more lattes and own nicer cars, but, largely, from the pressure people feel to provide their kids with access to the best schools they can afford (purchased, in most cases, not via tuition but via real estate in a specific public-school district).

Seen this way, Rosen says, housing and education merge into the same spending spiral: “For the most part, where a family lives determines where their kids go to school, and as a result, where schools are better, houses are more costly.”

After the housing bubble burst in 2007, the buyers who lost their homes were sometimes disparaged for unwisely trying to purchase houses costing well beyond their means. Overlooked in this analysis were the parents who were seeking, not prestige and luxury, but better schools for their kids. Writes Rosen:

It’s all too clear why parents will spend their last dollar (and their last borrowed dollar) on their kids’ education: In a society with dramatic income inequality and dramatic educational inequality, the cost of missing out on the best society has to offer. . . is unfathomable.

As Rosen puts it, “Breaking the bank for your kids’ education is, to an extent, perfectly reasonable: In a deeply unequal society, the gains to be made by being among the elite are enormous, and the consequences of not being among them are dire.”

Echoing what Jerome Segal has written about the social inefficiency of money in our society, Rosen concludes:

In a sense, the people who say rising wages would help are onto something, but the key is not getting households more money—it’s about building a different system. . . . That would require systemic changes—changes to the tax code, changes to corporate-governance practices, changes to antitrust law, changes to how schools are funded, to name a few.

This is the sort of systemic change needed to build a society where it is easier to live simply.

Transportation, housing, education—these are three of the heaviest burdens pressing down on Americans today. Does our simple living provide a practical way of relieving these burdens? Let’s consider again the questions raised by our bumper sticker “Live Simply So That Others May Simply Live.”

First, by living simply do we really touch the lives of other people in the ways that we imagine? How much do our simple lifestyles lift the burdens that most encumber hard-pressed Americans? The honest answer seems to be: Not much. It is difficult to see how my decluttered house helps a person without any house at all, or how by riding a bike I could improve the life of someone dependent on a rickety car to get to work. Our simple lifestyles by themselves do not have much impact on the lives of these people.

Despite the many virtues and rewards that we individual Quakers find in living simply, we must recognize that our efforts—when only personal and apolitical—fall short of helping others to “simply live.” As Jerome Segal put it, to “change the lived experience of mainstream life in this country, we have to go well beyond personal economies.” We will have to take our commitments beyond the thrift store.

Second, how attainable is a simple lifestyle today? Can most ordinary Americans live on less? The surprising answer: Not really. As damaging as our consumerist culture can be, acquisitiveness alone may not be what has trapped so many Americans in the “earn-and-consume hamster wheel.” As we have seen, what burdens Americans most is the high cost of essentials such as transportation, housing, and education. The seductions of materialism and the lures of Madison Avenue may not be the chief forces that keep Americans from embracing the simple life. In our profoundly unequal and financially inefficient society, it takes a lot of income to obtain dependable transportation, secure housing, and quality education.

For Quakers in America today, finding a balance between personal and political strategies means looking beyond the thrift store to merge our personal simple living practices with collective work for wider systemic change. Without abandoning our simple living commitments, we can together move beyond their limitations and turn our attention toward enacting economic policies and social priorities that will build a society where it is easier for all of us to live simply.

Maybe someday we’ll even have a bumper sticker for that.

American

Catholic Worker

change

education

house

Matthew Desmond

Quakers

store

transportation

women

Features

Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)

Philip Harnden

Philip Harnden is a member of Syracuse (N.Y.) Meeting. He has served on the board of Right Sharing of World Resources and as American Friends Service Committee’s liaison with the Mohawk Nation at Akwesasne. He wrote the Pendle Hill pamphlet Letting That Go, Keeping This: The Spiritual Pilgrimage of Fritz Eichenberg.

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Get free news and updates from Friends Journal and our QuakerSpeak video series.

Name:

Email:

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Receive weekly updates on new FJ stories and features

Name:

Email:

Current Issue

Vocal Ministry

June-July 2022

Finding God - Friends Journal

Finding God

June 1, 2022

By Ed Higgins

Photo by Jenelle on Unsplash

“God is everywhere but He is losing.”

—Margaret Atwood

Lately I’ve been trying harder than ever,

especially now past fifty, increasingly aware

of my prostate and other possibly weakening glands.

Trying earnestly to find God, establish once-and-for-all

certainty found nowhere else. Despite those risks toward

disappointment upon which faith depends.

God knows I’d like to keep up hope notwithstanding uncertain

glands, hair loss, bifocals. My mind’s lucid still, though often

adrift like those green and amber globes tossed up after storms

on the Pacific coast. This is evidence of some absence beckoning,

defined by distance. The nets vanished with no sign of fish.

Millions of these bobbing globes have escaped their purpose

and float in the world’s oceans, likely to be there forever.

Stay loose, drift easy used to be my rule—and before that

when much younger, Be Cool. Now I suppose no rule fits

a world so adrift with millions of escaped thoughts and desires,

corners of regret to stand in, sand always between your toes.

I am looking for some revelation of God to drift into

as certain as the darkness, then the light mystics always see.

Or even as gentle as this morning’s breeze leans on a passing

hayfield, lifting and bending the overripe grass. When such direction

offers itself go there I say. Trace again the language of light,

stumble onto runic deity in its own sway. There still are corners

of repose to stand in, resting for the moment.

faith

God

green

language

Poetry

Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)

Ed Higgins

Ed Higgins lives in Yamhill, Ore.

[[Are Quakers Christian, Non-Christian, or Both? - Friends Journal

Are Quakers Christian, Non-Christian, or Both? - Friends Journal

Are Quakers Christian, Non-Christian, or Both?
February 1, 2013
By Anthony Manousos

Photo Mircea Ruba

I am both a Christian and a Universalist Friend. I see no theological contradiction between Universalism and Christianity because the Gospel of John makes it clear that the Logos/Christ Spirit is present in everyone and everything. “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made” (1:3). Furthermore, “the true light [another name for the Logos] that gives light to everyone was coming into the world” (1:9). This was the basis of early Friends’ belief that the Inward Light is universal, present in all people (though some ignore or turn away from it). If you look in the dictionary, you’ll see that the first definition of “Universalist” is a Christian who believes that God will save everyone.

There is no doubt that early Quakers saw themselves as Christian—in fact, they saw themselves as the only real Christians. Early Friends argued this in pamphlet wars, tracts, and longer works such as like Robert Barclay’s 1675 Apology for the True Christian Divinity. Around 1690, George Fox wrote an epistle to American Friends admonishing them to evangelize among the peoples there. Since this is not a passage you’re likely to see in your Faith and Practice, it’s worth quoting:

Dear Friends and brethren, ministers, exhorters, and admonishers that are gone into America and the Caribbean islands. Stir up the gift of God in you and the pure mind, and improve your talents; that you may be the light of the world, a city set upon a hill, that cannot be hidden. Let your light shine among the Indians, the blacks and the whites; that you may answer the truth in them, and bring them to the standard and ensign, that God has set up, Christ Jesus. For from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same, God’s name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every temple, or sanctified heart, “incense shall be offered up to God’s name.” And have salt in yourselves, that you may be the salt of the earth, that you may salt it; that it may be preserved from corruption and putrefaction; so that all sacrifices offered up to the Lord may be seasoned, and be a good savor to God…. And Friends, be not negligent but keep up your negroes’ meetings and your family meetings; and have meetings with the Indian kings, and their councils and subjects everywhere, and with others. Bring them all to the baptizing and circumcising spirit, by which they may know God, and serve and worship him.

It is clear from passages like these that George Fox was not only a Christian, but an Evangelical who believed that Christ was the “way, the truth, and the life.”

Some prominent early Quakers embraced a more inclusive and tolerant view of other forms of Christianity, and even of other religions, as is evident in the writings of William Penn and Isaac Penington. Some 70 years after Fox’s epistle, John Woolman wrote:

There is a Principle which is pure, placed in the human Mind, which in different Places and Ages hath had different Names; it is, however, pure, and proceeds from God. It is deep, and inward, confined to no Forms of Religion, nor excluded from any, where the Heart stands in perfect Sincerity. In whomsoever this takes Root and grows, of what Nation soever, they become Brethren.

When John Woolman felt led to go among the Native Americans, he didn’t feel a need to convert them. He simply wanted to share what he knew about God, and to learn from them.[?]

William Penn also saw the Indians as having “that of God” and wrote about them with great sympathy. He was a (Christian) Universalist who believed that there was truth in all religions and in all people:

The humble, meek, merciful, just, pious, and devout souls are everywhere of one religion; and when death has taken off the mask, they will know one another, though the liveries they wear here make them strangers.

The issue of whether Quakerism should be inclusive or exclusive—conventionally Christian or faithful to the Inward Light—has long been a divisive one among American Quakers. In the 1820s, the split between Orthodox and Hicksite Friends was partly over power—rural Friends felt that wealthy Philadelphia Friends were lording it over them. Urban Friends felt that the rural Friends were out of touch with what was happening in the cities. The Orthodox wanted to become involved in Bible societies and other outreach efforts, like mainstream Christians. Followers of Elias Hicks, a rural Friend from Long Island, wanted to stick with traditional Quaker doctrines, such as the Inward Light, which seemed strange to mainstream Christians. Elias Hicks was an extremely charismatic and popular preacher who travelled all over the United States and drew huge crowds, including many non-Quakers. (The poet Walt Whitman was a big fan of Hicks and you can see glimpses of Hicksite Quakerism in Leaves of Grass.)

Perhaps the most controversial teaching of Hicks had to do with the Bible. Hicks totally disapproved of Bible societies and didn’t believe that they would do anything to advance “real Christianity.” In a controversial letter, Hicks argued that when the Bible was translated into English in the sixteenth century, and people finally had a chance to read it in their own language, it didn’t lead to more Christian love but to religious wars in which huge numbers of people were killed. Hicks argued that that it is the Holy Spirit, not the Bible, that makes you a “real Christian.”

More from Friends Journal on Christianity

• “God, Jesus, Christianity, and Quakers,” by Jim Cain
A nontheist Friend on the role of Jesus and Christianity in his life.

• “Are We Really Christian?” by Margaret Namubuya Amudavi
Do we focus on the religiosity or the spirituality of our Quakerism?

• “Expectant Visions of a Christian Anarchist,” by Zae Isa Illo
If all the gifts of the Spirit are still available today, why aren’t they present among us?

In the latter part of the nineteenth century, an Evangelical revival swept through Friends in the Midwestern United States, bitterly dividing Friends into “real Christians” who were “saved” and the traditional, Inward Light Friends who didn’t ascribe to the methods and theology of revivalism, and were therefore “unsaved.”

This revival was a severe trial for Joel and Hannah Bean, weighty Friends who had served as clerks of Iowa Yearly Meeting in the 1860s and 70s. The Beans tried to mend fences between the camps, but finally retired to San Jose, California, where they founded a new Friends meeting. Iowa Yearly Meeting refused to approve the San Jose meeting, and stripped the Beans of their status as recorded ministers after they incorrectly answered theological questions on a written test.

A test of this sort had never been used by Quakers, nor had a recorded ministry status been taken away for doctrinal reasons. Because the Beans were internationally known and respected, this became a huge “issue.”

Hannah and Joel Bean then did something unprecedented among Friends: they declared San Jose an independent monthly meeting. This “Beanite” movement eventually grew into an independent association that spawned three independent yearly meetings in the Western United States.

Even broad-minded twentieth-century Liberal Friends like Howard Brinton used divisive language at times. In his memoir, Brinton refers to unprogrammed Quakers as “real” Quakers. In the 1940s and 50s Howard Brinton worked hard to bring Hicksite and Orthodox Friends together because both practiced unprogrammed worship, but he didn’t reach out to pastoral Friends and hardly mentions them in Friends for 300 Years because he felt that programmed worship was not Quakerly.

Given this history of divisiveness, I can see why Friends are wary about identifying themselves as Christian or non-Christian. It seems safer, and saner, to keep Christ and God talk to a minimum. I am glad that many Friends are willing to bring up these concerns, however. I think we can be better Quakers if we are honest and admit our differences and have respectful dialogues about theological issues. We can learn much from each other when we open up and share our beliefs and spiritual experiences. And I think we can communicate with those in the ecumenical and interfaith movement, as well as our neighbors of other faiths, when we feel comfortable talking about theology among ourselves in a Friendly, non-exclusive way.

Until the 1960s or so, most unprogrammed Quakers identified with being Christian, at least publicly. But many questioned the dogmas of traditional Christianity, and some were drawn to other religious practices, such as Buddhism. In the 1980s, the Quaker Universalist Fellowship was created for Friends who didn’t identify with Christianity per se. (I belong to this group and manage their blog at quakeruniversalist.org.)

This Universalist approach was controversial at first. Some feared it might create new divisions. But the Universalist perspective met a deeply felt need. It has served those who have come to Friends as “refugees” from Christian denominations in which they felt spiritually abused. Others have come from other faiths, such as Judaism and Buddhism, and are grateful to find a religious community that is non-dogmatic and welcoming; a growing number of Friends proclaim themselves non-theists.

This theological diversity has enriched Quakerism in many ways—indeed, there would probably be no Quakers in South America, Africa, and Asia if it were not for splits that led to Quaker missionary efforts—but this complex history has also led to questions that many Friends struggle with. Are Quakers Christian? If not, what binds us together? What makes Quakerism distinctive?

The majority of U.S. Quakers consider themselves Christian. One third belong to Friends United Meeting, and another third are Evangelicals. Worldwide, the vast majority of Friends living in Africa and Latin America are Evangelicals. Kenya alone has 133,000 Quakers, far more than the 50,000 unprogrammed Friends in the United States and Britain.

Two years ago, I felt a leading to reach out to Evangelical Quakers. This came about when I heard the theologian Marcus Borg speak at the Friends General Conference gathering. I asked him, “What is the biggest challenge for interfaith dialogue?” His response startled me. “The real challenge is not interfaith dialogue, but intra-faith dialogue.” He went on to say that some of the bitterest misunderstandings are among people within a faith tradition. That insight spoke to my condition. It was far easier for me as a liberal Quaker to reach out to Muslims than to Evangelical Quakers.

Something seemed wrong with this picture, so I offered to become a representative to Friends World Committee for Consultation, the umbrella group started by Rufus Jones in the 1930s to enable Friends of different theological persuasions to come together and dialogue.

One reason I believe that God has led me to this work is because eight months ago I met my wife at a Peace Parade that took place in Pasadena on Palm Sunday. I went to this parade because the main speaker was Jim Loney, a Christian Peace Team member who was kidnapped along with the Quaker Tom Fox, who was killed by his Iraqi captors. Tom is one of my heroes and I wanted to honor him.

Meeting Jill was a major turning point in my life. She is an Evangelical Christian who defies media stereotypes. She believes passionately in the Bible as the Word of God and Jesus Christ as her savior, and she also believes passionately in social justice and peace. She moved into a low-income neighborhood in Pasadena to be a good neighbor and serve the poor. She started tutoring programs, a gang prevention program, and works for affordable housing.

Jill opened me up to a world of Evangelical Christians who share many of our Quaker values. For example, Professor Glen Stassen of Fuller Seminary has written powerful books arguing for “Just Peacemaking” and he is also a peace activist. (He went to a Quaker high school, and two of his children attended Quaker colleges.) He is part of an Evangelical group called the Matthew 5 project that advocates the abolition of nuclear weapons and the use of diplomacy rather than arms to resolve international conflicts. Jill also knows Jim Wallis, the founder of Sojourners—an ardent advocate for progressive social change. And finally, Jill introduced me to a young countercultural Evangelical named Shane Claiborne who believes that Jesus is a revolutionary who calls us to work for economic justice. Shane started an intentional community called “The Simple Way” in one of the poorest neighborhoods of Philadelphia. He was also asked to be the keynote speaker at Philadelphia Yearly Meeting.

Jill has made me realize that many Evangelicals are open to many of our Quaker theological beliefs, as long as we can justify them biblically. Some, like Ron Mock, a professor of Political Science and Peace Studies at George Fox University, have a keen interest in the theory as well as practice of Christian peacemaking.

Other Evangelical Friends are taking active steps to promote peace. For example, Evangelical Friends in Rwanda founded Friends Peace House in 2000 because of the genocide that took place in 1994 in which an estimated 800,000 people, about 20 percent of the total population, were killed. The surviving Rwandese were traumatized and destabilized. The young Friends Church of Rwanda, founded only eight years previously, accepted the challenge this posed, and has taken an active part in the rehabilitation of Rwandese society ever since.

In Kenya, where I took part in a pre-Conference program organized by Judy Lumb and David Zarembka, Evangelical Friends are active in trying to insure that violence doesn’t break out during the next election. They are enlisting Friends to help do trainings in the Alternatives to Violence Project.

Ever since 2000, Evangelical and liberal Friends have been working together in the African Great Lakes Initiative to do a variety of peacemaking efforts: trauma healing, community organizing training, conflict resolution training, compassionate listening.

I was not only impressed by how Kenyan Friends live out the Quaker Peace Testimony, I was also intrigued by their theological understanding. In Early Christianity Revised in the Perspective of Friends in Kenya, Zablon Isaac Malenge, one of the leading theologians of Kenya and former General Secretary of Nairobi Yearly Meeting, had a remarkable take on missionaries and the universal basis of Quakerism:

I will tell you a mystery. Many people in this world are practicing Quakerism without being aware of it. Some have never heard of it and yet they are practicing it. Even our great-grandparents might have practiced Quakerism long before missionaries came here. Quakerism is a religion of the soul, the indwelling Spirit, the light within, the light of Christ, the Seed. Missionaries did not bring it to us, but the missionaries revealed it to us and said, ‘This is Quakerism.’

Malenge describes Quakerism as an “old practical religion” that preceded the arrival of Europeans to Africa. It is the religion similar to that of James, the practical apostle, whose letter was a favorite with Quakers. James wrote: “faith without works is dead” and “true religion means taking care of the widows and orphans, and remaining unspotted by the world.” Similarly, Malenge writes:

When Quaker Missionaries came to Africa, and revealed Quakerism to our people, many lesser-known individuals discovered that they had been Quakers long before they had heard of this new movement. They had been caring for one another with compassion, they had aided each other in times of need and trouble and they had been providing companionship in their small communities. They had elders in their communities who handled conflict resolution through dialogue and counseling. Those who were offended were encouraged to reconcile with their offenders and so they forgave one another, loved their neighbors and exercised fairness and justice in their societies.

Reading this passage, I wondered: If Friends cannot unite around theology, could we instead unite around practices like peacemaking and social justice? George Fox said we need to be “salt” and “light”; Jesus urged us to a “Light to the world.” How can we, as a world-wide community of Friends, show that we can indeed be a Light to the world, as well as a preservative that prevents the world from sinking into decay and corruption?

To be “salt and light,” we need to transcend our differences. We need to share our stories, listen to those we disagree with, and be open to a change of heart. We also need to seek common ground wherein we can put our faith into practice. One important lesson I have learned from my marriage to an Evangelical is we don’t have to agree about everything in order to love each other.

American Quakers
Early Christianity Revised
God
Hicksite Quakerism

Anthony Manousos

Anthony Manousos, author of Quakers and the Interfaith Movement, attends Orange Grove Meeting in Pasadena, Calif., where he lives with his wife Jill Shook, author of Making Housing Happen, a book about faith-based affordable housing models. He is currently completing a book about Howard and Anna Brinton. His blog is laquaker.blogspot.com.
Previous Article Next Article

28 thoughts on “Are Quakers Christian, Non-Christian, or Both?”

Quaker Writing on Listening and Speaking from the Heart | Nontheist Friends
March 11, 2013 at 5:02 pm

[…] Given this history of divisiveness, I can see why Friends are wary about identifying themselves as Christian or non-Christian. It seems safer, and saner, to keep Christ and God talk to a minimum. I am glad that many Friends are willing to bring up these concerns, however. I think we can be better Quakers if we are honest and admit our differences and have respectful dialogues about theological issues. We can learn much from each other when we open up and share our beliefs and spiritual experiences. And I think we can communicate with those in the ecumenical and interfaith movement, as well as our neighbors of other faiths, when we feel comfortable talking about theology among ourselves in a Friendly, non-exclusive way….If Friends cannot unite around theology, could we instead unite around practices like peacemaking and social justice? George Fox said we need to be ‘salt’ and ‘light’…To be ‘salt and light,’ we need to transcend our differences. We need to share our stories, listen to those we disagree with, and be open to a change of heart. We also need to seek common ground wherein we can put our faith into practice. [Anthony Manousos, “Are Quakers Christian, Non-Christian, or Both?” Friends Journal, 59(2), Feb. 2013, pp. 19-22, online at oldfj.wpengine.com/are-quakers-christian-non-christian-or-both/] […]
Reply

Day 163: Are Quakers Christian, Non-Christian, or Both? Does it Matter? | Finding God in 365 Days
March 24, 2013 at 4:01 am

[…] Are Quakers Christian, Non-Christian, or Both? | Friends Journal. […]
Reply

dihappy
June 16, 2013 at 12:17 pm

Nice website.

I just wanted to point something out and let you know i didnt even get past your first paragraph.

Heres why:

“the Gospel of John makes it clear that the Logos/Christ Spirit is present in everyone and everything. “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made” (1:3)”

This is an incorrect statement. The only thing the Gospel of John makes clear is that Christ had a hand in creating all things. This in no way means His “spirit” dwells in all things. The Gospels make it clear that only those who have accepted Christ have the Holy Spirit dwelling in them. Time and time again this message is preached, and can easily be proven by referencing the original texts/words and comparing how these words were used elsewhere in the Bible.

Well, thats my .02 cents. Your in my prayers.
Reply

Chester Kirchman
September 1, 2013 at 8:10 pm

Anthony Manousos, “Are Quakers Christian, Non-Christian, or Both?” actually does an excellent presentation of people actually believing in Quakerism, before being aware of its existence. We all have training and personal beliefs. Without being Christian, the ‘salt and light’ can appear in many people around the world. Love of life, a belief, is to be in each sane individual on earth.
What is believed, can be false in reality. Many United States citizens wish to believe in a valid Justice Court System. However, an attorney at Buzgon-Davis has explained the four Judges in the Lebanon County Court, Pennsylvania that will automatically disregard a twenty year lease, once materials from a flooded home is seen in a picture of a Manufactured Home and the leased lot. Even though a picture the lessor’s considerably more dangerous mess, before the lot was prepared for the Manufactured Home. What we have faith in, may or may not be true. The lessor was trained in a Mennonite School and lied before a District Magistrate, at least twice, after taking a vow to tell the truth with the left hand on the Bible. The District Magistrate insisted the lessee pay for cleaning-up the lessor’s mess and evicted the lessee.
In the United States, the apparent God is money. Many local governments insist people keep their lawns ‘mowed’ within certain regulations. The real reason for this, is artificial value of the property to keep real estate taxes higher. There is total disregard for natural landscaping and the high level of air pollution created by machines used to meet the regulations. To many Christians, this is the right thing to do, to keep the value of their homes and even church buildings at higher levels.
Does it really make any difference, whether Quakers are Christian, some other religion, Agnostic, and/or atheist? With belief in the Quaker Universalist Fellowship, plus similar to Africans presented by Anthony Manousos, practicing Quakerism before joining, this individual has finally found a permanent Honor as a Quaker.
Reply

James Tower
December 28, 2013 at 1:00 pm

Great article. As an Evangelical Friend who has recently migrated to FUM, I have come at this from the opposite direction. I have struggled greatly in trying to reconcile liberal Quakerism’s positions. I do feel we have much to learn from each other, yet theology is profoundly important to me. It has been said that Evangelical Friends are a politically diverse group bound together by a unified theology, and liberal Friends are a theologically diverse group bound together by the politics of social justice. I am one of those who want to have it both ways. I firmly believe that the gospel is important and that social justice is an expression of the gospel lived out. For me, true Quakerism must embrace not only the theology of social justice embraced by early Friends but the theology of the Gospel from which these expression arose.

While we have divided further along a spectrum over time, I find it odd to be accused by liberal Friends of not being Quaker enough because I have definitive theological beliefs and attend a programmed meeting, when they have virtually turned their back on the theology of early Friends. While many liberal Friends have been more faithful to early Friends worship practices and social justice concerns, I have found a lot of intolerance for someone who gets to the same sorts of practices theologically, though the Bible. How can one person who reveres the name of God speak to those who are offended by it? Shane Claiborne and Ron Mock are heroes to me. They take the Bible seriously and let it shape them with its redemptive message. I too have been shaped powerfully by God through the Bible, as well as by mystical experience. For me, doing good alongside a non-Christocentric Quaker is still good, but what I would rather have is a shared vision of what it means to be working toward the inbreaking Kingdom of God. I want a shared vision of servant evangelism, where service and gospel are working together as they did in the days of early Friends. Frankly, I refuse to settle for anything less. I have a great deal in common with liberal Friends, but if we don’t have Jesus in common, there will always be something of great value missing.
Thank you for your efforts coming toward the middle from the other side!
Agape,
James
Reply

Guy Napthine
January 5, 2014 at 11:29 am

Not everyone is going to Heaven. However religious someone might be, God is no respecter of persons and will not save everyone. Christ Jesus alone is the One to whom we must look for soul salvation, forgiveness of sins and eternal life.
Reply

Kevin
January 20, 2014 at 11:18 am

Thanks for a poignant article. I find the greatest freedom as a disciple of Jesus to follow the Quaker way in joining God in his loving/saving/redemptive work in the world. To know God as final judge (far more righteous than me and anyone I know) and that he has come to all whom he spoke into existence… (John 1:1-18; Romans 1:16-2:4 – hopefully proof texting with some context) is incredibly freeing! It matters not what tradition you ascribe to in the Christian faith nor what Religion you adhere to in the global market. Kevin. Committed to the Gospel and its effects according to Matthew, Mark, Luke & John.
Reply

Christopher
March 1, 2016 at 5:45 am

Stealing from Al Gore, his soundbit was “An Inconvenient Truth” and it says it all. Truth isn’t what we fancy it ought to be, truth is what it is.

But what is “True” ? Its certainly not for us to decide – if as individuals we say we can decide “what truth is” we are stating that we are “God”. Its for us to weigh the evidence, discard the chaff and accept what remains, however inconvenient it may be.

Somehow we as human’s don’t like being told we messed up – whether that’s teenagers who won’t admit their best attempts have failed, or when they were toddlers and refused to be shown.

Somehow we want to prove to God that we will do something good then having earnt his approval “he’ll owe us”, which is absurd. This is a foundation principle of many world religions.

Many have incorrectly assumed that Jesus left us a set of rules and a way for people to somehow “earn” God’s approval, he didn’t. He challenged us to accept that we can’t “earn” God’s approval, but we can simply ask for it,

Its a gift, if you don’t want it, send it back……………..and since he himself claimed to be God ……

You can’t change what the choices you can choose between are, you simply choose which one you want. Disagreeing is a choice. Agreeing is a choice. You takes your choice and pays your money …..

Jesus himself claimed to be God, He said he has no intention to Judge us, and we will only be separated into those who believe and accept he was God and those who don’t. He made that perfectly clear many times, not least when he had a stand-off with the religious and judgmental community of his day as recorded by mark, (mark ch2).

“Son, your sins are forgiven you.” And some of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, “Why does this Man speak blasphemies like this? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” There are many other examples, this wasn’t an isolated exchange.

Jesus says he isn’t going to Judge (Separate / Choose / use whatever language you wish), but that the people will themselves be “Separated” between those who thought Jesus was God and those who don’t. – boiling down from John 12:47-50

“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. ……… {but}…. There is a judge for the one who rejects me ……….For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken. ………………. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.”

So Jesus was either stark raving mad, or he was God. There is no middle ground. “An Inconvenient Truth” for sure.
Reply

Nicholas
January 10, 2017 at 2:18 pm

I became interested in Quakerism before even attending a meeting. The words of Fox, Woolman, and others “spoke to my condition”. When I did attend a few meetings (an east coast meeting in Massachusetts) I met some “Christian” Quakers, but also Buddhist Quakers, Wiccan Quakers, and atheist Quakers. I even met one Friend who didn’t know who George Fox was. “Not important”, another Friend told me. Jesus wasn’t mentioned at meeting, and God, if mentioned at all, was referred to in nebulas, all inclusive ways that would make a Unitarian proud. Much of the meeting’s focus was on social issues and concerns – a traditional Quaker focus to be sure, but one that was an expression of Quaker FAITH, never an end in and of itself. Oddly, for me, the Bible – never mentioned at meeting (and not my first source for guidance, that being the Spirit) WAS quoted – when touching on social concerns. I’m a Friend who’s too socially liberal for, and geographically distant from, the Wilburites – but too conservative and traditional for the more liberal Quaker groups that are around me. My life goes on – in endless song – but in a solitary manner, at this point. I identify as a Friend, but am a Friend – without a meeting.
Reply

Mother of Six
April 10, 2017 at 10:41 pm

Why I know that you are not saved…a Christian. In your posts, Jesus, him being God’s Son, his death, on the cross to save us from our sins (You are not saved unless you believe with your heart, and confess with your mouth), and his resurrection and eventually return are not your focus. “Go ye into the all the world and preach the gospel”. As a Christian, spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ is always our focus. Christians, those who have accepted Jesus Christ as their savior and confess him, know and understand that spreading that message….and that message only is what we have been tasked to do by our Savior Jesus Christ. Church organization, meetings, dress codes, denominations, church names..lifestyles (no matter how simple)……are not what Christians do… We live the life and witness to the unsaved as God leads us.
Reply

Shelli Hill
August 15, 2017 at 12:41 pm

When I speak of my experience with God, I can’t speak of anything, but the risen Jesus, whom I have found to be alive, speaking and guiding me from the beginning of my seeking. Other spiritual voices (alive and deceased) have been appreciated throughout my reading and studies (I have a Master degree in Spiritual Formation from Portland Seminary, formerly George Fox Seminary), but none are authoritative, but Jesus. As for Scripture, my understanding of God’s love through Christ came through reading the New Testament without instruction. So, for me, the Scriptures are a powerful way that God reveals Gods self. However, I recognize the danger of going too far. The Scriptures have no power except the Spirit of God enlivens my mind to understand who the true Word is. I have a newfound appreciation for the Quaker saying, “What sayest thou?” It forces me to not be satisfied with only 1st century interaction with God, but to continue to seek God’s voice myself. I consider their testimony and what the Spirit reveals to me as well. I am a Quaker who believes in Jesus as the only Divne incarnation of God. I currently do not have a Meeting to Worship with.
Reply

Toria
September 17, 2017 at 9:01 am

If someone is an atheist and has concern for social justice why don’t they start their own humanist group and practice social justice etc? I don’t understand why atheists would want to attend a meeting that traditionally is based on religious principles.
Reply

`Nancy Mott
October 22, 2018 at 10:05 pm

I like this suggestion. And as a friend of Quakers, please consider how you can be practicing Quakerism if you cannot be friendly toward Friends whose worship practices or theology differs from you. It surely makes your witness weak. And that’s sad.
Reply

Aaron Zacharias
March 28, 2019 at 8:21 am

Interesting article and thread of replies. I have been to a few Quaker meetings in my city, Vancouver, BC, and here in Monteverde, Costa Rica, where I a currently visiting. I do no identify as Quaker. I am a Christian. I am also an Anglican, but I feel centred in the Jesus Christ of the Four Gospels. I also have the experience of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, from my days as a teenage Jesus freak. What has attracted me to Quakerism has been the focus on social justice, reconcilition and silent prayer. But I have always found something to be spiritually lacking in the meetings I have attended, and have also felt saddened and alienated at the evident hostility in many Friends towards the Christianity of the New Testament, which does involve centring and ordering our lives, not around a nebulous light, but around Jesus, the Light of the World. Just last week I attended Catholic mass in the parish church in nearby Santa Elena. I felt there a sense of God’s Spirit and presence that I have never experienced while in a Quaker meeting. I probably won’t visit the Friends again. There is something lacking when Christ is not the focus. By the same token, I’m not about to convert to Roman Catholicism either. But I do agree that we are all on a journey together, and that whether or not salvation is something universal, really, who knows? I would rather not put God to the test, but continue living my life in a state of holy reverance and awe and of universal kindness towards others.
Reply

Aaron Zacharias
March 29, 2019 at 9:27 am

Interesting article and thread of replies. I have been to a few Quaker meetings in my city, Vancouver, BC, and here in Monteverde, Costa Rica, where I am currently visiting. I do not identify as Quaker. I am a Christian. I am also an Anglican, but I feel centred in the Jesus Christ of the Four Gospels. I also have the experience of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, from my days as a teenage Jesus freak. What has attracted me to Quakerism has been the focus on social justice, reconcilition and silent prayer. But I have always found something to be spiritually lacking in the meetings I have attended, and have also felt saddened and alienated at the evident hostility in many Friends towards the Christianity of the New Testament, which does involve centring and ordering our lives, not around a nebulous light, but around Jesus, the Light of the World. Just last week I attended Catholic mass in the parish church in nearby Santa Elena. I felt there a sense of God’s Spirit and presence that I have never experienced while in a Quaker meeting. I probably won’t visit the Friends again. There is something lacking when Christ is not the focus. By the same token, I’m not about to convert to Roman Catholicism either. But I do agree that we are all on a journey together, and that whether or not salvation is something universal, really, who knows? I would rather not put God to the test, but continue living my life in a state of holy reverance and awe and of universal kindness towards others.
Reply

Jonathan Lloyd
July 23, 2019 at 7:07 am

This is eye-opening and mind-opening for me. Just when I thought I had to run as fast and as far away from Evangelical Christianity as I could, here comes Quakerism. I, too, am married to an evangelical, a Bible-believing woman who holds social justice to heart. But as the Beans discovered and the Hicks discovered the dogma and teaching of the theologians within fundamentalism turn one against the Spirit. Even in these comments on this site you can see and hear the judgmentalism coming from that quarter. It sickens me and just makes me want to turn away from all things fundamentalist–the “it’s me or the highway” approach. I feel the error of fundamentalism; I feel it comes from a deep-set hatred of spiritual truth. It seems to love to circle the wagons, to protect what it has taken, to war from within and without. But Quakerism! This is something to consider, something to hold dear. Maybe the lilacs in the dooryard really can bloom after all–to steal from Walt Whitman.
eply

Bill Rushby
Crown Point NY, May 6, 2021 at 10:37 am

I am also a Wilburite-evangelical Friend without a meeting. I understand your circumstances, but believe that being a genuine Christian calls for fellowship with other Christians; in our case, Christian Friends! For my take on matters of faith, see my essay on “Conservative Friends” https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/qrt/topdownloads.html. Let’s be in touch!
eply

Leave a Reply