Monthly Archives: November 2015

Quakers and Me

Quakers and Me. 7/11/15

I have never been clinically depressed, but I’ve had periods of gloom, depression and anxiety. Perhaps the most memorable was when abroad, driving through the rain in the Netherlands in a cold old car through dreary flat fields, alone on my 50th birthday, dwelling on my broken marriage – my cuckolding. But then, on arrival, I found that fellow-expat Quakers had organised a surprise party for me. My host had even recorded several episodes of a series starring my favorite actress – Harriet Walter.

Now I feel that same anxious depression, with little hope of a surprising lift-up, least of all from fellow-Quakers, since it is they who seem to be the cause of my malaise.

For the thirty-odd years prior to my moving to Bristol my Quaker life was very rich. Rich in satisfying my longing to be closer to God, satisfying in my desire to ‘do good’ especially in service to the Religious Society of Friends. They were indeed friends, and they were indeed religious. In the 1990 the whole Society worked together on the revision of “Quaker Faith and Practice” such that we felt we “owned” it. The variant of Christianity which it portrays has remained the bedrock of my religious conviction.

During those 30 years I served the Society at every level, from the international to the local. I attended the 1991 World Conference, and represented BYM at two FWCC Triennials. I served on the committee of the European and Middle East Section and was involved in the governance of Brummanah High School in the Lebanon. In another YM I was on the equivalent of Elders and Overseers, then was clerk to my Monthly Meeting.

Within BYM I attended almost every YM and MM/AM. I have attended countless courses at Woodbrooke and Charney Manor, (including a three-month residential at Woodbrooke) and also a few at the equivalent in New York. I served as an Elder almost continuously at Westminster Meeting. I was appointed twice to Central Committees, and to Meeting for Sufferings. In 2001-2002 I took a year traveling round the world, visiting and leading discussions in many Quaker Meetings, after which I moved from London to Bristol.

In sharp contrast to that rich Quaker life, since coming to Bristol it has been arid. I have continued to serve as a Trustee and with Premises work, but have not been appointed to any seriously religious position.  While I have made clear my desire to serve the Society as an Elder, I have been passed over, sometimes in favour of unsuitable or ineffectual Friends, such as those who very seldom attend any meetings.

This has happened once again and it has been a second blow. A few days before I found I was not to be nominated I had re-read the recently published leaflet, “Our Faith in the Future” which apparently is the replacement of our previous statement of our priorities. It is a well-produced, multicolored leaflet, full of admirable aspirations and assurances, but with almost no hint of us being religious. Even our name, “Religious Society…” is absent. The one mention of God is in parentheses and there are no other specifically religious – let alone Christian – words.

Studying that leaflet lead me finally to accept with sad resignation that there is now no hope of rescuing British Quakerism from its decline into humanism. My two most recent letters to The Friend have not been published. Ben PD’s 2014 Swarthmore Lecture has not had its desired effect. A letter I wrote to my AM Elders has simply been ignored. (I offered to start another Meeting for Worship, preceded by a short ‘preparation for worship’ which would remind attenders of our religious basis). The Society seems to have become no more that a philanthropic reformist meditation association – a Spiritual Society rather than a Religious one. Quakers’ claimed Purposes as a registered charity are “religious” and “charitable”. We do virtually no charity, except amongst ourselves. And now it seems we will be doing virtually no religion.

I find myself in flight or fight mode. Were I not the clerk of my Local Meeting I think I would take time out from Quakerism perhaps to go more often to Anglican services, or drop religion altogether. Walking in the forests and on the hills could serve as well. I could go for longer periods on Retreats and to my favorite ashram in India.

I long for the deeply spiritual, God-centred, Spirit-led Quakerism of the past, where we saw ourselves as ‘humble learners in the school of Christ’. It was Christianity stripped to its essentials, with all the bells and whistles, the rituals and pre-written prayers, all swept away to leave room for the promptings of love and truth, which we agreed to trust as the leadings of God, and which we agreed to heed. Now, in my Meeting, anything which smacks of this is verbally rejected by the preponderance of Attenders, a good proportion of whom are Buddhists and other non-theists taking advantage of our Sunday facilities and resentful of any challenge to their comfort zone. It has become a Sunday Social Club.

I ask myself often whether I am mistaken. The reason I have continued to fight the decline of religious Quakerism is that I am frequently encouraged to believe I am not. I obtained an interview with a leading academic Quaker to seek an answer, and was greeted with full agreement. Attending Yearly Meeting lifts my soul, and heartens me. In the current “Friends Quarterly” I read “…while recognizing God’s transcendence … [Quakers] have given greater attention to divine immanence…[But] humans are seen to suffer from a certain hardening of the heart that gets in the way of them seeing God’s presence in the world.” A leading Friend sought to correct me by drawing my attention to the section in QF&P on Diversity. But that section reinforced my conviction since it is clearly about diversity within the context of Christianity. Not within that of ‘anything goes’.

The same article goes on to say “all human images and all language about God are inevitably deficient because, ultimately, God is beyond comprehension”. Quakers have always left it to the Spirit to ‘teach and transform’ those who attend our form of worship. That and prior knowledge of Jesus’ teaching. Unlike all other religious groups we have no regular teaching ministry, reminding us of our organisational purpose. Thus those who start attending our meetings hear nothing of these Christian essentials, and conclude that none of what they expected of religion applies to Quakers. Few realise that the object of our worship is God. Warped concepts of the nature of ‘God’ persist, leading to evangelistic non-theism.

Despite many years of warnings, those in responsible positions in BYM have done little to correct these deficiencies. At a conference on “Quaker Identity”, following a lecture by the arch-evangelistic non-theist, all of us in our weighty “home group” disagreed with his views except one who was one of the leading paid officers of BYM. One can only conjecture that these powers that be in our organisation have decided that the future of the Society lies in development as the philanthropic, humanist association. Maybe that is what God (as it were) wants. Maybe there is a place for another such organisation. But my view is that without the core conviction of God’s unmediated inspiring guidance Quakerism will lose the fire in its belly which has enabled it so effectively to speak truth to power, and so has given it its fine reputation. Is it too late? Can I do anything effective? Do I deserve to retire from the fray?

I had hoped that writing this essay would clear my mind. But I am still undecided and unhappy. Perhaps some gardening will help!

Quakers and “God”

The fundamental problem within our Religious Society is widespread and gross misunderstanding of what Quakers mean by the word ‘God’. We have reached a state where even some of our weightiest and most influential Friends share this ignorance. Additionally there are those who avoid using the word ‘God’ because of an assumption that other people misunderstand it.

This widespread ignorance is due in part to the word ‘God’ being beyond precise definition. (It is also due to our lack of a teaching ministry. We assume the Holy Spirit will teach and transform people, but can it if they firmly reject any such Spirit?) God is beyond our comprehension. We do not and cannot describe God any more than a child could describe the mystical experience of a Native American medicine man. Questions about the what, why, where, or how of God, or about when God came about, all are impossible for us to answer. We can only know God by God’s effects. Put another way, we choose to use the word God to depict the source of all that is good.

In Section 1.01 of “Quaker Faith and Practice” (“QF&P”) the first thing said about God is that God can be ‘allowed’, thus rejecting the concept of a God that imposes its will on us. The next Section, 1.02. urges us to ‘trust’ that the source of ethical values such as love and truth is God. It does not declare that we must ‘believe’ this to be the case. To ‘trust’ something is to decide to go along with it even though one knows there is room for doubting it. There are hundreds of philosophies and religious paths available to us. Quakers are those people who have decided to live by this one – the one that suggests that ‘the promptings of love and truth in our hearts are the leadings of God’. Not instructions or rules ordained by God, but the gentle ‘leadings’, which come to us via gentle ‘promptings’, like the quiet help available to an actor from a prompter hidden off-stage.

One can now get all of QF&P on one’s computer. ( qfp.quaker.org.uk/?s=God ) The word ‘God’ appears over 700 times! None depict God as an autocratic jealous, angry control freak obsessed with sin. All mentions of God that go some way to describe God speak of a supportive, loving, creative influence. Quakers are not unique in this understanding, though they were perhaps many years ahead of other Christian denominations in realising it.

I believe it to be a ‘poor silly notion’ to abandon this useful little word, replacing it with a convoluted construction, or using it only in inverted commas, as if it were not a real word. I also think it silly to abandon a word simply because one thinks other people misunderstand it, or have been damaged by its misunderstanding.

What I suspect and fear is that these reasons for not using the word ‘God’ are not really the case, but that people simply will not accept that there is any external power that might be called God which can have any effect on us, that all our ‘promptings’ are the leadings of no more than our nature and our nurture. This is a perfectly reasonable hypothesis, and might well be true. But Quakers are those people who have decided to accept Advice 1. Others may ride on our bus with us but please do not ask the driver to change course! Please don’t scoff at our wish to allow God into our lives! We joined our religious society to nurture our faith, not to have it continually undermined.