Wednesday, March 16, 2011

The Bible Among Friends

By Paul Buckley

Originally published as the introduction in Buckley, Paul, ed., The Quaker Bible Reader (Richmond: Earlham School of Religion Publications), 2006.  Used with permission of the author and publisher.

For many Friends, the Bible is a lost resource.  They don’t read it, and they don’t miss it.  This is not a new situation—complaints that too few Friends read or know scripture have been heard consistently for at least the last two-hundred years.  For example, more then fifty years ago, Henry Cadbury, a Quaker and one of the twentieth century’s great biblical scholars, decried this condition in an address at Guilford College.

In some ways, this is a surprising situation.  Friends in the seventeenth century were devoted to their Bibles.  Early Quaker writings seem at times to consist of little more than stringing together selected bits of scripture.  George Fox, founder of the Religious Society of Friends, knew scripture so well that Gerard Croese, in his 1696 book, The General History of the Quakers, makes the claim that “though the Bible were lost, it might be found in the Mouth of George Fox.”  Early Friends, of course, were not unique in their love of the scriptures.  Three hundred and fifty years ago, the Bible was the pre-eminent book in the English-speaking world.  For many people, it was the only readily accessible book and it profoundly influenced views of life, society, history, politics, and the world.  George Fox was far from unique in committing it to memory.
Despite this intimate familiarity with the Bible, the tension between roles of immediate revelation and of the scripture had been present from the very earliest beginning of the Quaker movement.  In the section of his Journal devoted to 1648, George Fox wrote:

I was to direct people to the Spirit that gave forth the Scriptures, by which they might be led into all Truth, and so up to Christ and God, as they had been who gave them forth.  … I saw that the grace of God, which brings salvation, had appeared to all men, and that the manifestation of the Spirit of God was given to every man to profit withal.  These things I did not see by the help of man, nor by the letter, though they are written in the letter, but I saw them in the light of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by his immediate Spirit and power… for I was in that Spirit by which they [the scriptures] were given forth, and what the Lord opened to me I afterwards found was agreeable to them.  I could speak much of these things and many volumes might be written but all would prove too short … (p. 34)

Fox is claiming immediate revelation for himself and declaring his mission to be directing all people to know it in themselves.  The final sentence makes it clear that these revelations are more than a mere reiteration of the recorded scriptures.  At the same time, he acknowledges that afterward he found that what had been revealed to him was “agreeable” with scripture.  This formulation—continuing revelation that does not contradict (but may go beyond) the Bible became the Quaker norm and appears in the writings of many other early Friends.  The evolving structures of gospel order did little to provide precise definitions of what was agreeable and what contradicted scripture.  In general, it was left to subgroups within the Society—monthly, quarterly, and yearly meetings—to deal with individual cases.  This process led to a degree of local conformity, but no Society-wide standard.

This tension remained unresolved at the beginning of the nineteenth century.  If anything, the cracks were widening as ideas were absorbed from both the Enlightenment and from other Protestant sects.  The events leading up to painful separations in the Society in 1827-28 prominently featured charges and countercharges over how the Bible was read, how it should be read, and how it was properly interpreted—although not over its ultimate status among Friends.  Of course, each side claimed proper use for themselves and charged serious error on the part of their opponents.

Nor are the 1820s unique in this respect.  Today’s structures, organizations, and practices within the Religious Society of Friends are the product of our history.  It is only a slight exaggeration to say that it is impossible to understand Quaker history without having some understanding of Quaker theology and impossible to understand Quaker theology without knowing something of the Bible.  The peace testimony, the practice of simplicity, both silent workship and the elements of programmed worship, and the other hallmarks of twenty-first century Quaker faith and practice were firmly established on biblical foundations.
Even understanding the ways we speak of ourselves depends on scripture. 

Many contemporary Friends take pleasure in referring to themselves as belonging to a “peculiar people.”  But to say we are “peculiar” is not to claim that we are odd.  The phrase is found in both the Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament) scriptures.  As a Quaker, my favorite example is from the first epistle of Peter, “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light” (1 Peter 2:9).  We Quakers are well acquainted with that “marvellous light.”  This is, of course, the translation in the King James Version of the Bible.  In modern English versions, “peculiar people” is rendered as “a people belonging to God” or “God’s own people.”  To say we are a peculiar people is to claim that the Religious Society of Friends is the chosen people.

Early Friends indeed made this claim, but we shouldn’t think it was a point of pride.  They knew the implications of being God’s people—it may be an honor, but it is much more a responsibility.  To know the elements of that responsibility, you need look no further than the historic Quaker testimonies.  Early Friends described the testimonies as “peculiarities,” but not to suggest these were mere idiosyncrasies.  These are the obligations that God’s people carry.  A person adopted Quaker dress, speech, and practices as an outward sign of submission to God in all things.

Paul BuckleyPaul Buckley is a writer and translator of Quaker thought. His book Twenty-First Century William Penn has made Penn accessible to many, and he is the editor of the recently re-published Journal of Elias Hicks.

Monday, March 14, 2011

What is the Greatest Challenge Facing the Church?

By David Johns

Perhaps the greatest challenge facing the church in our own time is the greatest challenge facing the church at any time: understanding the times and discerning the Spirit in how to respond.

This is not easy work. It requires careful observation and critical thinking. It requires the courage to 'desacralize the status quo,' whether that status quo is in society, nation, cherished denomination, place of employment, or our own heart and assumptions. Until this status quo is desacralized it can not be analyzed, and until analyzed it can not be determined to be just or unjust, that is, whether it is in step with the gospel message of life and hope, or whether it is simply another means for exploitation and idolatry.

A seminary education can help us consider differently what is the sacred, how to see clearly and to evaluate faithfully, and how to know more profoundly the gospel of life.

Here is the difference, however. Some programs of study place emphasis either upon the analysis or upon the action. When we are at our best -and we strive often, I think, to evaluate whether we are so doing -  ESR attempts to bring these together, understanding the times, and discerning the Spirit in how to respond. It is easier to give our attention to only one piece of the equation, but that is not in the long run going to form women and men prepared to address creatively the challenge of being the people of God in our time.

David JohnsDavid Johns is Associate Professor of Theology at Earlham School of Religion. He has traveled extensively among Friends in Mexico and Central America and is a regular contributor to Quaker Religious Thought. He resides in Richmond, Indiana with his family.

Friday, March 11, 2011

Spirituality Gathering: “Leaps and Bounds: Faith, Ecology and the Global Economy”

By Diane Reynolds
Artist and activist Tevyn East used modern dance, song, movement and story-telling to embody earth care as the keynote performer at Saturday’s Spirituality Gathering. East, a member of the Church of the Tevyn East performing Leaps and BoundsSavior and the Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns, appeared joyous and sometimes radiant as she absorbed herself into an hour of using her body and voice to express sorrow, wonder and hope over the fate of the earth. Borrowing words and images from Torah, Jesus, and peace advocates such as Ghandi, East encouraged her audience to care for creation as a creative and spiritual practice.
After her performance, East invited onlookers to share practical issues that block their paths to living more simply.  Answers included not wanting to give up privacy to share space to not knowing who could most benefit from produce from our gardens.
In the afternoon, following lunch, a varied program of workshops included spiritual dancing, taizĂ©, understanding place, communicating about eco-spirituality, yoga, midrash journaling and a nature walk. In a session on economic discipleship, Roland Kreager and Cindi Goslee of Right Sharing of World Resources, led participants in exploring how those in the “developed” world can better practice the self-reliance, Earlham School of Religion 2011 Spirituality Gatheringsustainability and mutual support and accountability that we often ask of our Third World partners.
Themes that emerged from the gathering included the role of art and imagination in supporting our connectedness to the earth. In her keynote, for instance, Tevyn evoked oneness with creation with a poetic image of humans “eating the sun” when consuming plants that are nourished by light. Also woven through the day was the theme of simple, local steps as beginning answers to global environmental problems.
Many prospective ESR students who attended an open house at the seminary on Friday stayed for the Saturday gathering, getting them a taste of how the school Tevyn East performing at Earlham School of Religionreaches beyond the conventional classroom to offer a creative and embodied education. ESR students, including Pat Thomas, Linnea Stiffler, Dagmar Bollinger, Dave Wunker, Emma Churchman, alumna Summer Cushman, and yes, me, Diane Reynolds, led workshops, an affirmation of the school’s emphasis on developing leadership. But most of all, we enjoyed a day of spiritual exploration of body, mind and heart.
I was impressed by the loving and optimistic  tone of the gathering. While creation care is an urgent concern, leaders and participants focused on spiritual  responses to the crisis, not stridency, recognizing that inner healing is a first step towards healing the planet.
A query: As Quakers, situated wherever we are, what are some steps we can take right now toward greater harmony with our environment? How can art and imagination help that process?










Diane Reynolds is a student in Earlham School of Religion’s Master of Divinity program. She maintains a personal blog, Emerging Quaker.

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Serving the Poor in Richmond, Indiana

By Diane Reynolds
The poor may be with us always… but we can help.
At ESR’s common meal last Tuesday, students, staff and visitors heard Sharlene George, Laura Arendt and a few others from Open Arms Ministry in Richmond speak of the growing number of working poor and newly poor in the Richmond area—and the efforts Open Arms is making to serve both the freshly minted poor and the entrenched generational underclass.
Sharlene George, the executive director of Open Arms, said that the organization is seeing more people than ever who are seeking aid for the first time. People in this situation are often embarrassed. Some are angry Open Arms at ESR Common Mealthat although they are working very hard, they can no longer earn enough to make ends meet. Open Arms works with these clients to focus on what they can be grateful for as they adjust to the reality of poverty.
Beyond financial aid, the organization offers budgeting help and offers itself as on-going spiritual and community support system that clients can call on for prayer, for referrals as other needs arise and for caring attention to them as human beings. One man, for example, who was just out of prison, came in for help paying for a prescription drug. When he mentioned that he was going on a job interview, Open Arms noticed he might need a hair trim and connected him with a beautician who offers free hair cuts to people in need. Another time, while talking to a woman with young children who came in for help, Open Arms realized that, beyond her immediate problem, this mother had no money for Christmas.  They took the initiative to recommend her to a group wanting to sponsor a family’s Christmas. 
Open Arms, which began in 2009 after several years of planning, is a partnership of a dozen faith groups in the Richmond area that pool resources to assist to people in need.   The ministry, which dispensed $11,000 in funds last year, offers financial help of up to $250 per needy family every six months. It works to meet people’s need by partnering with other agencies: $100 pooled from several different groups each donating $25 can make it possible to pay a bill.
They say the hardest clients to deal with can be the generational poor,  because they are used to living on the social services system, and thus can sometimes appear to be demanding.  The staff pray daily to keep an unbiased attitude and open heart toward this population, who have deep and real needs.
As I listened to the story of Open Arms, I found myself remembering Jesus’ comment that “the poor will be with us always.” This statement occurred to me as I was pondering how we could structure a system that wouldn’t enable people to skate along in poverty but would encourage Open Arms at ESR Common Mealthem towards independence and fuller life. Then I realized, that as it was impossible to engineer the Tower of Babel, so it’s impossible to structure a perfect human system, much as we might long for a shalom world where God’s abundance is distributed such that every person has enough.  So for the people who are left at the bottom, scraping along to survive inadequately, we need to offer help and compassion, not condemnation.  As seminary students, sometimes caught up in the intellectual realms, it’s also good to have a stream of reminders from places like Open Arms of faith in practice and of missional opportunities in our own community and around the world.
Open Arms is also aware of the fine line it walks between counseling people to adjust to straitened circumstances and the issue of addressing structural problems that are causing an upsurge in poverty. While an attitude of gratitude is helpful, acquiescing to a new normal in which poverty is acceptable is counterproductive.  In addition to giving or receiving charity, people need to be talking to Washington.
Ministries like Open Arms that address the whole person, spiritual and emotional as well as financial, fill an important and urgent social role. George noted that when poor people, who could be any of us, receive dignity and respect, they are more likely to give back to the system that helped them. She said that the woman whose family received Christmas gifts “paid it forward” by leaving a bread maker on the Open Arms doorstep, hoping it could be used by someone else in need.
Open Arms can use both monetary donations and volunteers. They can be contacted via their website, and they are always open to phone calls or visitors.

Diane Reynolds is a student in Earlham School of Religion’s Master of Divinity program. She maintains a personal blog, Emerging Quaker.

Monday, March 7, 2011

Leadership Formation at ESR

By Jim Higginbotham

I believe that a good leader attempts to respond in a relatively less-anxious manner to the powerful dynamics of an organization's system. When a group begins running around like they're rearranging chairs on the deck of what seems like a sinking ship, instead of trying to direct people over the howling winds (as the group expects), a leader might simply sit down on one of the chairs in the middle of the deck. Even if we can't calm the winds like Jesus did when his followers were panicked in the storm, we can exhibit peacefulness when others are overwhelmed.

As the above image implies, I believe that becoming a good leader is a product of spiritual formation. Only when we are well-connected to theCarving Pumpkins at ESR depth of who we are created to be can we live less reactively (among other important qualities of a good leader). Jesus' ability to inspire and empower his followers was directly connected to his depth of spirituality. He constantly went away to pray before important events in his life. Similarly, we need strength from a Source that will help us to face challenges less afraid and not anxiously respond to the pressures that a group places upon us. In other words, we can not act peacefully if we do not possess peace.

This spiritual formation requires self-awareness and a willingness to open ourselves up to a transforming Spirit. Although the Gospels seem to portray that Jesus developed his own spirituality, if this picture is completely accurate, it was only due to his unique relationship with God. We need others to help us understand our strengths and growing edges as well as to connect to the power of the Spirit. That is one of the primary reasons that Earlham School of Religion focuses our program on spiritual formation; it is a corporate activity that can't be done only in isolation. We need to worship and pray together to find our spiritual center. When we are vulnerable with spiritual friends and others whom we can trust, they Jodi and Shelley - Friends at ESRcan help us to recognize our gifts and the areas in us that need to be transformed. Usually, hidden parts of our soul are the source of our anxious reactions to others.

For example, a goodhearted person might sometimes rescue others when they don't need so much help because s/he is uncomfortable with seeing people struggle. A hidden part that this person might need to discover is that s/he feels responsible for others' pain even if s/he hasn't contributed to it. This person takes responsibility for the struggles and thus robs others of the chance to grow from facing their own challenges. Such over-responsibility is not just a personal foible, but it is also a spiritual issue. This hypothetical person needs to learn to turn their concern over to a Comforter that can empower others in their struggles. If we believe that there is a power greater than ourselves, we must learn to trust this Spirit. It can be difficult when we feel uncomfortable, but having faith that God will be present frees us to do what we do best and allow others to use their strengths and gifts as well.

Obviously, leadership requires knowledge and many kinds of skills which seminary helps to develop. ESR's program is based in spiritual formation, because the world needs leaders formed in faith.

Jim HigginbothamJim Higginbotham is Assistant Professor of Pastoral Care at Earlham School of Religion. He live in Indianapolis.

Friday, March 4, 2011

Authority and Love

By Dortha Meredith

John 15 tells us that God is the vinegrower. Jesus is the vine. We are the branches. God is the gardener, tends the vine and the branches. Jesus is the vine. We are the branches that bear fruit. The sap that runs through the vine and the branches is Love. We are called to Love God our gardener, love Jesus and ourselves so that we can love our neighbor. So far this sounds quite simple. But as human beings we soon discover that life isn’t that simple. In fact, it rarely is. Let me illustrate that with a situation that has been on my mind over the past several months.

There has been a lot of talk about authority and submission in discussions between Indiana Yearly Meeting and its Monthly Meetings in the past few years. It is a topic that comes up from time to time – it seems especially when one or the other is in disagreement with actions the other has taken. A few years ago there was a small group of meetings who wanted the yearly meeting to change our Faith and Practice to allow meetings to use the elements of water and bread and wine (probably really grape juice) in the sacraments of baptism and communion. Before that, there was a movement within the yearly meeting to state that homosexuality was a sin. Recently, a question has arisen and has been accompanied by an argument between some Meetings and the Yearly Meeting about whether the Monthly Meetings should submit toIndiana Yearly Meeting Office the Yearly Meeting or whether the Meetings and the Yearly Meeting should submit mutually each to the other. 

Surrounding all this is the question about authority and who has authority over whom.  What does authority mean? Our Faith and Practice says this about authority: “The Yearly Meeting exercises such power and authority granted to it by its members in annual session.” To me this says that whatever power and authority the Yearly Meeting has is granted by its members. There is mutuality built in here.

Our Faith and Practice also cites this on the topic of subordination: “Subordination as used in this Faith and Practice does not describe a hierarchy but rather a means, under divine leadership, of common protection between IYM and its Quarterly and Monthly Meetings. It is a relationship among Friends ‘submitting themselves to one another in the fear of God’ (Ephesians 5:21). In the spirit of Christ who ‘humbled himself and became obedient unto death’ each member, each monthly meeting, each quarterly meeting and the Yearly Meeting submits to each other in the love of Christ. Subordination is the assurance that no monthly meeting is alone, autonomous or independent.

“Thus Monthly Meetings recognize the legitimate role of the Yearly Meeting in speaking and acting for the combined membership. Likewise the Yearly Meeting recognizes the freedom of Monthly Meetings and the validity of their prophetic voices. Each needs the other in order to be Indiana Yearly Meeting Faith and Practicestrong and vital, and both need the mediation of Christ and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.” 

I think there is room for love to grow in an environment where there is mutual respect – that acknowledges divine leadership that speaks to individuals as well as organizations. That speaks of submitting to one another in the fear (awe) of God. 

I should not leave you with the impression that everyone in Indiana Yearly Meeting interprets our Faith and Practice the same way I present it here - and that is the cause of recent conflict and disturbance in the Yearly Meeting. Some folks think that authority is one dimensional and top-down; whereas Quakers have traditionally organized themselves in the opposite direction from the bottom up - beginning with the Monthly Meeting and ending with the yearly meeting. As it is stated in the front of our book of discipline, “Indiana Yearly Meeting is a uniting of Monthly Meetings who have come together to work and witness in the name of Christ. We seek to do cooperatively the tasks which can best be done together.” The Yearly Meeting is established to do what individual meetings cannot do alone. 

Without love, the whole question of authority becomes slavery. We can submit to each other if we love and trust each other. Mutual respect creates an atmosphere of trust that allows love to flow. We must allow God the gardener to tend our vines and branches so that we will bear fruit for a hungry world.

Dortha MeredithDortha Meredith is a recorded minister in Indiana Yearly Meeting and has served as pastor at Williamsburg Friends Meeting. She also has been a member of team ministry at West Richmond and First Friends. She is now retired from Earlham College where she served as director of the Newlin Center for Quaker Thought and Practice and as Exec. Sec. of the Peace Studies Association. She also worked at Friends United Meeting with Harold Smuck in Wider Ministries.

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Festival of Friends meets in Richmond

By Valerie Hurwitz

On Saturday, February 26, 2011, the Festival of Friends took place at First Friends Meeting House in Richmond, Festival of Friends at Richmond First Friends Meeting HouseIN.  These gatherings began a year ago with the purpose of allowing Friends from different yearly meetings to gathering and worship together.  There are no business sessions and no agenda, other than to enjoy each other’s company.  The gathering on Saturday night drew Friends from Western Yearly Meeting (FUM), Indiana Yearly Meeting (FUM), and Ohio Valley Yearly Meeting (FGC).  Though this is the first time the Festival of Friends is in Richmond, it took place last summer and the winter before at Indianapolis First Friends.

I was there ostensibly as the choir director.  I usually direct the West Richmond Friends choir, and we rehearsed with the First Friends (Richmond) choir to sing two songs during the worship service.  Worship began with singing hymns, and then a member of the planning committee explained what he hopes is accomplished by these gatherings.  As some of the local Yearly Folks lining up for food at Festival of FriendsMeetings have experienced tension lately, a group of Indiana Friends decided to plan these gatherings to build connections and understanding between meetings.
After a choir piece, ESR students Emma Condori and Evelyn Jadin got up to speak about the book Spirit Rising. Spirit Rising is a collection of writing and visual art by young Quakers from across the world and across the theological spectrum of Friends.  Evelyn and Emma have been involved as editors in this project, and shared some common themes.  They spoke of the work young Friends have done in gathering together, listening to each other, looking for what they have in common, and trying to better understand their theological differences.  I would encourage you to read this book!

One of the interesting parts about their talk was that much of their audience was *ahem* an older generation of Quakerism.  Did this older generation try to reach across branches of Quakerism and bridge theological and liturgical differences?  What happened?  Are projects likeTable fellowship at Festival of Friends the worldwide YAF gatherings (in England in 2005, Richmond, Indiana in 2008, and Wichita, Kansas in 2010) merely a reflection of youthful idealism, or can they  create a convergent Quakerism for the twenty-first century?  What does that convergent Quakerism look like?  These questions rose up during the open worship that followed.  Several spoke about wanting to share their stories with Young Adult Friends, and the difficulties and hurt that some carry from trying to reach across boundaries in their own time.   Open worship ended, to me, on a meaningful note: “Who are we to tell Young Adult Friends that they won’t be able to form and nurture these connections?  Maybe they will.”
In every organization and every community, there is a natural and healthy balancing act between wanting to keeps things the way they are and wanting to change and try new things.  Change for the sake of change is as damaging as just wanting to keep things the way they’ve always been.  One of the tasks of leadership is to understand what to keep and what to change.  This is not a unitary process, as the same thing may be kept in one setting and changed in another, and different leaders may honestly disagree.

Worship was followed by a meal and then a concert by the Earlham College Gospel Revelations choir.  Katie Terrell, communications editor of Quaker Life magazine, brought copies of Spirit Rising to sell, and Paulette Meier (from Cincinnati and a member of Ohio Valley YM) brought CDs of her music (http://www.lessonsongs.com/).  Connections, in my opinion, are best formed over meals.

Quakerism is not my faith tradition, and for those of you that do not have a Quaker background, some of the above might have looked like aSpanning generations at Festival of Friends jumbled alphabet soup (FGC?  FUM?).  Suffice it to say that there are different branches of Quakerism that include a range of worship practices and theological views.  Like the person at the family reunion that you look at and question, “Am I really related to this person?”, the different branches of Quakerism sometimes look at one another in confusion, thinking “Do we really share theological DNA?”  What I admire about Quakers is that there is some historical sense of what it means to be Quaker, aided by the small size of the community in comparison to mainline Protestant denominations.  In one sense, it may seem like a tenuous tie that different branches of Quakerism claim the same first generation of ministers, writers, and evangelizers, but in another sense that is an enormous connection.

I am curious to hear the thoughts of others: For anyone else who was at the Festival of Friends, what was striking to you about the gathering?  Do you have any thoughts about Spirit Rising?  Do you think that modern convergent Quakerism is something new and different?  What does a convergent Quakerism look like?  How do we balance youthful idealism and energy with the knowledge that comes with experience?  Could you imagine an event like this in your local area? 

Valerie HurwitzValerie Hurwitz is Director of Recruitment and Admissions at Earlham School of Religion. She lives in Richmond, Indiana and serves as choir director at West Richmond Friends Meeting.