|
Friends United Meeting |
 |
Quaker Life
November 2002
350 Years of Quakerism—
Now What?
Don't Be Afraid of the Future!
By John Punshon
England
The London Times is noted for the comical topics sometimes discussed in its letters page — the origins of Yorkshire pudding, the names of butterflies, whether the proverb 'a stitch in time saves nine' occurs in Babylonian cuneiform — that sort of thing. One of the most intriguing I can remember was actually pursued for some time, and it was whether there was an unpreachable text in the Bible. The most plausible answer, as I remember, was Deuteronomy 19:14: "Thou shalt not remove thy neighbor's landmark..."
I actually adopted the challenge of the unpreachable text some years ago, to celebrate the opening of the new bell tower at George Fox College, now George Fox University. I had been asked to bring the message at North Valley Friends (the Newberg Church with the wonderful, swiftly rising spire that looks like a spacecraft and a capacious porte cochre, though they don't call it that) and I am afraid I took the opportunity, at their expense, to conduct the experiment.
It was easier than I imagined. In early Israel, the removal of a landmark signified theft. In effect, stealing land was stealing food, and possibly even a familys survival.
The new bells on campus were landmarks in the passage of God's time, which we are to use industriously (Ephesians 5:16). The landmarks of the soul are the events by which we recognize what God has done in our lives. We are not to move the landmarks in our own lives either.
Nor should we forget the collective landmarks within which we live. The family, the neighborhood, the school or college, the workplace, our particular religious community and the nation are all powerful forces shaping who we are. We may not like everything we inherit, and sometimes struggle against it, but these things are important influences on our identity, and we need to come to terms with them.
Not everything we inherit will be acceptable, of course, because we are independent people in our own right, and we live in the present and not the past. But at the same time we need to remember that to destroy one of the lessons of the past is to commit a crime against the future. Because we have no use for an idea, a practice, or an institution, it does not follow that those who come after may not. We all have a genetic heritage and aspects of our own physique and temperament will continue to manifest themselves in our descendents.
The same thing is true in religion. One can look at the history of the Church and interpret it as a process by which the gospel endures through the ages and in every one of them comes to terms with secular ways of thinking. Part of the excitement of theology is to see this happening, and to take part in the process in one's own times. But that is a secular way of looking at things. With a committed mind, one sees underlying this process the constant dialogue of Christians with one another, and the constant revival of certain common themes like the nature of conversion, how we should read the Bible and what is the nature of the Church itself.
This is the point about landmarks. Every movement of thought or reform stakes out a claim to Christian truth and usually makes some sort of claim about the significance of Christian history in doing so. This usually involves an attempt to redefine what faith and practice ought to be. Some movements, like Methodism, seek to work from within the body; some, like Quakerism, consciously rebel against it. Which course a body takes probably depends on the circumstances of the time, but it is undeniable that each of them takes up matters unjustifiably neglected by the larger Church of their times. Each has a significant and important place.
I have to say I am suspicious of anniversary-led speculations about what the future may hold. God will look after that. But we will only feature in His plans if we are faithful to the calling we have already been given. That is our task now — not to worship the past, but to keep the faith and move confidently into the future. By respecting our neighbour's landmarks, we remember where our own are, and like ancient Israel, will continue to be blessed. The text was not unpreachable after all. It appears to be about a prohibition, but it is in fact a message of hope.
A Living Message Requires Changes
By Wilmer Cooper
Richmond, Indiana
Forecasting the future of Quakerism is risky and uncertain. It is a little like forecasting the weather or the ups and downs of the stock market. It has of course been done before. An attempt was made in the autumn 1966 issue of Quaker Religious Thought (VIII, #2) entitled "The Future of Quakerism," edited by T. Canby Jones. The contributors included Church historian Roland Bainton at Yale (a Quaker fellow traveler whose wife was a Friend); Everett Cattell, a highly respected Evangelical Friend, then President of Malone College; and Maurice Creasey, director of Quaker Studies at Woodbrooke College in Birmingham, England. Later my 1990 volume, A Living Faith, ended with a chapter on "Quaker Assessment and Future Prospects." There have been surprises of course — who would have thought a century ago when Friends sent three missionaries to Kenya, East Africa, that a century later the number of Friends there would be equal to, or even exceed the number of Friends in North America, and perhaps even the rest of the world? But preoccupation with numbers alone may not be wise because it could simply be an early sign of our decline.
On the positive side there is something about Quakers which sets them apart as unique in the history of Christendom. Historically Quakerism is rooted in Biblical faith and the Christian tradition, which is not in itself unique but rather in the way it is experienced, lived out and proclaimed. More explicitly it is expressed in what Friends call the Quaker Testimonies. The Quaker Religious Testimonies arise from our experience of the Light of Christ within and the leading of the Holy Spirit. The application of this is in the Quaker Social Testimonies — Integrity, Simplicity, Equality, Community, and probably the best known of all, the Peace Testimony. Friends affirm the revelation of God in Jesus Christ but have not excluded other religious faiths and traditions. Friends have not always had unity on these matters so there have been divisions and separations that have plagued the Religious Society of Friends.
Early Friends were said to be so alive and vibrant in their religious faith that they not only "quaked" in their ministry but also "shook the world for ten miles around." I well remember as a boy that my father, who was a "dyed in the wool" plain dressed Friend, believed Friends should be able to "shake the world" in the same way today. But perhaps we need to place less emphasis on early Friends and search out what we are called to be and do as Friends to meet the needs of our generation. Tom Mullen often asks the intriguing question: what did the early Quakers do who didnt have any "early Friends" to rely upon? What we may need is to create new ways to articulate and embody our Quaker faith and practice — ways that we believe are authentic, timeless and enduring.
In 1990 when my "Quaker Assessment and Future Prospects" was written, I quoted Tom Brown, a good friend and gifted Quaker educator, who said: "Quakerism is here to stay but the Society of Friends may be expendable." What he meant was that the basic truth and essential elements of Quakerism are timeless and are here to stay, but the institutions that embrace them may need to go through a metamorphosis.
Another way to address our Quakerism for the future is to examine Scripture and the parable of wineskins in Mark 2:22. Phillip's translation says it best: "Nobody puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins, the wine spills and the skins are ruined. No, new wine must be put into new wineskins." This suggests that if Friends have a living message for today it could well require spiritual, institutional and organizational changes. Everett Cattell's analysis referred to earlier ends with another Scriptural metaphor — "The future of Friends may be like the grain of wheat which must fall into the ground and die. Perhaps this would be the way to a new harvest." (1996 QRT, p. 14).
In my life work I have been privileged to have had significant relationships with all branches of Friends. This has reached across the Quaker spectrum — liberal, conservative and evangelical. In recent years it is my observation that a growing number of Friends are becoming increasingly comfortable with "spirituality language" to express their Quaker faith and practice. Could this help us to bridge and heal our differences and draw us closer together? It seems to me this trend is most notable among liberal FGC Friends. Also, out of my Conservative Friends background I know they have always sought to increase spirituality in their faith and daily practice. And having been a member of and moved among FUM and Evangelical Friends I am convinced they too strive to be authentically spiritual. Yes, different words are used to express our leadings and our spirituality, and we need to examine carefully the substance thereof. Without such examination we may simply be sweeping our differences under the proverbial rug.
Copyright (c) 2002 Friends United Meeting
Return to November 2002 Contents page