quakers: A statement of Quagans

jeanne_d_arc (

jeanne_d_arc) wrote in

quakers,
@ 2008-05-02 14:25:00

A statement of Quagans
I have placed in the first comment to this post a statement of Quaker Pagans. It's long(ish), so I didn't put the whole thing in this post. Please read it.

(Post a new comment)

jeanne_d_arc
2008-05-02 06:29 pm UTC (link)

A Statement on Pagan Quakerism
Part 1

Quaker Pagans are Friends who worship ancient deities, Nature and the Earth. Quaker Pagans believe in and follow Friends Testimonies, worship in the manner of Friends and are usually member or attendees of Friends Meetings, including Ann Arbor Friends Meeting; yet Pagan Friends find the Divine in Nature in addition to or instead of in Jehovah and Jesus.
About 1.8% of FGC Friends in North America identify as Pagan or have expressed interest in Pagan Quakerism; many more Friends value the experience of the Divine through Nature. Many of us formally meet during FGC Summer Gathering. We also have an international Yahoo listserv with 75 members.
“Pagans” include or can include those who identify as Wiccan, Druid, Asatru, Santarian, and Hindu, as well as those who follow Native American spirituality, Goddess spirituality, pantheism, Shamanism, Animism and various Nature-based or traditional religions. “Pagan” is a broad, inclusive, umbrella term. It is a term that people choose for themselves as an identity, rather than one pushed upon them.
Quaker Pagans neither need nor want anyone’s approval. We would however, appreciate other Friends’ acceptance of us as part of the Religious Society of Friends’ diverse community. We exist whether or not anyone formally recognizes us.

(Reply to this)

jeanne_d_arc
2008-05-02 06:30 pm UTC (link)

Part 2

We would also like to emphasize that we are not against Christians or Christianity. We celebrate the joy that Christians find in Jesus and do not seek to censure their expression of their faith. We hope that other Friends can show us the same appreciation.
Pagan Friends are not trying to change the Religious Society of Friends nor its form of worship or identity. We exist and we are part of the community, but we have no interest in changing others’ views. We hope that other Friends will respect us and our beliefs as we respect theirs.
Calling ourselves Pagan Quakers is not about having “dual membership” anywhere but rather is about accurately describing our beliefs. Just as George Fox found a spiritual path that spoke to his condition, so have we. Unlike Fox, we are not interested in proselytizing. We do seek to live the equality and integrity testimonies within our own spiritual home. To keep our spiritual path secret, to not identify ourselves, is to act as if our path is shameful. Furthermore, to stay in the closet about who we are is to allow others to assume we are part of the majority; not to correct such an inaccurate assumption is to allow a lie of omission, which is not in accordance with the integrity testimony. To ask us not to identify ourselves as Pagan Quakers is to create a double-standard and a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy within a Meeting: Christian Friends may identify themselves as such and speak about their spiritual paths but others may not. We do not hyphenate Pagan Quaker because it is not a conjunction of two religions but rather a precise and accurate description of who we are and how we experience the Divine. We do not have a “previous” religion to give up.
In our community-building work in the larger world of Friends, we as Pagan Friends have found that we have a great deal in common with committed Christian Friends, who seek to live as Jesus did. One of our areas of shared experience is other Friends’ discomfort when we explicitly name the Divine as we experience It. Christian Friends have told us of their experience of being asked not to speak explicitly of Jesus in their ministry or their conversation. They have likened that experience to ours of being asked not to speak of, for example, the Goddess. Some Christian Friends have also told us of their experiences of being informed that explicit Christianity does not belong in their Meeting, echoing our own experiences when we have been told that Paganism does not belong in our Meetings.

(Reply to this)

jeanne_d_arc
2008-05-02 06:30 pm UTC (link)

Part 3
Some Friends assume that we do not know that Quakerism is, generally speaking, a form of Christian Protestantism. Actually, as minorities within Quakerism, we are all too aware of this. We are fully aware of Quaker history and the fact that George Fox and the other early Friends very much considered themselves Christians. Yet some key differences exist between Quakers and other Protestants, including that Quakers believed then (and now) in continuing revelation, that we learn more of the truth as we live. So, is it not possible that Pagan Quakers have discovered their continued revelation? Furthermore, early Friends emphasized that the Inner Christ or Inner Light dwells in everyone, regardless of one’s gender, race, nationality, religion, etc. Cannot Quaker Pagans seek the Inner Light during Meeting for Worship just like our Christian sisters and brothers? Does it really matter by what name we call the Divine? We, too, have found a spiritual path that speaks to our condition and we no more need any individuals or organizations to moderate our relationship with the Divine than George Fox did.
If the Religious Society of Friends is only open to Christians, then it does indeed have a membership creed and should at least be honest about that, rather than calling itself a non-creedal religion. If we are truly non-creedal, then why not accept a diversity of beliefs? If Pagan Quakers are not “truly” Friends, then are Jewish Quakers, non-theist Friends or non-Christian Quakers in general “truly Friends”?
Some Friends have assumed that we know little or nothing of Quaker history. Actually, I have a degree in history. I wrote so many term papers on Quaker history that one professor ordered me to write about another subject—any other subject—in the future. I am a former member of Friends Historical Society and have visited such English historical sites as Lancaster, Swarthmore Hall, Pendle Hill and Morcambe Bay. I can quote George Fox, Margaret Fell, John Woolman, Lucretia Mott and others.
Some Friends believe we are intentionally being provocative. We can assure you this is not the case. Perhaps, some of that misunderstanding comes from our use of the word Pagan to describe ourselves and our experience of the Divine. The word “Pagan” comes from the Latin word for “country-dweller,” because people in rural areas were the last to convert to Christianity. Indeed “Pagan” comes from the same root as “peasant.” The word is an umbrella term to describe people who practice Earth- or Nature-based religions, Goddess spirituality, ancient or traditional religions and polytheism or pantheism. Please remember that this is a very broad, all encompassing definition. Individual Pagans may identify with all or parts of this description or perhaps none of it. There is as much diversity among Pagans as there is among Christians, so to assume that one Pagan’s identity, actions or beliefs are the same as another’s is as wrong as to believe that a description of Russian Orthodox Christianity would also accurately describe the Amish Church. When a Pagan Quaker speaks, she/he speaks only for herself/himself.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

tegdoh
2008-05-03 12:22 am UTC (link)

Maybe you could help me understand this one comment in particular: Some Friends assume that we do not know that Quakerism is, generally speaking, a form of Christian Protestantism. Actually, as minorities within Quakerism, we are all too aware of this.

Typically, the phrase "all too aware" indicates a negative connotation-as in, "As the mother of a child of color, I am all too aware of racism in this country."

In other words, you seem to be drawing a kind of parallel between Christianity in Quakerism and white privilege within the larger society.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	jeanne_d_arc 2008-05-05 03:56 pm UTC (link)
	In the United States, Christians are by far the majority and so do have priviledge. In some ways in parallels Euro-American priviledge. I cannot begin to tell you the number of times I have been harassed for not being Christian. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

tegdoh
2008-05-05 06:45 pm UTC (link)

But we are not talking about being a non-Christian from within Quakerism, not the larger U.S. society. I don't understand the objection to "Christian privilege" within the context of a Christian religious society.

I sincerely hope you have never been harassed in Meeting, and honestly can't imagine it happening in any of the Meetings I have attended. But I do wonder what form unprogrammed Quakerism is going to take over the next few decades. Will Christianity still be central, or will it just be another one of many religious traditions that call themselves Friends? Will we become essentially another form of Universalism, one that worships in silence?

(and for what its worth, most Quakers would argue that Quakerism is not a form of Protestantism, but rather a close cousin to the anabaptist movement.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)

jeanne_d_arc
2008-05-02 06:30 pm UTC (link)

Part 4

So why use the word Pagan if some people might misunderstand it? Because it is the best word available given the diversity of beliefs. Remember that after World War II, many Holocaust survivors moved to North America and hid the fact that they were Jewish, going so far as to attend Protestant Churches and never reveal the truth to their own children. Yet it is unlikely that any Friends today would ask Jews to hide their true identity or call themselves by another name just because of the shame and prejudice placed upon Jews by others. Remember also that the term “Quaker” was once considered an insult but early Friends did not let that deter them from speaking their truth. Instead, they adopted the formerly derogatory name for themselves.
Pagans do not worship nor consort with devils or demons; indeed, how could anyone worship or consort with imaginary beings that do not really exist? We do not sacrifice animals nor commit violence in any form. We see the Divine in Nature and all living beings, including all people. Pagan Quakers believe in Peace as much as other Friends.
Some Friends might find the idea of Paganism uncomfortable because of statements in the Bible. We believe that biblical descriptions of Pagans and Paganism contain as much bias as some early Christian writings contain bias against Jews. We would also encourage Friends to remember that Jesus interacted with people who were not of his religious or ethnic group. He broke religious laws by eating meals with slaves, women, prostitutes, tax-collectors and others who were considered lowly in that society. Can Christians today be as open minded as Jesus himself was? The story of the Good Samaritan, which Jesus used to illustrate the admonition to “Love thy neighbor as thyself,” is about someone who was not Jewish but who nonetheless acted kindly towards a Jew in need.
This leads us to ask what the Religious Society of Friends is really about and what Quakerism really means. I would say that Quakerism is really about providing a place for us all to find and travel our own spiritual paths and learn from each other through our diversity. We come together in Meeting for Worship in order to share that spiritual experience and support each other in what can at times be a joyful or difficult journey. Quakerism is about continuing revelation, about connecting with the Inner Light and living our common testimonies of peace, simplicity, equality, integrity and community. We hope the Meeting can practice these same testimonies in its treatment of its own members and attendees. We hope that the Religious Society of Friends is a place that can accept us as we are.

(Reply to this)

capriuni
2008-05-02 07:27 pm UTC (link)

Furthermore, early Friends emphasized that the Inner Christ or Inner Light dwells in everyone, regardless of one’s gender, race, nationality, religion, etc.

It was through meditating on this basic, and fundamental, Testimony that first led me to the point where I could call myself a Pagan Quaker, for, in the centuries since Fox, we have come to expand our understanding of consciousness to include animals and also plants. If the Light of God is within every human person, regardless of catagory (even among the mute and cognitively disabled), I asked myself, why should we automatically exclude the Inner Light from the experience of non-human persons, and thereby struggle for justice on their behalf, as we do for fellow humans?

Simply asking myself that question led me to see the Divine in all of nature. I did not know, until many years later, that this idea let me stand under the "Pagan Umbrella."

(Reply to this)

sammka
2008-05-02 09:38 pm UTC (link)

I have been thinking about this issue for a long time. I think that my concern about non-Christian Quakers is not because I don't support people following their faith where it goes, but rather preserving a space for Christian Quakers. Christian Quakers do appreciate communicating productively with non-Christians, but this is something that we do all the other days of the week.

Sometimes we just want to be with people who share our beliefs, and we see Christ as a core belief, not a marginal one. I think a lot of religions have important things in common, and that's important to respect, but that doesn't make them the same or their beliefs the same. I find that in extremely theologically diverse Meetings, people have this sense that they should express their messages in the most universalist terms possible so as to communicate effectively with others at the Meeting and possibly avoid offending people. But the thing I like about Christianity - and that I liked about paganism, too, when I was a pagan - is that understanding God in terms of a common canon of characters and stories gives us a rich spiritual symbolism, and that symbolism gets lost when people talk in very general, abstract terms about the Inner Light. It is more difficult for messages to speak to me emotionally when they are phrased in this way, and I get very little out of Meeting.

(Reply to this)

stori_lundi
2008-05-02 10:50 pm UTC (link)

My only problem is that from my experience, only Pagans have chosen to identify themselves as *Pagan* Quakers. My meeting is very diverse and we definitely have Quakers who are not Christian yet everyone calls themselves "Quaker". I'm more deist than Christian yet I don't call myself a "Deist Quaker". Likewise our Taoism, Sufi, and Buddhist members don't self-identify as X Quaker so I'm wondering why Pagan Quakers have purposefully singled themselves out like. It's almost like a challenge to the community to say, "Hey, we're here!! What are you going to do about it?"

(Reply to this)(Thread)

kibbles
2008-05-03 01:22 am UTC (link)

I knew one Jewish person who did the Quaker and thing. But yeah I see the Pagan thing. But then I also see it online more. I know that one of the things that distanced me from the Pagan community WHEN I was Pagan, was the internet. I was happy as a clam with my local community (NYC, so nice sized, and diverse) but then once I got online (95 and on) things changed. My local people were mostly still the same, but there was a lot more challenging going on. A lot of attacking of outsiders. A lot of dogma, a lot of baggage. It's not the only reason (obviously) that I changed faiths but it really did put a tarnish on it, for me.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	jeanne_d_arc 2008-05-05 04:00 pm UTC (link)
	There are several Jewish Quakers in my Meeting who openly identify as such. To me, it's like identifying as an unprogramemd Friend or FGC Friend or Hicksite Friend. I've found that being open as a Quagan is much like being open as a Lesbian. I'm not singling myself out or asking to be attacked. Instead, I'm living truthfully, rather than hiding. (Reply to this)(Parent)

tegdoh
2008-05-03 12:18 am UTC (link)

It seems as though what you are saying is that you have found one or two elements of Quakerism that you appreciate. But there is more to Quakerism than silent worship and Testimonies. For instance, Quakers have long rejected ritual and other "outward signs of inward devotion." Yet my understanding of most pagan religions is that ritual is very important, if not central to worship. How can these two very different philosophical underpinnings about spirituality be reconciled? Would it not make more sense to incorporate that which you find resonates within Quakerism into your pagan rituals, rather than vise versa?

I agree with

sammka that Christianity is a core element of Quakerism. The stories and traditions of Christianity are important to me, and I want my children to be raised in that tradition. What happens, though, when the Meeting we attend no longer holds those traditions as central? Are we destined to become UUs that hold silent worship?

I hope that all spiritual seekers can feel welcome in Meeting. But I wonder sometimes what we mean these days when we call ourselves "Quakers." I understand that you have tried to explain that in your post. I'm just not sure I can find common ground with you on this issue.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

kibbles
2008-05-03 01:24 am UTC (link)

That's what confused me too. To me, it's like Catholic Quaker, or Orthodox Quaker! When I was Pagan, and even in interfaith Pagan groups, there was a LOT of ritual. Sometimes I think that I went from Catholicism to Paganism because at least I still have heavy ritual to lean on. And then I wonder if one of the appeals of Quakerism to me was the lack of ritual, after decades of it coloring my life for so long.

There is a lot that overlaps, true, but a lot that seems to conflict. I should be all open minded and say "Well, I don't care, whatever floats your boat" but where do we draw the line, if at all? When will it cease to be Quakerism, and turn into a bunch of quiet people who hang out on Sundays and are really nice?

Edited at 2008-05-03 01:24 am UTC

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	simienwolf 2008-05-03 07:00 am UTC (link)
	a bunch of quiet people who hang out on Sundays and are really nice? LOL. Sometimes when pressured to define Quakerism, I've found this description quite tempting. :P (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

kibbles
2008-05-04 02:03 am UTC (link)

Don't forget the potlucks!

When I moved to this area, after the conveners heard we were living in a hotel, they said "don't know you, but PLEASE let us have you over for dinner".

And then as soon as humanly possible, they made sure there was a potluck after Meeting (the next or the one after that). Because nothing says WELCOME in the Midwest, and in a Quaker group, like a POTLUCK.

I love it. I really do. :)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

stafferchick
2008-05-04 02:50 am UTC (link)

seriously.

though, in central Indiana, we called them "carry in dinners"....
but I got used to the term potluck from being around the mennonites.

.. which the menno community up here... potlucks every monday night (different ones too! the break into different groups)... and then also the monthly potluck...

one thing I'm looking forward to about the local Meeting: pancake breakfast AND potluck. :)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	kibbles 2008-05-04 02:57 am UTC (link)
	We never really had this stuff in Brooklyn. Now we're too small for stuff like the pancake bfasts but other churches do. And spaghetti dinners, and since my town is overwhelmingly Catholic? FISH FRYS ON FRIDAY. I see more fish around here than I did living near the fishing boats in Brooklyn. Of course, it's mostly catfish... (Reply to this)(Parent)

	flynd 2008-05-04 03:06 am UTC (link)
	Man, I could go for a potluck right now. :o) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

kibbles
2008-05-04 03:12 am UTC (link)

Me too, it's been a long winter and transportation to our group has been sketchy for me, so I haven't seen much of everyone, I could use that.

Best thing. First day of college in TWENTY YEARS (almost)and one of the guys from Meeting teaches there. He was one of the people who invited us over for dinner, living in the hotel. Just opened up their lives for poor us, it was beautiful.

He asked what I was doing there (I was sitting waiting for the shuttle to the other campus) and I said "oh it's my first day, yada yada yada" I probably looked like I was going to puke all over the place.

He said "you look like you need a hug" and put his arms out and I was like AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH it was brilliant.

We're tiny, I think there are 20 Quakers in Dubuque tops (or so it seems), I been in Meeting for Worship with 6 people in it, but I LOVE IT, and I LOVE THEM so much. :D

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	flynd 2008-05-04 02:03 pm UTC (link)
	Many congratulations for going to college! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Thanks! kibbles 2008-05-04 03:45 pm UTC (link)
	I am having the time of my life at college! I had tried after high school, and it wasn't nearly as much fun. I am GIDDY, some days. usually the days without public speaking, though. ;) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Thanks! flynd 2008-05-07 03:10 am UTC (link)
	I did NOT enjoy college-after-highschool, but now I'm aching to go back ... I love being a student. I'm not a good one, but I love to learn. Public speaking doesn't bother me in the least - isn't that funny? (Reply to this)(Parent)

king_laugh
2008-05-03 09:02 am UTC (link)

For instance, Quakers have long rejected ritual and other "outward signs of inward devotion."

Well, no. My understanding is that Quakerism rejects the religious importance of ritual, but ritual is by no means prohibited. I still cross myself sometimes, as I was raised Catholic, and it is a ritual that connects deeply with my childhood understanding of faith. But as a Quaker I now recognise that it is a ritual which means something to me, and is important only insofar as it means something to me. Ritual or the lack thereof doesn't mean much to God - or, rather, makes no difference to the value of prayer from His point of view. Which still makes it hard to understand why a Pagan would want to be a Quaker: to Pagans, as I understand it, ritual actually does stuff in and of itself.

I also see God as a central part of worship. And I find that pretty non-negotiable: not nebulous concepts like "the Devine", but the one and only monotheist true God. And Christ, His son. I'm not sure that my view on this is more valid than anyone elses, though, and feel I need to learn a lot more about Quakerism before I reach a solid opinion.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

flynd
2008-05-04 03:02 am UTC (link)

to Pagans, as I understand it, ritual actually does stuff in and of itself.

As I understand it, ritual to Pagans is a method of prayer. They believe that it can help control energy, as well as giving the body something to do so the spirit can commune. Pagans may pray, too, of course.

I look on pagan ritual as kin to Quaker ritual. Pagans may create a circle on Sabbat; Quakers sit silently in pews on Sunday.
Every Quaker I've spoken to believes that Meeting is an integral part of the Quaker experience - implying that it does something - and it's certainly ritualized. Not as tightly regimented as Catholic ritual, but there is surely protocal.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	kibbles 2008-05-04 03:14 am UTC (link)
	I've partaken in all 3 you mentioned, and I do think that Pagan ritual is more specialized as Quaker process. Catholic is somewhere in the middle. It may be more ritualistic, but less specific. Quakerism, to me, is the least of both. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

flynd
2008-05-04 03:40 am UTC (link)

Oh, I agree they aren't equally ritualized.

king_laugh stated that Quakers '[reject] the religious importance of ritual'; I disagree. They place less importance on it (although the emphasized lack-of-ritual is, in itself, a form of ritualized experience).
Ritual might not mean anything to god, but it certainly means something to the Quakers.

Which isn't bad. I frankly love ritual. And as humans, we're more or less pre-programmed into forming and re-forming rituals. They comfort us.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

kibbles
2008-05-04 03:47 am UTC (link)

I specifically chose unprogrammed worship (in NYC they had both) because I do NOT want ritual. Not in my religion. I actually avoid as much ritual in my life as possible, although there are some that I am looking forward to (i.e. getting 'pinned' when I graduate). They do not comfort me, usually. When you come from such an extensive ritualistic background (Catholicism then Paganism) you may find that the ritual loses meaning. There is no comfort when there is no meaning. At one point it did, yes, but not any more. Personally defined ones work better for me too (headcovering, but even then I go uncovered before it becomes meaningless, or a crutch).

It's really hard because there are a few reasons I want to leave Quakerism (the dilution of it, the classism, the elitism)but nothing else is like unprogrammed worship, to me. I do, however, find my comfort in tradition, go figure. Six of one, half a dozen of the other, I suppose.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

flynd
2008-05-04 02:20 pm UTC (link)

I think the comfort is in knowing what to do, not having to think. I absolutely don't want that in all areas of my life, but in some - mundane things, like morning rituals of teeth-brushing and saying goodbye - it's good, it's peaceful, to have a set pattern of ways. For the extreme moments of life, too, it can be a comfort to know what to do. When someone dies, we have ritual to know how to act. It's a confimation, of sorts; a formulated act to reiterate that this happened.
Without church, some people wouldn't know it was Sunday.

That said. Ritual has to be meaningful, or it's just habit. Too often when ritual is 'led' by someone (eg. priest), it becomes just a set of rules to follow.

... I just read a bit of your journal & I'm annoyed that we don't live anywhere near one another - I'd like to attend your Meetings.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

kibbles
2008-05-04 03:41 pm UTC (link)

They're lovely, and The people here give me warm fuzzies. It's a great place to live, although you just missed the locked post about THE CRAZIES ACROSS THE STREET and I will have another about THE CRAZIES NEXT DOOR. But we had the first outdoor Farmer's Market yesterday and just seeing everyone after the long winter all happy to see each other, and chatting, and hugging, and it was just so dorkily wonderful. After coming from NYC, it's refreshing. I'm studying nursing here and everyone asks if I will leave once I get my RN, and I won't. I like it too much, here.

Now that all made me think, my major and your comment, asbout where I am being led to, I think, with school. Hospice or geriatrics. About the things that comfort people at the end. Was thinking about how we put an emphasis (and yes it is VERY important) on making giving birth a sacred and comfortable process. We should do the same on the way out, too. Ritual can help with that, I think.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	flynd 2008-05-07 03:14 am UTC (link)
	It's great to find a place you belong! And I admire your interest in geriatrics/hospice care - it must be an intense and difficult, although gratifying, field. (Reply to this)(Parent)

jeanne_d_arc
2008-05-05 04:03 pm UTC (link)

If Quakers reject ritual and outward signs of devotion, then are Programmed/Pastoral Friends still Quakers?
Some Pagans will tell you that ritual is important to worship, but I'm not one of them. For me, I find silent Quaker worship to be what's most spiritually nourishing. I can feel the Divine Spirit when I worship. Often I feel it coming from the Earth itself and wrapping around us as we worship.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

stafferchick
2008-05-05 08:30 pm UTC (link)

I don't see singing or listening to a message as a ritual.

(in my experience)
That seemed to be the only difference -- well, and we took an offering, but that's because no one thought to just put a box somewhere for collection...

In the unprogrammed meeting I'm attending now... there's a second hour -- a Meeting for Learning... it's facilitated by a member, and from what I'm told others participate in the discussion.. And they have an opportunity for singing together before Meeting for Worship.

looking back on it now, the main difference I'm seeing is that our time of silent worship is 1/2 as long, and everyone participates in singing and we generally we listen to the message rather than treat it as an open discussion...

In the unprogrammed meetings I've been to, the silent worship is still the main part of the Meeting for Worship.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	stafferchick 2008-05-05 08:56 pm UTC (link)
	and -- as I'm sure has been mentioned.... ... the "rejection" of rituals is mainly due to the fact of experiencing the God in all aspects of life. basically rituals aren't necessary for experiencing God's revelation. Just as we don't need a mediator (such as a priest to confess to, et cetera) to experience it either. (Reply to this)(Parent)

diegoliger
2008-05-06 04:04 pm UTC (link)

Stop me if I'm wrong, but Quakers as Christian Protestants, not Pagans?

We experience God through the God within each of us, through seeing and experiencing God in all aspects of our life; there is a variety in how we worship with meeting in silence and prayer until the spirit moves us to give testimony or more formal worship with songs and readings (at my Meeting we have meeting in the mornig and a service of sorts in the evening with singing). Rejection of Ritual are those of the Anglican or Roman Liturgy,witih emphasis on Priests, regalia, ritual for the revelation and experience of God, God's revelation being through the Word etc. Seeing the Priestly "caste" as corrupt (very Purtianical in view really).

As Quakers we are Christians - yes we can learn from the experiences of others who may or may not be Christian - but as Christians we believe in One God and One Mediator between Heaven and Earth, Jesus Christ.

Some meetings are getting a bit like the Unitarians have gone in the US and are going in the UK - believe what you like, build your own theology be a pagan, atheist, humanist, deist etc (but not Christian). etc.

(Reply to this)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…