Widening The Appeal Of Quakers And Embracing Non-christians

Summary of online discussion on QUG- widening the appeal of Quakers and embracing non Christians I've attending some discussions at Friends House in Euston recently in which possible ways of "updating" the Quakers and widening the appeal of Friends have been discussed. One thread to emerge has been the possible need to "loosen" Quakers links to Christianity and to more obviously embrace other faiths. This seems to clearly take mainsteam Quakers in the direction of Universalists. Do list members agree that this a good idea?? Peter Trethewey Do the Quakers need updating? While I don't disagree necessarily, It would be good to know what prompted this assumption. The same thing goes for "widening the appeal" of Quakers. The assumption appears to have been that the appeal needs widening, it's just the mechanism for doing so that needs sorting out? Finally, in terms of moving towards a more Universalist approach, I'd say that this describes my own position to a large extent but whether Universalism should become some form of creed within Quakerism , I'm less certain. Absolutely! I'm an attender but would consider membership of a more 'universalist' SoF. The Inward Light shines on, and is in, everyone whatever their religious tradition. There is a great book on this very subject, THE PURE PRINCIPLE, by Jim Pym. It addresses Quakerism reaching out to embrace other faiths and concrete steps which have been taken. What appeals to me about Quakerism is the tolerance extended to all faiths. I have always felt that one can follow almost any religion and still be a Quaker, although I realize that for many Friends Christianity is at the core of their faith. I confess to being a little sceptical about 'obviously´doing anything; It feels too prescriptive. I understand the wish to broaden the appeal of the Quaker way, but I do wonder if by being over-zealous it might not weaken the freedom of worship and become counter productive(?). I would think this an excellent idea. Naturally I can only speak for myself. If we could draw the attention of Friends to the Universalist Group this would be even better. Although I am interested in other faiths it seems to me that we need to find links and common ground rather than our differences and explore the deeper spirituality that we might find we can share. I love what you say about 'loosening' the links to Christianity and towards other faiths (and none)........and would be interested to know more about the discussions. I have gone to Quaker meetings once in a while over the years and enjoyed them and the Quaker message, except the sense that it is very linked to Christianity. BUT then I recently read about Quakers and Universalism and I felt hopeful! This also prompted me to go to meetings again, but what has struck me is the lack of diversity of people attending meetings - I live in a diverse city - in terms of

race and ethnicity, age etc but this doesn't appear to be reflected in meetings - I wonder if this a common issue for Quakers in the UK today? I am interested in the practical application of Universalism in spirituality and would love to hear more about this - inspired by the example of the QUG homepage of people of different faiths coming together in India to worship in the silence. Douglas V. Steere wrote a booklet MUTUAL IRRADIATION and Jim Pym has picked up on it in his PURE PRINCIPLE book, proposing an ecumenical approach to including faiths outside Christianity in our concept of the Inward Light. Different forms of meditation were also proposed by Pym, including even Transcendental Meditation! I think embracing the essence of other faiths is not only healthy but necessary. It fits the very concept of Universalism. It does not mean, of course, that we need to become Muslims or Jews. That is not what is meant by mutual irradiation. Rather, we all live in the Light and share in the beauty of that reality whatever our faith tradition might be. I like the link to Christianity. G K Chesterton was writing about Quakerism when he said: “Continuing a series on God and the human condition: That Jones shall worship the "god within him" turns out ultimately to mean that Jones shall worship Jones. Let Jones worship the sun or moon -anything rather than the Inner Light; let Jones worship cats or crocodiles, if he can find any in his street, but not the god within. Christianity came into the world firstly in order to assert with violence that a man had not only to look inwards, but to look outwards, to behold with astonishment and enthusiasm a divine company and a divine captain. The only fun of being a Christian was that a man wasnot left alone with the Inner Light, but definitely recognized an outer light, fair as the sun, clear as the moon, terrible as an army with banners.” So to talk about ‘loosening’ the links to Christianity is odd since for Quakers “the inner light” has usually referred to the inner light of Christ that we can know and experience in our meeting for worship. This idea of the Inner Light is crucial to Quakers and is God’s presence within us as a direct and a personal experience of God as Christ. The Inner light is thus objective and is not subjective. The universalism of Quakerism rests on the universalism of Jesus. The message of Jesus in the gospels is universalist. All of our testimonies come from this experience and without the inner Light of Christ there is no basis for our testimonies. Can there be a Quakerism without Jesus? I believe we can. Buddhist would call that inner light, the Buddha within. Hindus would probably call it God. I, myself, call it God. I believe that God is within us all, God is everywhere and in everything. I don't worship this God because I can't imagine doing so. But God may even be more than us, a Consciousness that created everything. Therefore, I don't believe that we are separate from God anymore than the birds that I hear singing out my window are separate from God. I also believe that when Christ said that he and his father were one, it is because he experienced the oneness in meditation, a oneness that Buddhist, Hindus, mystics, etc. have experienced. For this reason too, i don't believe that only Christ can be part of Quakerism. Quakers came about because a few broke links with the established church

At the time 'the country' was officially Christian. There might have been very little knowledge of other Faiths, if any. As we have travelled more we have come to know more about a multitude of other Faiths. Quakers believe there is that of God in everyone ....which makes a step to 'loosen' links and embrace other Faiths sound appropriate. Yes, I do think it suggest a move towards Universalists . As for whether it's a good idea I am not sure. Personally I would say yes, but on the other hand wonder if this would be a popular move? Faiths do seem to need to evolve, too. This can be difficult. When you say embrace other Faiths what would this mean? Embrace aspects of the ideology or more? My own belief is that Friends need to recognize and celebrate other religions while maintaining a somewhat unique perspective. The Dalai Lamai expressed it well. "I always believe that it is much better to have a variety of religions, a variety of philosophies, rather than one single religion or philosophy. This is necessary because of the different mental dispositions of each human being. Each religion has certain unique ideas or techniques, and learning about them can only enrich one's own faith." Early Friends said that "There is that of God ,,, in the Jew and the Turk." Turk was the term for Islam. Even in the seventeenth century there was recognition of the universal nature of God. However, the SOCIETY of Friends was formed, it seems to me, to be one perspective and not try to subsume all perspectives. I think there is power in the paradox of believing in the truth of (and belonging to) one group with a set of rather "unique ideas or techniques" and also believing that other groups with their own sets have the truth as well. If one looks at the very earliest Quaker writings, such as Isaac Penington, one sees a decidedly Christian orientation. Nevertheless, acknowledging that of God in all people was an important and for its time a radical concept. I don't think of early Friends as exclusivist at all but the foundational text for their movement was the Bible, specifically the King James Bible issued a half century earlier. It does not surprise me that the early friends said "that of God...in the Jew," since the Jewish scriptures became part of the Christian Bible and David's and Moses' God was the same God as the God of Jesus. But it was an extraordinary leap, I think, for them to include "the Turk", since Islam, while not rejecting the Bible, replaced it with the Qur'an. However, I believe the early Friends had the universal and expansive belief to recognize that of God in everyone regardless of belief. Give the newness of their movement, the early Friends were remarkably spiritually sophisticated and attuned. And they were profoundly committed to their belief regardless of persecutions. That is why I personally feel greatly refreshed to read the writings of Fox, Fell, Penington, and others. My knee-jerk reaction, as a pantheistic, polytheistic Pagan of many years' standing who has a lot of issues with mainstream Christianity is: I don't want Quakers to chuck out their ties to Christianity; I want them to make clear that Quakerism is not Churchianity, not yo mama's Christianity, but a church of radical inclusivity that challenges what is meant by "Christ" and "Christianity", shakes the meanings up and

makes them new for every person - regardless of where they stand in relation to mainstream Christianity. I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, I want modern Quakerism to be a radical church that encourages us to stretch our comfort zones, challenge our concepts of "god-talk", question exactly what our unease with mainstream religion is all about and where we're going. I want a vibrant, living tradition in which we are not afraid of each other's god-talk, where we learn from each other's differing attitudes to, understandings and experiences of God/Goddess/the Light/the Living Universe and Christ (whether as divine, son of God, great teacher, mythological figure) and all the other thousand and one strands of experiential spirituality we bring to each other. I want a tradition that is capable of looking to the future and living in the present because it understands its own past. I want a messy, scary, joyful, generous point of unity which does not need complete agreement but that trust, truth, and openness to change and growth in the Light that is the manifestation of genuine mysticism. I'm pretty damn sure my current understandings of God and Christ are not exactly orthodox (I don't believe that Jesus was an historical person, I don't believe that Yahweh is the Light but one of the filters through which we see it, but they fit really well into a polytheistic way of seeing the world), and that many Christians would be appalled at an initiated Wiccan who has an altar to Woden, the Morrighan, Ganesha, Brigantia, Brighid and Dionysos would be considering adding Christ to her pantheon rather than abandoning it to follow him (some might even say my path's Satanic - it has been said before). But while I'm working out what my relationship to Christ is - if at all - I'd be sad to see Quakerism decide to let mainstream Christianity set the agenda and frame the debate about Christ. Most folk are damaged by or hostile to Churchianity, not the experience of Christ. Even those who are non-theist or choose not to worship Christ can work with the idea that he (or the myth of him) has good lessons to teach. I really hope this makes sense to someone other than me out there. I don't know how many are familiar with the concept of engaging in separate cultic activities around one god while also venerating others or none. I believe there can be Quakerism without Jesus as the "inner light" can just as easily refer to the spirituality of the universe itself, as each of us individually understand and apply that term. What attracts me to Universalist Quakers is the inclusiveness that goes with it...that we need not all have a high degree of Christology in order to belong. As I see it, it is the "spirit" that "moves" us and that is what makes Quakers, Quakers...the definition of said "spirit" need not be absolutely defined in Jesus nor required to be excluded from the same but can be applied as each sees fit and it is that point that needs to reiterated if we seek to expand, what seems to me stateside, as ever dwindling numbers... We loosen at our peril. I believe we're about inclusiveness.

Come, welcome and let us share together whatever our respective faiths.