Mercurial > hg > rsof

comparison but_a_way_short.xml @ 122:61fde973aa27

Find changesets by keywords (author, files, the commit message), revision number or hash, or revset expression.
to The Friend
author ht
date Thu, 14 Dec 2017 10:09:07 -0500
parents ff88152a32ca
children c033b5636958
comparison
equal deleted inserted replaced
121:ff88152a32ca 122:61fde973aa27
15 missed. Maybe focussing on the language that divides us was necessary, and the 15 missed. Maybe focussing on the language that divides us was necessary, and the
16 light this book shines on the nature of that division is valuable. But it feels to me that it got trapped by its 16 light this book shines on the nature of that division is valuable. But it feels to me that it got trapped by its
17 own success and never got past a fundamental assumption which guaranteed its 17 own success and never got past a fundamental assumption which guaranteed its
18 eventual limitations.</p> 18 eventual limitations.</p>
19 <p>The key, mistaken, assumption is that what we need to talk about as 19 <p>The key, mistaken, assumption is that what we need to talk about as
20 Quakers is what we <emph>believe</emph>. There are a few 20 Quakers is what we <emph>believe</emph>.
21 oblique mentions of alternatives in the book, but it's almost all about belief. 21 That's not the right way to look for what unites us as Quakers. After all,
22 That's not the right place to look for what unites us as Quakers. After all, 22 the
23 we've all heard it said that the 23 <emph>single</emph> thing we can confidently say unites
24 <emph>single</emph> thing we can confidently say unites the membership of 24 Britain Yearly Meeting is that we go to
25 Britain Yearly Meeting is that when we can we meet together in 25 Meeting for Worship. Our identity is not determined by what we
26 Meeting for Worship. Our identity is not fundamentally determined by what we
27 <emph>believe</emph>, but by what we <emph>do</emph>.</p> 26 <emph>believe</emph>, but by what we <emph>do</emph>.</p>
28 <p>If you only look at the language of belief, you miss a whole different 27 <p>If you only look at the language of belief, you miss a whole different
29 way of looking at religious identity. Choices with respect to the language of 28 way of looking at religious identity. Choices with respect to the language of
30 belief are what distinguish many, even most, Christian denominations from one 29 belief are what distinguish many, even most, Christian denominations, but
31 another, but that's actually a game we Quakers 'officially' declined to play a 30 that's something Quakers have declined to play: we don't do creeds. And we're not the only religion that
32 long time ago: we don't do creeds. And we're not the only religion that
33 isn't best understood in terms of belief, and recognising that points us towards a better way to 31 isn't best understood in terms of belief, and recognising that points us towards a better way to
34 distinguish <emph>us</emph>, by shifting the focus from belief to practice, from 32 distinguish ourselves, by shifting the focus from belief to practice, from
35 ortho<emph>doxy</emph> to ortho<emph>praxy</emph>.</p> 33 ortho<emph>doxy</emph> to ortho<emph>praxy</emph>.</p>
36 <p>I don't claim originality in suggesting this: John Punshon, as quoted in 34 <p>I don't claim originality in suggesting this: John Punshon pretty much
37 QF&amp;P 20.18, pretty much writes exactly this in 1967, and I think it's at the heart 35 writes exactly this in
38 of what Ben Pink Dandelion has been writing and saying for some time. What 36 QF&amp;P 20.18, and it's at the heart
39 follows is very much in line with what I understand them (and others, no doubt) 37 of what Ben Pink Dandelion has been saying for some time.</p>
40 to be saying.</p>
41 </div> 38 </div>
42 <div> 39 <div>
43 <title>We already know this</title> 40 <title>We already know this</title>
44 <p>Quoting a few well-known phrases will help me make my point:</p> 41 <p>Some well-known phrases make my point:</p>
45 <list type="naked"> 42 <list type="naked">
46 <item>Let your life speak</item> 43 <item>Let your life speak</item>
47 <item>Be patterns, be examples</item> 44 <item>Be patterns, be examples</item>
48 <item>A testimony to the grace of God as shown in the life of ...</item> 45 <item>A testimony to the grace of God as shown in the life of ...</item>
49 <item>As Friends we commit ourselves to a way of worship</item> 46 <item>As Friends we commit ourselves to a way of worship</item>
51 <item>Swear not at all</item> 48 <item>Swear not at all</item>
52 <item>Live simply</item> 49 <item>Live simply</item>
53 <item>[need a quote for equality/justice testimony]</item> 50 <item>[need a quote for equality/justice testimony]</item>
54 <item>[L]ive in the virtue of that life and power that takes away the occasion of all wars</item> 51 <item>[L]ive in the virtue of that life and power that takes away the occasion of all wars</item>
55 </list> 52 </list>
56 <p>This emphasis on what we <emph>do</emph> as Quakers puts us, according to 53 <p>It's not surprising that, surrounded as we are by churches for whom
57 Karen Armstrong, right back at the heart of the origins of the great monotheist religions:</p> 54 orthodoxy is fundamental we should have
55 fallen into adopting their language for our own internal discourse. But we
56 need to shake that off, and embrace our distinctive nature.</p>
57 <p>Emphasising what we <emph>do</emph> puts us, according to
58 Karen Armstrong, in line with the origins of the great monotheist religions:</p>
58 <display><p>"Religion as defined by the great sages of India, China, and the Middle East was not a notional activity but a practical one; it did not require belief in a set of doctrines but rather hard, disciplined work..."</p> 59 <display><p>"Religion as defined by the great sages of India, China, and the Middle East was not a notional activity but a practical one; it did not require belief in a set of doctrines but rather hard, disciplined work..."</p>
59 <p><emph>The Case for God</emph>, 2000</p></display> 60 <p><emph>The Case for God</emph>, 2000</p></display>
60 <p>Armstrong suggests that contemporary Judaism and Islam have retained 61 <p>Armstrong suggests that contemporary Judaism and Islam have retained
61 their original self-definitions centred on orthopraxy ("uniformity of religious 62 their original self-definitions centred on orthopraxy ("uniformity of religious
62 practice"), whereas Christian denominations in the 63 practice"), whereas Christian denominations have shifted much more towards defining themselves in terms of orthodoxy ("correct belief").</p>
63 main have shifted much more towards defining themselves in terms of orthodoxy ("correct belief").</p>
64 <p>It's not surprising that, surrounded as we are by churches for whom
65 orthodoxy is fundamental, as well as strident parodies of all religious people
66 as little better than flat-earthers, we should have
67 fallen into adopting their language for our own internal discourse. But we
68 need to shake that off, and embrace our distinctive nature.</p>
69 </div> 64 </div>
70 <div> 65 <div>
71 <title>And this [we know] experimentally</title> 66 <title>"And this [we know] experimentally"</title>
72 <p>But, what does that have to do with us, you may well ask? That old 67 <p>But, what does that have to do with us, you may well ask? That old
73 language may give us a warm feeling of in-group-ness when 68 language may give us a warm feeling of in-group-ness when
74 we hear it, but what does it actually amount to us now? It may be 69 we hear it, but what does it mean to us now? It may be
75 of intellectual interest to hear that historical Christianity and 70 of intellectual interest to hear that historical Christianity and
76 contemporary Judaism were/are founded on practice, but we're not about water 71 contemporary Judaism were/are founded on practice, but we're not about water
77 baptism or keeping kosher. What's so special 72 baptism or keeping kosher. What's so special
78 about Meeting for Worship that it can sustain us in unity, preserve the 73 about Meeting for Worship that it can sustain us in unity, preserve the
79 effectiveness of our business method and allow our disagreements about belief 74 effectiveness of our business method and allow our disagreements about belief
80 language to be recognised without fear?</p> 75 language to be recognised without fear?</p>
81 <p>It's simple, really. In Meeting for Worship, on a good day, we 76 <p>It's simple, really. In Meeting for Worship, on a good day, we
82 experience two things: a presence and a possibility. That's why we keep 77 experience two things: a presence and a possibility. That's why we keep
83 coming back, because at some level we know we need to keep having that experience.</p> 78 coming back, because at some level we know we need that experience.</p>
84 <p>What presence? The technical term for it is 'transcendence'. We're not very good at talking about it. We refer to a 79 <p>What presence? The technical term for it is 'transcendence'. We're not very good at talking about it. We refer to a
85 "gathered" meeting. We say "Meeting for Worship is not just meditation". We 80 "gathered" meeting. We say "Meeting for Worship is not just meditation". We
86 know it when it happens. It's 81 know it when it happens. It's
87 elusive, and if we try to pin it down we lose it, that feeling that we are 82 elusive, and if we try to pin it down we lose it, that feeling that we are
88 joined with one another into something more than just our physical co-location. 83 joined with one another into something more than just our physical co-location.
89 Accepting that it is "not just me" isn't easy in the resolutely individualistic 84 Accepting that it is "not just me" isn't easy in the resolutely individualistic
90 culture we live in today, but if there is one item of faith we 85 culture we live in today, but if there is one item of faith we
91 <emph>must</emph> confess, at least to one another, it is the truth of that 86 <emph>must</emph> confess, at least to one another, it is the truth of that
92 experience, joining with and encouraged by 350 years of history and hundreds of 87 experience, embracing 350 years of history and hundreds of
93 Meetings around the world today.</p> 88 Meetings around the world today.</p>
94 <p>What possibility? The technical term for it is 'immanence'. We see and 89 <p>What possibility? The technical term for it is 'immanence'. We see and
95 hear it in the witness of those around 90 hear it in the witness of those around
96 us: the possibility of living an inspired life. We <emph>recognise</emph> it 91 us: the possibility of living an inspired life. We <emph>recognise</emph> it
97 most vividly in Meeting for Worship, when we hear authentic ministry, 'authentic' because it comes from someone 92 most vividly when we hear authentic ministry, coming from someone
98 we know is speaking as they live. It cannot be be faked, it is unmistakable, 93 we know is speaking as they live. It cannot be be faked, it is unmistakable,
99 terrifying and uplifting in equal measure. It 94 terrifying and uplifting in equal measure. It
100 calls us to what we aspire to. It is at once daunting (how can I possibly do 95 calls us to what we aspire to, here and now: These are neither historical
101 what they do) and reassuring (it is possible). These are not celebrities or 96 figures, contemporary celebrities nor
102 distant missionaries, they are each <emph>one of us</emph>.</p> 97 distant missionaries, they are each <emph>one of us</emph>.</p>
103 <p>Whole books have been written about both of these, I have barely scratched 98 <p><emph>This</emph> is what we need most to
104 the surface. My point is simply that <emph>this</emph> is what we need most to
105 be talking about, and we don't need to agree about the <emph>words</emph> in 99 be talking about, and we don't need to agree about the <emph>words</emph> in
106 order to get started. We just have to acknowledge that there is a shared 100 order to get started. There's nothing <emph>wrong</emph> with talking about
107 <emph>experience</emph> that matters, deeply, to us. Its reality and 101 belief&mdash;it's natural to want to dig in to <emph>why</emph> we do what we
102 do, and belief language creeps in to this, precisely <emph>because</emph> we're
103 not sure of ourselves.</p>
104 <p>So, guard against being <emph>consumed</emph> in such
105 talk, and remember that it's the
106 <emph>experience</emph> that matters, and matters deeply. Its reality and
108 its significance are <emph>not</emph> compromised by our unsatisfactory 107 its significance are <emph>not</emph> compromised by our unsatisfactory
109 attempts to talk about it.</p> 108 attempts to talk about it. We know that what we <emph>do</emph> works for us. So sure, keep trying
110 </div>
111 <div>
112 <title>There's nothing wrong with talking about belief</title>
113 <p>It's natural to want to dig in to <emph>why</emph> we do what we do. And
114 it's not surprising that we struggle to come up with agreed answers. The key
115 point to hold on to is <emph>that doesn't undermine the validity of the
116 doings</emph>. Or, rather, it only undermines our faith if we <emph>let</emph>
117 it. If we restricted ourselves to only doing things if we understood why they
118 worked, we'd have very little left. And, as the previous section tried to
119 explain, we know that what we do <emph>does</emph> work. So sure, keep trying
120 to figure out why. But meantime, keep cheerfully practicing.</p> 109 to figure out why. But meantime, keep cheerfully practicing.</p>
121 </div> 110 </div>
122 </body> 111 </body>
123 </doc> 112 </doc>