"How was the Rally?"

After I broke my leg in 1999, I was in a hip-to-toe cast for a few months. Sometimes during this period, people would ask how my leg was as they stared at a completely immobilized leg while ignoring the "body". At other times, people were disbelieving when I would say I'm doing great. See, what I was learning during this period was life-transforming. I was learning how to not always run to the next thing, but to be in the moment, and to take time to consider my actions with greater forethought rather than be impulsive. All these were great things that, perhaps, would have come to me at some point, but basically having the use of one leg for 4+ months really deepened the lesson.

I was thinking of this yesterday as I was being asked "How was the Rally (to Restore Sanity)?" It was a great time. A huge crowd on a beautiful day. Both before and after the rally, I have had friends and family asking for reports. I find it difficult to give simple information about things such as this because of the context in which they are happening. Crowd estimates vary from 150,000-250,000, so something is going on outside the rally to bring that many people to one place at one time. I'm not sure that the sense of this can be captured easily. So here goes, in two parts. Use this as an analogy: "How was the college?" 1. The buildings were beautiful. 2. The education really has made a difference.

How was the Rally? The facts: I was riding my bicycle down towards William Penn House. I left my apartment at around 8AM. At first, I was surprised how little traffic was on the road and bike path, but as I neared the Air and Space Museum, the energy was buzzing so I opted to instead park my bike by the American Indian Museum and set up my chair and blanket under a tree on the first block near the stage. A real stroke of luck. By 9AM, the police closed off entry to this section. Like me, there were a few other people around me who laid out extra blankets and chairs for friends who could not get in, so we filled in for each other in sharing the experience. I walked around periodically to take in the signs and get-ups, so the 3+ hours went by fairly quickly. I had brought a book to read, and an Mp3 player to listen to Car Talk if I got bored, but being there was absorbing. There were people of all ages. Most of the signs were non-partisan. Many picked up on Jon Stewart's theme that Obama and Bush are not Hitler. I think that many of us who saw the "Bush=Hitler" signs and were silent need to perhaps to some reconciliation around our silence.

The performance started right on time. I won't go into the details of the performance itself as this is readily available on-line. But among the highlights for me were:
- Hearing John Legend's amazing voice singing "Dear God, I'm trying to believe in you. Dear God, I see your face in all I do." Stunning.
- Yusuf (Cat Stevens) coming out to sing one of the 1970's anti-war anthems ("Peace Train"). Rather than settling in to a serious peace message, though, Colbert almost sacrilegiously cutting him off, saying he can't get on the Peace Train, and bringing Ossie Osbourne on to sing "Crazy Train". The back and forth banter culminated in Yusuf and Ossie singing their songs simultaneously until the O'Jays ended the dispute with "Love Train". Colbert signed on to the Love Train because love can hurt and cause std's. Good stuff!
- The awards for sanity and fear were great. A really nice touch was Colbert giving one of his fear awards to Anderson Cooper's shirt rather than to one of the easier media targets (Limbaugh, Beck, Olberman). Cooper in general is perceived as a good guy - especially some of his recent work on anti-bullying. He is, however, one of the subtle fear-mongerers. Recognition of this is a good reminder of how pervasive the fear in the media is.
- Stewart's message was great. Not political (despite how some - including McCartney in the Washington Post - are shamefully representing it) but a reminder that we are all in this together, and only together will we be able to come out of this. "These are dark times, but not the 'End Times'" he said. I appreciate, as a fellow Jerseyite, the reference to the fact that, sometimes, the light at the end of the tunnel is New Jersey. Even his message at the very beginning of the show asking the crowd to leave the mall cleaner than we found it ("plant topiaries if your a lanscaper") resonated with me. I often use this message in both Workcamps and program messages: the essence of peacemaking as a lifestyle is a commitment to leave a place better than it was upon arrival, regardless of whether it's in the daily routine such as re-stacking weights mis-laid by others at the gym and picking up trash while on a hike, or more pronounced such as mediating a conflict. It's about Stewardship ("Stewart-ship"?).

All in all, a wonderful show.

How was the Rally? The night before, I led a group of 8th grade students from a local private school on a Workcamp to help prepare foods as part of an all-encompassing meals/job-training/employment program in DC. These students chose to be there, as did all the other volunteers including some young adult professionals looking to be a part of and to give back to community. The private school (Norwood School) seems to do an amazing job of giving kids an opportunity to see the world and reflect on purpose. One of the kids even remarked that they were having more fun than being at home watching TV. This school also hosted a viewing of the documentary "Race to Nowhere", which speaks volumes to their admirable commitment to youth development, not test performance. I only bring this up to note that I already was in a pensive mood having spent the prior evening with youth and young adults with a passion for a better world - so much so that they were spending their Friday evenings actually doing something.

As I mentioned above, the rally itself was attended by, what I could see, people who really want to be a part of something different than the status-quo. But it was after the rally that there were deeper conversations about this. At William Penn House, we had an open house after the rally, inviting people to come in for cider and cookies. Many people came in, much appreciative of and a bit taken aback by the openness to strangers, but this is something we have embraced as a part of our "Radical Hospitality" (if I had been more on the ball, we should have done something similar during the Glenn Beck rally if we want to really walk our talk). When I first got back to the house, there were some older folks from Gettysburg at the table. Nice folks who were heading back to PA that afternoon. Most of the folks who came in afterward were also leaving town that afternoon, and were walking to the bus parking at RFK. For us, by opening our doors and welcoming in strangers, it was a good opportunity to quietly be an example of what the rally's message was - being civil.

One of the conversations around the table that flowed from one group to the next was "Do you think the rally will make a difference?" This, to me, is the real heart of the matter. Clearly, there is something stirring in society, but can a "call to Sanity" become a movement? Is our society really ready to take this on ourselves? The media and the politicians are not going to take the lead on this. The political parties are too much about power - so much so that they often penalize their own who try for some civil discourse (witness how Sen. Lindsey Graham has been treated). I do have to say that Republicans seem a bit better at this than Democrats, but I sometimes think that this is because Democratic leadership is lame and unfocused, not more civil. I reflected to one group from the Philly/Poconos area when asked these questions, "Isn't it up to us to have it make a difference?" I know from my experience working with people and groups not necessarily pro-what-I-want that we really can find the common ground and civility that is beneficial to our collective responsibility to leave the world better than we found it. A lot of the people at the table said that it won't be easy to bring about these changes - something as simple as turning off the 24-hour news - but, hey, no one said this would be easy.

So, how was the rally? Great! How would we like the rally to have been as far as making a difference? That's up to us. I'd encourage that we start now - by turning to each other to continue the momentum, and not read what the "pundits" have to say. They are already trying to snuff out any glimmers of light and passion that might spread. We don't have to pay them any mind. Between the kids on Friday evening and all the folks I spoke with after the rally, there is much to build on. It's not your parent's movement, for sure, but the hope and willingness seems to be there.

Are Quakers Prophets?

"Prophecies" are inspired declarations of divine will or purpose, according to Merriam-Webster. Synonyms are along the lines of predicting, prognosticating, foretelling and the like.

This has been rattling in my brain since early this weekend. I was present at Friends General Conference's Central Committee - a wonderful gathering of inspiring people who have accomplished a lot, cumulatively, over the course of their varying lengths of lives. As a collective body, however, I left wondering whether we are caught in a system that is less than the sum of our parts. A gelling, jarring and telling moment came when the word "prophetic" was used in describing one of the program proposals. Without going into too great detail, this had to do with a proposal to upgrade the web-presence of the organization so that its messages and communications can be more egalitarian and timely. I had to be honest (and spoke to this at the gathering): upgrading the web presence and technology is essential to today's world, and, given that we are now wrapping up 2010, this can hardly be considered "prophetic". "It's about time" is more appropriate although, given the challenges on the road ahead for FGC, and the fact that the plan calls for this process to take 3-5 years, "too late" might be even more apt.

One of the Quaker testimonies is "Community". There are only 5 testimonies. Technology has profoundly changed the face and networks of the global community, how things get communicated and how things get done. It is a wonder what community FGC has had a covenant with that it finds itself, technologically, this far behind the times. I wonder if this is not reflective of a deeper challenge not just of FGC, but of all the Religious Society of Friends, and our corporate process. Certainly, among Friends, there are countless folks out in the cyber-world active and engaged. Why have none of the governing bodies of Friends (FUM, EFI, FGC) embraced some of this energy and integrated it into their web-world?

Beyond the mere integration and adaptation issue, for FGC-Friends, I am troubled by the use of the word "Prophetic" as a self-descriptive term. To what extent are we, as Friends, so enamored with our prophetic, cutting-edge and radically-progressive past that we are completely blinded to our present? We talk about embracing diversity, but there was more diversity at the local bar in New Windsor with 20 people than at Central Committee with a gathering of 150+ Friends (I'm talking real numbers, not proportions). I continue to find little movement among Friends in promoting HIV-testing - a small thing that we could do to show greater unity in our communities. To not do so is an act of white-privilege, especially here in DC. I increasingly feel that their are a rising number of Quakers who are and can be prophetic, and some of their messages of the need for change are directed not at the outer-world but at the Friends institutions themselves. If what I witnessed this weekend is any indication, these institutions have a long way to go before their actions can really join the world in sharing prophetic messages again.

Thoughts on "Meaningful" Work

As I am about to end two plus years of leading a service-learning program, I am reflecting on my time here and the lessons I have learned. A common phrase I hear a lot is “meaningful work”. Pastors, youth group leaders, and parents have all use this term when they call to inquire about my programs. Over time I have found out that this is actually code for “instant grafication”.

Yesterday the phrase came up again, while reading a document on Quaker workcamps. In one section, the writers wrote that meaningful work needs to be important and effective, then they go on to give an example of how cutting back invasive species is not meaningful work.

For the past two years, I have collaborated with Anacostia Watershed Society (AWS), an organization devoted to removing invasive species from the local watershed in Washington DC. From the dedicated employees of AWS, I have learned about an epic environmental disaster happening in our midst. This disaster threatens our whole eco-system, because the invasive species only support, on average, 5% of the species that native flora support and in many cases, the invasive species have been growing wild for more than a hundred years. This disaster threatens our food supply because of the way the food chain works, i.e. if insects disappear, then their predators are at risk, and so on. AWS have developed a five to seven year plan for sites of eradicating invasive species. The organization is always in need in volunteers to help with this work. In an afternoon, a group can make a tremendous amount of progress if they are part of an organized plan, like the one developed by AWS.

Instead of these types of projects, leaders want their groups to volunteer at homeless shelters, soup kitchens, etc… These places have a need for volunteers too, but most of the time, they are filled to the brim with volunteers, sometimes a year in advance. Adults ask for these places, because they want to get to know people in need. I can count on one hand the number of conversations I have had at soup kitchens with the clients, because when you are serving food or cleaning up after people there is not time to sit and talk. But, the volunteers leave feeling good about themselves when they go home to their own bed, because they have “helped” someone. Where is the volunteer when the client needs something to eat the next day? How many tested models are there for eradicating hunger or homelessness in five to seven years from an entire section of a city?

For the adults who ask for “meaningful” work, they are great adults who are dedicated their lives to working with youth in their community and they want to ensure a great experience for their group. In addition, groups are needed to volunteer in all areas. I try to plan workcamps that include all types of volunteering, because these issues are all connected. How can you help people out of hunger and ignore a problem that threatens our source of food? The error is calling one type “meaningful” and another “unmeaningful”. If we are unwilling to work on an issue affecting our community, then who do we expect to work on the issue?

I see in the history of Quakers as investing in long-term struggles, whether the issue was slavery, peace, suffrage, civil rights. Friends devoted their whole lives to causes that did not end in their own lifetime. Friends, generation after generation, continued working on the same issues and changing their own lives to bring about the change they advocated for. Friends today are continuing in this tradition by working on a wide range of issues. Friends Testimonies remind us to consider how our lives, individually and corporately, affects the rest of the world.
In our youth programs now, are we teaching our Young Friends about how solving problems take a long-term plan and vision or are we more interested in teaching band-aid solutions that ignore larger less glamorous issues?

-Greg Woods

Does God speak only through the Silence?

As I have had conversations with people about core truths of Quakerism, reflecting on our faith, values and practice, there has been one level of thinking that keeps popping up. To put it into a query: "To what extent do we act as if our practice of silence feeds a sense of righteousness because we believe God only speaks through the silence?" I quickly take this to another level of query: "To what extent might it not be that God speaks to us, but that we can become more practiced in deep listening that is perhaps our greater asset to the world?"

Here's what I mean: Our practice is to wait in silence and to be spirit-led in our Meeting messages as well as in our Meetings for Business. What seems to happen is that we go through this process and then take what emerges as our marching orders. We often proceed with a clarity of "here's what needs to happen", "here's where the injustice is", etc.

But what if we instead went forth with a commitment to nurturing and seasoning the sense of the group no matter where we go? Imagine going and sitting in conversation, fellowship, and service with people of other faiths, cultures and beliefs, and listening for the spirit and sense in that gathering. I don't mean sitting with fellow liberals or moderates of different faiths or colors - that's too easy. I mean, sitting with people where we are not necessarily welcome or may not feel comfortable, and being a loving presence, listening for God.

I am learning to view our practice in our Meetings for Worship for Worship with a concern for Business (or any other issue) as just that: PRACTICE. But, as a former runner, I know that practice is what we do in preparation for the real events, the ones that engage the "other". And, rather than look at this as a competition where we want to be the better/wiser person, we instead want to be the best bridge-builder, listener, loving-presence. Let it be our practice and our process that we bring forth externally, rather than hold it internally while sharing the outward message.

Too busy to notice?

We were sitting in the office at William Penn House the other day, and Greg showed Susan (Byron's wife) a trailer clip of a documentary called "Race to Nowhere". The main message of this documentary is that we have become a society in which our children are not allowed to be children anymore. There is too much pressure coming from all segments of society (parents, colleges, media, government, performance tests) that children need to succeed in school to the point that they are overburdened. One of the quotes is "our children are pressured to perform, but are they really learning?"

This past Spring, a student at a NY state high school gave the valedictorian speech in which she called out the education system. In her speech, she talked about the goal of the education, from her experience, is to excel and to get out, but not to learn. She said "while others sat in class and doodled to later become great artists, I sat in class to take notes and become a great test-taker. While others would come to class without their homework done because they were reading about an interest of theirs, I never missed an assignment. While others were creating music and writing lyrics, I decided to do extra credit, even though I never needed it." She referred to herself as the "best slave" by doing what she was told "to the extreme".

At William Penn House, we run Quaker Workcamps. We work with many youth groups from schools all over the country. For many of these youth, the reality is that they are doing the service not because they care, or because their strength is in service, but because they have to meet the school requirements. When I fill out the forms for students, I don't think I have ever seen a question about whether the student seemed to have a passion or gift for service. Most of the questions are about whether the student participated and was cooperative - basically, was the student obedient. Questions are asked about whether hours were completed, but not whether a project was completed. Even the organizations we work with and advocacy groups I am connected to don't encourage thinking. Scripts are given, but thinking about solutions to problems is not encouraged.

Almost thirty years ago, when I was first starting my work career (working in a mental health center with children not able to make it in public schools) I read a book by Tufts sociologist David Elkind called "The Hurried Child". This book called attention to the dangers of exposing our children to overwhelming pressures that can lead to low self-esteem, pregnancy and suicide, and that in blurring the boundaries of what is age-appropriate, by expecting - or imposing - too much too soon, kids are forced to mimic adult sophistication while secretly yearning for innocence. The third edition of this book (published two decades later) found that the problem had only been compounded by media, schools, home, and new technology such as the internet and video games. The subsequent decade did not alter this at all.

In all the meetings and networks I have been involved in, including Peace/Justice committees and networks, not once has the concern for this pattern been raised as a serious issue. But to me, nothing is more important than education, and not the kind that tells people what to think, but actually nurtures the ability to think. Real deep learning, I think, is as much art, play (one of the reasons I enjoy the workcamps is it is an opportunity to bring play to service), creativity and research as it is performance, but we have come to put way too much emphasis on performance.

Recently, as I was stepping into the clerking position for BYM Peace and Social Concerns Committee, I requested that the committee take a day together to discern, as a committee, what is ours to do. I sent this suggestion out to the committee of about 12 people. Only three responses came back and were the same: "we are too busy". And yet, when I see what people are doing, I don't see a whole lot of collaboration which, in its purest sense, is about making the whole greater than the sum of its parts. I do see a lot of networks and activities that, because they lack creativity, play, and visioning of solutions, end up often producing less than the sum of its parts. As an aside, in my experience, when true collaboration happens, we can actually be less busy but more effective.

There is a societal pattern here of keeping people busy without really thinking about what we are doing. It gets even worse when you consider that there are people working in various systems (including non-profits) who are doing studies and running programs as they always have not because it is the right thing. In some cases they know what they are doing is pointless, wasteful and even counter-productive, but they do it because they are being told to do it and it is the way it has always been done.

In the documentary "Race to Nowhere", one person says "This has to stop somewhere!" But where? Dr. Elkind warned of this almost 30 years ago, but few seemed to notice - in fact, things have gotten worse. The NY state valedictorian spoke up, so maybe that's a start. The fact that Norwood School in Bethesda MD is hosting a screening of "Race to Nowhere" and publicizing it on their website could also be a part of that start. But where are Friends schools on this? I was fortunate to go to Cambridge Friends School in a time when play, creativity, and self-directed learning seemed more weighted than they are now. I never even saw a letter-grade until high school (thanks, Mom and Dad, for that one - seriously!) Are we, as Friends, going to live our gospel truth that there is "that of God in all", and take the time to allow for the youth to develop their own soul and their own way, or are we too busy? As the Religious Society of Friends that includes Friends Schools, can we follow Norwood's lead, recognize that the performance-driven world is doing nothing to break the cycle of violence and unsustainability that we are currently on. Should not Friends schools, because of our gospel truth, be at the forefront of this? When I see so many such schools committed to their students going to the best schools, I have to say "no, not now". But when I get to know the kids, and some of the people working in these schools, I can see that the potential is there. It's just going to take some courage for us all to stand together, as the valedictorian courageously did, and say "This has got to stop".

"Root Causes" vs. just roots

I was attending the BYM Peace and Social Concerns Networking Day on Saturday. It was a beautiful sunny day, and Sandy Spring Meeting is a beautiful surrounding. The gathering was a spirited and passionate group of Friends who vary greatly in where they focus their passions and social justice efforts. Among the issues: Israeli/Palestinian conflict (with an leaning toward Palestinian rights); mental health services; Muslim relations and understanding; peace scholarships; and environmental laws and policies. Among the various actions: prayer vigils, letters to Obama and elected officials, petitions, education and awareness events, and relationship building efforts (notably between Friends and Muslims).

Among the discussions, there were a few things about the process that struck me. First, there were two Monthly Meetings that seemed to reflect where my own passions are - that all things are interconnected. One of the Meetings started their report stating that they were "all over the board", as they see our current path (globally) is unsustainable, using the concept of "peak oil" as an example. Having this vision of the world - that not only is reducing fossil fuel consumption a good idea, but is a harsh reality that will happen whether we want it or not - influences the way one sees all the other issues of the world. We have an infrastructure that depends on fossil fuels for existence - our homes, our cars, our economy - and we have not made the paradigm shift needed to move away from this. The result is an increasingly volatile geo-political environment as pipelines for oil are extended deeper and farther into more hostile environments of all sorts. This view can do two things: bring a greater sense of clarity of what we need to change in our lives, and make many of the other social justice efforts seem like "window dressing", sort of like fiddling while Rome burns.

Second, there was one Meeting's committee that was not looking at topics, but process. It was considering the extent to which it can nurture individual leadings, serve as a source of education for its members, take on issues as a committee, and reach out to others on common causes. Basically, this committee seems to be considering how to do things more holistically, and how it can get the "most bang for its buck" in terms of energy. I personally think that this is one of the most important things that we can do as Friends. Minutes, epistles, and prayer vigils are fine things, but they are also actions that place the responsibility for problems and how to fix them on someone else, somehow conveniently elevating our own lives and lifestyle above reproach.

This leads me to another thing that has stuck with me from this meeting: a discussion of systemic and root causes. I think it is real easy for people to regress into a highly intellectual discussion about the "root causes" or "real problems" of the world that tend to accomplish very little other than perpetuate blame while fostering a sense of powerlessness. For those of us on the left, this tends to boil down to terms like "multi-nationals" (including banks) and "oligarchies". I am in no way denying that these are not fundamental to our challenges in working for a more just and egalitarian world, but, in pontificating about "them", we are in denial of how we who live in comfort and have thrived off the backs of the disenfranchised for centuries have been beneficiaries of these institutions. We can talk about root causes as if there is some linear cause/effect formula in play, but I prefer to just see that the roots of all we face are deep, connected and have been there a long time. Moving to community banks will not end homelessness - we are going to have to drastically change how we live. I don't mean "we" in a euphemistic "them" way, I mean "we" as in you and me. In fact, I would say that our ability to sit in comfort and talk about the big problems of the world, while our actions are whittled down to pointing out where others are flawed is a form of oligarchy in itself.

I juxtapose this with the main speaker we had that morning. Nathan Harrington is a young man who has started an intentional community in southeast DC while working in some of the more challenging school districts (currently in Prince George's County, MD). His story is full of courage and humility, a gentle balance of following a moral compass with meeting his own needs. He readily admits that finding a home in southeast DC was as much driven by affordability as motivated by conscience. But the entirety of the story is simple: he is bearing witness, and is a vehicle for consciousness. In doing so, I believe he sees more clearly the nuances of social trauma as it has played out over the centuries, and how painstakingly slow the work of reconciliation and sacrifice will be. It is his radical example that I hope to inspire in the real work of the Peace and Social Concerns committee as the real justice work of Friends.

Where are my First Amendment rights?

Last week, after more than 8 years of discerning, I signed up for the Selective Service.

Every male resident of the United States of America, between the ages 18 and 26, have to sign up for the Selective Service, which will supposedly help in the time of a draft. (This is debatable if the Selective Service would actually help at all in the time of a draft.) If males do not to sign up, they could face jail time or fines. When the government pursued legal action against non-registrants (males who didn’t sign up for the selective service), they were highly unpopular and resulted in more males deciding not to sign up. So, in the early 1980s, Congress passed the Solomon Amendment, which prohibits non-registrants from receiving federal financial aid for college. Since then, there have been more restrictions, such as denying non-registrants access to most federal jobs. Most states have also passed laws denying non-registrants drivers licenses and barring from attending state colleges.

I believe that the Selective Service is a part of war and I oppose participating in war. My belief comes from my Quaker upbringing. In a 1660 letter to King Charles II, a group of Quakers wrote in their first statement of pacifism:

Our Principle is, and our Practices have always been, to seek peace and ensue it, and to follow after righteousness and the knowledge of God, seeking the Good and Welfare, and doing that which tends to the peace of All. We know that Wars and Fightings proceed from the Lusts of men (as James 4: 1-3), out of which Lusts the Lord hath redeemed us, and so out of the Occasion of War. The Occasion of which War, and the War itself (wherein envious men, who are lovers of themselves more than lovers of God, lust, kill, & desire to have men’s lives or estates) ariseth from the lust. All bloody Principles & Practices we (as to our own particular) do utterly deny, with all outward Wars, and Strife, and Fightings with outward Weapons, for any end, or under any pretence whatsoever. And this is our Testimony to the whole World.

When I was in middle school, I sent letters to every representative and senator I could asking for them to end the Selective Service. I had hoped that the Selective Service would end before I had to sign up, so I wouldn’t have to decide whether to register or not.

Sadly the law did not change. On my 18th birthday, I thought I would make a stand and write a letter to the editor decrying my position, but I did not. Over the past eight years, I have been a conscientious objector. I have not been able to apply for federal aid for college, apply for state jobs in my home state of Missouri or most federal jobs.

During the past eight years, I started reading the Bible and I am now call myself a Quaker and a follower of Jesus. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God." (Matthew 5:9) I believe that killing people and war is against Jesus' teachings. I know people have other interpretations, but this is how I read His teachings.

I ended up violating my conscience and my religious beliefs and signing up for the selective service because in less than a month I turn 26 and I would be bar permanently from most federal jobs. I found that I have been silent about being a conscientious objector, so what is the use of holding onto a belief if I am too scared to publicly voice a belief? Also, I hope to one day be married and have a family and I don't want my decision to adversely affect my future family.

I comprised my moral and my religious beliefs against war to comply with this law. Where are my First Amendment rights to free exercise of religion?

For more information about Selective Service and Non-registrants, visit
Center on Conscience and War