Friday, May 13, 2011

Are Friends "bumper-sticker" social justice? Can we be more?

Earlier this week, when I was in Costa Rica, I went on-line to get information about and to contact Casa Ridgway, a Quaker-run guest house in San Jose, Costa Rica that I was planning to spend the night at. As I was looking more into the information about this place, I read a statement recently written by the adjoining Peace Center (“Amigos Para la Paz”) that stated “we categorically reject military intervention as a solution to problems”. In the afternoon, as I was walking up to the guesthouse, I spotted the seemingly ever-present “War is not the answer” sign in the window. Later that evening, I would spend time at a Lutheran church in San Jose that runs a support group for men with HIV, and then share a meal with three Lutheran pastors and a Catholic nun – all of whom have done some hard work both within their respective churches and within the communities they live (San Jose and Guatemala). The conversations revolved around the hard work of challenging our own faith communities and beliefs in our shared commitments and desires for a better world. We talked about the ethical and moral dilemmas of our work. We shared ideas about how to reach deeper into community and higher into bureaucracy in our eternal pursuit of a better, more just world. It was an evening of enriching, enlightening, energizing and challenging conversation.

All of this has had me thinking more deeply about and seriously questioning the viability of Quakers as a meaningful player in the modern world when it seems like the majority of our actions seem to consist of driving a Prius, self-segregating with like-minding people, writing Minutes condemning some action or some policy, and then wringing our hands, but not really getting out there and getting our hands dirty. I know that there are notable exceptions to this, but when I read the requests and Minutes of committees and business meetings, these are too few and often being undertaken in isolation. We have created so many committees that our social justice work (glbt equality, race, environment, etc) is fragmented and disjointed.
What we are left with are signs. Take “War Is Not the Answer” (to quote Henny Youngman, “please”). You are hard pressed to encounter an unprogrammed Meetinghouse that does not have this somewhere clearly visible. My problem with it is not the sentiment, but the fact that this is a statement, not an invitation to a conversation. And yet, it is in conversations that we find common ground and common humanity, develop deeper understanding, and gain new insights and perhaps new ideas. “War Is Not the Answer” also oversimplifies the world and smacks of a partisan tone that does little to nurture deeper thinking. Consider, for example, one of the other popular signs seen in Quaker circles: “Save Darfur.” Is there an action plan behind this statement? How do we suggest stopping the genocide? Most likely, some kind of military presence is going to be needed or at least strongly considered, but doesn’t this go against the grain of the statement “War Is Not the Answer”?

I am increasingly finding that I am having more enriching, challenging, spiritual and growth-provoking conversations outside the Quaker world when I sit with people who are really questioning how their own faith communities may have to make accommodations in order to serve the world. These are not the kinds of conversations that make us angry and powerless, but actually challenge us to think, act and live differently. When I sit with Friends, what I hear more is either statements about how others are wrong about some act or some policy, or lengthy reflections of what it means to be Quaker. What I see as needed and missing is a combination of these two – a deep passion and commitment that there are things we need to do about injustices in the world, but to stop with the signs and minutes, and instead be a part of conversations and programs with people doing the hard work. I think we need to seriously consider doing away with the simplistic signs and the definitive minute statements (especially to people such as President Obama, knowing full-well it won’t make a bit of difference). We should instead be willing to go out and be challenged as to why we care and what it is that our faith calls us to act on.

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Are Quakers Ready for Quaker Youth and are Quaker Youth Ready?

“The Quaker Meeting is a faith community, grounded in the shared experience of God’s guidance and grace felt in our Meetings for Worship, our Business Meetings, and our fellowship. We are a diverse group of individuals who have been drawn together by the Spirit and a longing to find a faith and community that could speak to our condition. This brought us to Quaker Meeting. It is only with God’s Spirit that such a diverse group of individuals can realize and embody the kind of unity, belonging, and community that answers to that of God within us.

The Quaker Meeting is meant to be a Blessed Community – a living testimony to a social order that embodies God’s peace, justice, love, compassion, and joy; an example and invitation to a better way of life. Like our other testimonies, Community can be a prophetic call to the rest of society”.-Southeastern Yearly Meeting


My cousin, Rob Sandford, a Baptist minister in Virginia shared the following:

” Over half of our Baptist churches in VA are plateaued and many are dwindling down to handful of seniors. Thus the emphasis on 'church planting' or church starting with a focus on young families, college & youth.

The passing of the torch is difficult if no one is coming along who wants to pick it up or sees its value. But part of the church problem is that youth were excluded from decision making from day one. They do not see the church as "their" church as a result.”


Last year as Pendle Hill was reorganizing, a proposal to remove the requirement that the Executive Director be a Quaker was suggested due to the limited number of individuals who are Quaker and who have management experience.

How did Quakers reach the point where our knowledge about the Religious Society of Friends is so limited and that our pool of leaders who are both Quaker and have experience in management requires us to look elsewhere?

This is reflected in the average age of participants in business meetings, in our committee appointees and in the number of our young people who were raised as Quakers and no longer participate.

For many organizations, leadership is shared based on ability not age. By being open to the gifts of others we are enriched and challenged to be more than the sum of our parts. We cannot assume that age, education, or traditions are precursors of wisdom. If our Quaker faith is to grow and survive, our youth must be engaged at all levels. They must be given roles in leadership and in the challenges inherent in a vital faith. We must ask the younger Friends to serve and then give them meaningful work and respect their decisions and approaches. We must recognize that with young people, the past informs but does not dictate. We must accept that we will be challenged. When cost is a factor the funds needed must be provided.

At William Penn House, we have worked to make this a reality,
1) The average age of the staff is 34.
2) The Hospitality coordinator is in her mid 20’s, as was our Workcamps coordinator.
3) 5 of the members of our board of directors are 30 or younger.
4) We release our staff to travel among Friends and allow them to serve our broader community by paying their travel and registration costs.

If our small Quaker organization can do this then the challenge is for each monthly and yearly meeting to recognize the gifts of our younger Friends and to change priorities to fund this service and to nurture the many gifts that these younger Friends bring.

"You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.” Book of James

In the 1950’s, the Young Friends of North America was a vital and spirit led organization and during this time there was a very strong group of Young Friends from all over at Earlham College which was our mailing address. They generally had their meetings several times a year at Earlham College and elsewhere. FUM had always been a strong supporter of YFNA, as was Philadelphia YM. But beyond that YFNA did all of their own fund raising and paid their own way to meetings etc. And had very little supervision or support from any Quaker organizations.

Our problems with engaging Young Adult Friends are systemic. From a blog was this clear statement:

The expectation was that young Friends wouldn't want to attend much of the "adult" stuff. And so the program was segregated. Our kids left frustrated and unhappy. We talk a lot about "including youth." We are asked to consider young Friends for our committee work and in other capacities. But if we really expected that that would happen would we have teen programming at the very same time as worship, business meeting and committee meetings?

Our Young Friends are often ill equipped to discuss their faith, because we seldom teach what our faith is about, how it fits into the faith of others and why what we believe is important. When we know why we believe as we do then we can live our faith. If we are to be a big tent of beliefs then we must be open to a broader range of beliefs and be willing to listen to others.

Adults are to pattern behavior, if our kids never attend worship, never attend business meetings, how do they learn to be Quakers. Is it hormonal, one day they wake up and go wow, let’s go to meeting for worship with a concern for business! And we keep it up. We discount their preparedness, their convictions and their responsibilities. Since they function in a parallel universe, we are not exposed to them nor they to us. So when we are seeking engagement from our younger Friends, we do not even know who they are.

So the problem of the older Friends recognizing the gifts of our younger Friends starts with First Day and is codified at Yearly Meeting. And we do not know when to make the change. Do we ever see or hear young Friends at worship, other than to shake their hands and grin as they leave worship after 20 minutes or return to worship at the end. Do we ever see or hear them at business meeting. And at Yearly Meetings they are paraded in for a dog and pony show with the teachers serving as their voice then they disappear and we can continue with adult stuff.

Studies of Young Adults have shown willingness if not a yearning to serve but they like to be asked and to be valued and they know what they can do and they know their abilities and time constraints.

How do we engage our youth if we do not ask them? How do we prepare the next generation to nurture the RSOF if we do not nurture them? How do we grow our faith if we do not share and yield? How do we change if the change agents are not at the table?

Among Friends, are blue collar workers welcome? Are business leaders welcome? Are young people following a different path welcome? Are Republicans and Tea Party followers welcome? Have we become so homogeneous that our sameness excludes others? Among liberal friends, can we talk about Jesus? Among Christ centered Friends, can we talk about Buddha? Can we challenge our elders? As the baby boomers retire from our jobs, will we step aside and let younger folks, who may or may not listen to our muse change Quakers to be relevant to them?

How do we make this change to engage others in the life of our meeting?

But as the saying goes it takes 2 to tango. The older Friends must reach out to the younger Friends but the younger Friends must also step forward. If young Friends do not attend business meetings, how will we know that they are ready to be involved? If young Friends do not participate in committees, how do they learn about the life of the meeting?

“When I was a child I acted as a child, but now that I am an adult I must give up my childish ways”. The young adults, the young friends must step up to the plate and deliver. They must be engaged in the life of the meeting and be willing to serve. The excuse of time is one all of us can use. The excuse of lack of experience is one that will be addressed by doing what it takes to serve. Quakerism is an On the Job Training faith. We can only become Quakers by being Quakers.

“You must be the change you want to see in the world.”
Mahatma Gandhi

Monday, April 4, 2011

The Fragmentation of Friends?

I’ve been noticing a trend recently in Quakerism. Consider these:
• Last summer at a Yearly Meeting gathering, I heard a presenter talk about one Friends organization that has reduced programming by 50% while keeping pensions 100% funded
• A high-tuition Friends School and its sponsor Meeting are considering separating over concerns of the tuition not in-line with Quaker values, and concern about what it is that makes the school “Quaker”
• A Yearly Meeting’s budget proposal that would eliminate financial support for Young Adult Friends (YAFs) programming and support. As a result, young Friends and young-oriented Friends are passing around a petition of support, but using words like “organizing” and “standing in solidarity with YAF’s”.

Each one of these issues, in a vacuum, is of concern. In each case, I could easily take sides and say “sure, people who have worked all these years deserve their pensions, and yes, high-tuitions smack of greed and reek of arrogance and privilege, and no doubt we should support YAF’s as they are our future”. But when I take a step back and look at the bigger picture of what’s going on here, and then look at the larger world, I see a pattern emerging among Friends that is immensely disturbing to me. There seems to be a drawing of lines along wealth and generations that is somewhat convoluted, and all are driven by the current economy. But rather than coming together, we seem to be pulling ourselves apart at a time when we need each other the most. I would love to pose this: We are in a deep economic hole as a result of at least 30 (and more likely 60) years of punting on big issues, and now the chickens have come home to roost. The whole country (as well as other countries) is facing the same thing, and we Friends are no exception. Can Friends be truly prophetic, embracing the community as one entity not segregated or intimidated by generational divides (or any other divides for that matter) in dealing with these big issues? Basically, to use a phrase from a former intern, “Can we all just put on our big-kid panties, hold each other’s truths, while considering what we all need to give up so that our future is bright and our presence is felt”? This would mean that we should perhaps drop all long-standing committees (on race, glbt, Indian, environment) that tend to pull us apart more than bring us together, and reconsider where we see ourselves in the world. We will also need to put our egos aside and accept that, no matter where we fall in the generations, “it’s not about us”.

So, to go back to the three bullets above as an example, I propose the following questions:
• How can we use the unexpected drop in income to best serve the communities we have made commitments to (social justice requires a long-term commitment) while honoring our promise to our retirees and honoring the spirit of their work that only lives in the future through the next generation of workers (most-likely to be YAF’s). I would hope that some of the 100% pensioners might be willing to give up some of the pension to invest in the future, which would also be a wonderful Testimony to Simplicity, Integrity and Equality.
• Has anyone asked the students what it means to them to be at a Quaker School, regardless of the tuition? It’s the parents who have the wealth, not the kids, but it is the kids who will inherit the wealth. Shouldn’t we welcome the opportunity to work with these schools to nurture Quakerism – not as a political value or a practice of silent worship, but as a deeply committed lifestyle that promotes peace and justice, including economic equality? I’m not sure we help this effort by arrogantly looking down on the tuition or the ego-driven life to get into the best school and to be a huge success.
• To the YAF’s: How is “A movement of Solidarity” nurturing compassion and understanding? Does the loss of this position mean you can’t carry on? I don’t mean to sound harsh, but you are all adults now. You’re not disenfranchised voters or exploited and abused laborers. Yes, your concerns need to be weighed and considered by the whole body (that includes you), but a “movement of Solidarity” seems a little dramatic to me. I have to say that even embracing “YAF” as a separate category has added to a “separateness”, and the elders have certainly played along (or lead? I’m not sure which came first). At the same time, I do know that the current structure of much of Friends is not particularly welcoming of new ideas or thought.

I think these are extraordinary times. As these events unfold, my hope is that we can put our reactivity aside and see that we are all in this together. Let's recognize the challenges and conflicts, and come together rather than choose sides. We desperately need the vision, creativity and energy of all for whom that is a gift (most often the youthful ones), and we need the wisdom that can bring the learnings of the past to the present but not be constricted by past – and often false – visions of how things were. But we need these to make up one body, not separate bodies.

I am sure that this may very-well offend people who I deeply admire for their passion and work as humans and as Friends, so please know that this in no way is meant to cause any. I am really wondering if we Friends can take to heart that we all need each other to have a future; divisions and exclusions of any kinds, whether it is walking away from tables of people with whom we disagree, or focusing on funding only as the issue that matters seems to be little more than a lost opportunity for us to really practice our faith.

Monday, March 21, 2011

You Are My Sunlight After the Rain

Just as I was preparing to settle into 7:30am silent worship, the doorbell rang. Our guest was a black male in his mid-thirties and holding a clipboard. Assuming he was one of the handful of service men who periodically stop by to fix, spray or check things, I stood firm in the doorway and asked him what he needed so I could direct him quickly. It turned out that the clipboard was for his own purposes and he was hoping to join us for worship. When we talked at the end of that half-hour, I discovered that he was in a divinity program at Howard University and was exploring different approaches to worship, but even if I’d known that information (it being a rare event) I still would have sat through the silence struggling with whether I should feel guilty about equating a clipboard and a black man with a professional visit. Without absolving myself of the responsibility to question such things in the future, I came to a rare (for me) acceptance that the perception was reasonable and I should let it go.

I find myself hyper-vigilant, well beyond issues relating to race, about being morally “good”. It is likely a combination of parenting, growing up in the age of restrictive political correctness and repeatedly planting myself in crowds where social justice and community are strongly valued. So on a social level, I am always self-monitoring for my motives, always secretly chiding myself for not feeling enough empathy for certain groups or persons; and on a personal level, I can become downright self loathing for not doing right (or being perceived as such) by the people I care about.

Recently there was a friendship in which I made poor decisions that caused a lot of pain, many enacted out of temptation or anger, and many with the aim of simply doing what is healthy and right for me. While there were plenty of layers to that relationship about which I could reasonably be sad, the one that ended up plaguing me most was the idea that his verbal condemnations, and my self-imposed ones, were evidence that I am a bad person. Though I hadn’t fully connected with that recognition yet, I left the house this past Saturday night with a strong need to keep my mind on the surface and gain positive attention from others. I would process what was really going on later.

At my second party of the night, held at a bawdy college bar, I wanted to work through some of this in my favorite way: dancing. Eager to start a marathon dance night but noting that most of the party goers weren’t yet lubricated enough, I invited myself along with a YAF who was heading to a dance party a few miles away. When I left the college crowd I was in great spirits and told my new friend I’d meet him shortly (he took his bike, I took the metro).

I carry a journal with me even (perhaps especially) on nights when socializing and alcohol are involved, so I was glad to have it with me on that long subway ride when thoughts of others’ opinions and my moral faltering began to slide in. Even while pining for that friend to tell me that what I did was forgivable and that he still thinks I’m good, I knew that the only person who could genuinely make me believe that was me.

So there I was alone with me, journaling and periodically crying, on a cement bench with a fifteen minute transfer wait. A train arrived in the opposite direction that would take me home. I thought, “This is no state to be dancing in. I should just go back,” but passiveness and a stubborn clinging to my “fun night” idea kept me sitting there. When I arrived at the club, I followed the friend upstairs into a room where humidity levels were five times what they’d been outside. I stripped down to what was essential and moved to the dance floor where I rocked back and forth in a kind of depressive stupor, letting my hair hang over my face to help block out the world. Soon his friends showed up and we all migrated to the center of the floor. While I felt comforted to have dance partners, I mostly kept to myself, each moment wondering how much longer I was going to do this before I decided to go home.

Things weren’t getting any better; I was just moving my body in spite of myself and was inches from leaving…until Kirk Franklin’s “I’ve Been Looking For You” came over the speakers – “To all my people in the struggle, you think God's forgotten about you. Here's some pain medicine….” – and I raised my hands up with the rhythm and lightly wept. Real or not, balm for the masses or not, I was reminded that God thinks I’m worthy. The universe believes I am worthy of being alive, no matter how poorly I live up to my own ideals. I danced until 2:45 in the morning, and I got an invitation from one of my dance partners to hang out at another time.

“Jesus you are my sunlight after the rain.” –Kirk Franklin–
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkVD9KyE8ck

Thursday, March 3, 2011

10%, Do You?

We live in a community where many non-profit organizations support and perform activities that are dear to our hearts: FCNL, AFSC, FMW, FGC, ACLU, WPH (William Penn House) and WQW (Washington Quaker Workcamps). Each of these organizations depends on the financial support of those who value their work.

When we are asked to donate, we often respond that we already make donations, but how much? The old rule of thumb is that we give at least 10% of our gross income to charity. Are your combined charitable donations equal to or greater than 10% of your gross income? Have your donations increased at the same rate as your income? Do you have a cost of living factor in your charitable donations?

If the answer is no to these questions, how do you expect the organizations that you support to maintain staff, to maintain their programs, to survive.

Byron Sandford

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

The Spirituality of Simplicity

"Simplicity" is one of the testimonies that most Friends claim as a fundamental part of our practice. But what does "Simplicity" mean? If you peruse the internet, it seems to be about minimal attachment to material things, and plainness. The Earlham website puts it this way: “The Quaker testimony of Simplicity invites us to recognize what is central in our lives by listening to inward leadings and learning from others. That listening can give us clarity as we make choices about the responsible use of our time and resources. A life guided by the testimony of simplicity can lead us to recognize what makes us genuinely happy and to be good stewards of personal, community, and global resources. It replaces distraction, stress, and excess with clarity, focus, and a sustainable life.”

What is missing from much of this, for me, is Simplicity as a spiritual practice, something that this definition seems to dance around, but not really name. For example, the statement that "a life guided by simplicity can lead us to recognize what makes us genuinely happy" seems to be saying that when we unclutter our lives, we will see what makes us happy. A spiritual practice of Simplicity would be not so much that we recognize what makes us happy as that we can be joyful in all things. Most of us are familiar with the Shaker hymn “Simple Gifts”. “Tis a gift to be simple; tis a gift to be free” is how it starts. I am finding that for me, this starts with growing in the ability to find joy in the little things – the snowy day, the winds, the commute to work; to even find joy in the moments when I am failing to find joy. But this has just been the starting point.

I have long been a follower and admirer of St. Francis of Assisi, who has challenged me to sow love where there is hatred, to sow joy where there is sadness, seek to understand rather than be understood, and to love rather than be loved. This has been a guiding prayer of Simplicity for me; if there is “that of God in All”, as we Quakers are so fond of reciting, than it has been the Prayer of St. Francis that has helped me to try and live this better (no doubt failing over and over, but I think I am getting better at it). Francis has been a model for seeing God in all the creatures on earth– the lepers, the poor, the animals.

More recently, as we have deepened our expression of this at William Penn House (in the form of “Radical Hospitality” and then having to explain what we mean), I have started to read more about the person attributed with the term, St. Benedict. As I have delved more into his theology and writing, and more recent writings of people from this monastic tradition, it has brought a deeper level of challenge and awareness to what Simplicity can mean. Benedict challenges us to not only have compassion for the poor, the weak, the elderly, but also for the wicked, the despised (even by us), the powerful, the wealthy, everyone. No wonder Radical Hospitality is challenging. However, there are some writings that have helped me to go deeper in this work. For example, Simplicity means not only letting go of attachments to material goods, but also to beliefs and judgments about others, and of how I think the world should be. One writing talks about “Simplicity of Intellect”, not as a simple-minded thing, but rather devoid of judgment so that a deeper truth can emerge, and a deeper love for our fellow humans which is really an expression of God’s love.

I have seen that when we can embrace Simplicity as an internal spiritual practice and discipline rather than an external expression or focus, I find fellow sojourners for a better world in places I did not expect, mostly because I have seen goodness in people I did not expect to see it in. Ultimately, I think we may also see more simple solutions to some of the worlds bigger problems.

Does this mean that the Simplicity as expressed by plainness and detachment of material things is wrong? Hardly. But I think it is the deeply spiritual, joy-filled Simplicity of Benedict and his monastics (as an ideal) that may be the glue to it all. It is this Simplicity that truly allows us to detach from all the external things so that we can better seek relationships and embrace more people in our daily lives. It is this Simplicity that can help us break through our fears and anger that can ultimately help us to build a stronger community with all of our neighbors - the despised as well as the needy. And out of this community, we can bring great equality and perhaps even more peace to the world.

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Inreach, Outreach and Quakerism

I have been both reading about and thinking about Quakerism and outreach. Some of the terminology has been about "revitalizing" Quakerism. Among the writings that I've seen has been talk about looking within our meetings for articulations of our beliefs. For me, however, when I hear about "revitalization", I think it would be helpful for us to also consider what inspires us and excites us about how the world could be that flows from our passions for our beliefs. This means that we not stop at the Meeting community level, but go deep within our own individual selves and reflect on our own passions, beliefs, and vision for the world. In the process, how can we also cleanse our minds and hearts of all the clutter of our biases and judgments about others so we can truly be loving presences for all people.

As an effort to nurture this within the workings of William Penn House, we have started to present to groups the following:

Consider the following reflection questions. Do any catch your attention? As we do our programs together, we invite participants to choose one or two as the ones to bring their attention to as we do our service work.

1. How do we recognize our unique talents and abilities? How can we use them to benefit the greater good and serve others?

2. What role do materialism and consumption play in our daily lives? Particularly when compared to themes of generosity, simplicity or sacrificial living is this division in lifestyle choice something that can be bridged?

3. To think and act on a deeper level, what steps can/should be taken to learn more about a local, national or global area of need?

4. How do you relate with your neighbors— if static, are there tangible ways to reach out to those living near you?

5. Is there a group or individual you find challenging to love or embrace in this world or in your community? What is the importance of reaching out to these people and loving them anyway?

6. What is your impression of “caring for the least of these” and how can we stretch ourselves to do so habitually?

7. How diverse is your network – culturally, religiously, politically, economically and racially? Are there things you can do to expand this?

8. How can we reach out to others— that is to say, are there specific activities we can pursue together or individually to achieve this goal?

9. In which context and how might we express our creativity and exercise our purpose to “make a mark” (either broadly or on a smaller scale) in this world?

10. With whom can you share your aspirations and thoughts in order to live out your goals with “missional momentum”?

(These were adapted from Helen Lee, author of “The Missional Mom”; see more at www.themissionalmom.com)