The Unnameable One

For some time I have been struggling in my spiritual life with how to call out to the Infinite Holy One. For me the term God has not evoked a male presence, but it is not an intimate enough term for me in prayer, for heart-to-heart discourse. For years my prayers had begun "Dear Lord", and for many recent years I've tried to tell myself that while that term historically refereed to the adult, male owner of the manor, it wasn't a male term. I told myself it was a term for grandeur, vastness, and powerfulness. But i had to admit to myself that an above me/below me quality and a "taskmaster" quality were sneaking into my intimate Divine relationship. This was not how I really thought the Nurturer is. So aware also that some of my sisters find the term God alienating when used in verbal ministry, I set out to seek a new name.

I wanted a name that I could call out to or speak of, that Ground of My Being, that would work in all instances. That is where I got stuck for several years. I tried out terms like Goddess, Creator, Comforter, etc. Nothing felt right. Goddess just put a different gender on a Being I find genderless. Creator wasn't the one I could pray to in grief. Comforter is not the One who made the Universe... and it went on and one. My whole prayer life seemed adrift. I was trying to change how I prayed to reflect more my feeling of calling on the Inner Light and the Outer Light to move in concert in my life. But how does one form a prayer without words?

Finally, in one of those divine ironies where one gives in order to get, I was leading a workshop on personal theology at the Friends General Conference Gathering and the answer was opened to me. The workshop was on theologies we construct for ourselves, and I had invited people that morning in small groups to look at how they conceptualized and called out to the Divine. As I visited the groups and as they reported back to the large group, I again heard the familiar struggle. Many names were put forth: Yahweh, the Light, God, Ground of my Being, Goddess, Abba, etc. But either the speaker or the listeners always expressed frustration with the terms. Nothing was ultimately the right fit.

Then we went into silent worship. The quite bouncy, joyful music of a Cris Williamson song ("Song of the Soul") came into my head. I heard two fragments of lines: "Love of my Life, I'm.." and "Spirit Divine." For the first time ever, I realized that the first line referred not to a human lover, but to the Ultimate Lover. As I thought about what beautiful phrases both were for the Dancer of my Heart, suddenly all the other names I'd heard that day came spilling in, sung to the same melody, and I saw a lovely patchwork with the many names of the Unnameable One. In a flash, I realized that the difficulty of my task had been its impossibility. I remembered only then that the ancient Hebrews had a name which meant: "that which I refer to in order to refer to that which in unnameable." They recognized the egotism and impossibility (and sin?) of trying to reduce to a mere word the name of the Infinite One. The impossibility of our finite consciousness trying to embrace both eternal, infinite, and mysterious! I had to laugh at myself because I'd been trying to carry out this same impossible task.

But what joy! What liberation to realize I was free to use any name, to use all the names. Suddenly the whole vastness and powerfulness of the Infinite Horizon seemed to wash over me, no longer blocked off by worlds that limited or confined by relationship to and experience of the Divine. I felt the multi-level connectedness to My Mother that I had sought so long in "the right name". As I lived the next minutes, hours, days and years with this new insight, several other things have became apparent to me. One is that I use the name God when my head is talking about Spirit. I use it when I am reducing the Infinite to a concept, or when I wish to communicate to another by a familiar and acceptable term. It is a term I sue when I'm in my head, not when I am in the Presence.

The other side of that is if I listen in my soul, if I listen to "the Still Small Voice Within", then the name I will call will be my immediate and genuine experience of Spirit this moment of my existence. Such practice makes my prayer life far more powerful and makes my vocal ministry evocative. I now have a much deeper understanding of my the journals of early Friends are full of such phrases for the One who Covers Us since they worshipped in a Living Presence who was the programmer of every Meeting. When I first read Thomas Kelly's Testament of Devotion, I loved the phrases he uses such as "the Hound of Heaven," which he uses throughout his book. But I thought of them as marks of good writing, not as ways to call out to the Maker.

I now see them as guideposts for all of us of the intimacy possible with the Author of Living, when we seek to know Spirit minute by minute. What came to me in worship felt like a genuine opening, a glimpse of Truth that my mind did not figure out, but was revealed to me as a gift of grace. I am aware of the battle that rages in many Meeting houses over God language. In this battle many feel oppressed and disregard, others feel the Most Sacred is attacked and denigrated. Each side reels their most personal experience of the Parent is devalued. I offer, most humbly, that perhaps in my opining as an answer for us as a Society of Friends: that we will not find consensus on a "right name", that we cannot argue each other into compliance or a new or old orthodoxy of semantics.

All of the names we call are correct and spirit filled. But if we embrace this as an answer, it must be one of the highest common denominator, not other lowest. By this I mean that all parties not simply "accept" the names others call their Beloved , and not routinely continue to use the same name they have sued for years. Instead, let all of listen to the Still Small Voice to know by what name we will call out at this moment, and that we hear the Divine Whisperer in each message given at Meeting. I wish to share with others the infinite richness I have found in such worship.

This article is reprinted from Friends Journal June 1994

Your Favorite Testimony?

" What is the most important Testimony?" This question was asked by one of the children in my Meeting during an intergenerational worship sharing where the children asked questions about Quakerism which we used as Queries. (Prewritten in First Day school the hour before.) The adults were quick to explain that there was no best testimony, that they were like children - you loved all of them and had no favorites. Someone acknowledged that at certain moments in your life one might be more important or more of an issue. What I found myself thinking about was that I feel all our testimonies flow out of the same beginning premise: the idea that that of God is found in all people. (A belief that I think may also be the one common connecting thread between all branches of Friends.) So far example, I believe that the Peace testimony makes sense because if there is that of God in another person how could you kill it? Or how could you treat one child of God with less equity than another? The Integrity testimony also follows because how can be dishonest or deceptive with another child of God? In the simplicity testimony we seek to avoid all distraction from knowing God. We do not adorn ourselves or our homes in ways that would distract others from experiencing that of God in us or them selves. It of course is also important to come into community with all parts of the Light dispersed amongst people, and to relate to the earth in good stewardship because this also is a creation of Our Creator. We strive for social justice because this is the only appropriate way to treat God's children. It is interesting to see that we do not all conceptualize these testimonies the same way, over time or location. Growing up I recall only 4 being taught: the Peace testimony, simplicity, equality and social justice. Integrity was understood to be covered in social justice. Looking at a pamphlet by East Coast Friend Gordon Browne I see he lists only 4 but they are Peace, Equality, Simplicity and Community. He then lists the call to truth telling and integrity as a requirement of equality - treating all of God's children the same with the same truth. However, he states that plain and honest speech is an expression of simplicity which he has described as not be distracted from God's truth in any form. He also sees stewardship and social justice as expressions of simplicity stating: "Respect for God's creation and, therefore, concern for the environment and the right use of the world's resources is another obvious expression of the testimony of simplicity." He says in relationship to social justice that American Friends are "privileged beyond the wildest imaginings of most other world's people. This fact is the occasion for special awareness of responsibility for good stewardship and for commitment to social justice." So certainly there are many ways to "slice" these testimonies! Similarly we do not all understand historic Quaker behavior as coming from the same testimonies. For example I have heard some people say Quakers wore black and white and grey because of the simplicity testimony and others say it was because of the testimony on social justice and the reality that in those days the dying of fabric was highly toxic and gravely shortened the life of the workers dying the fabric. I have also heard Friends involvement in abolition and the vote for women as alternately stemming from the social justice testimony or the equality testimony. Either, both - it really points to how interwoven the testimonies really are - perhaps because they come from this same root of acknowledging that of God in all others. Friends have testimonies instead of creedal statements because we understand them to be our best current understanding of the Truth. We believe that Truth is known experientially and that our understanding of truth can evolve over time with more information and more experience. So of course the truth is so completely interwoven!

Conflict in Meetings

Recently I was asked by someone on my Yearly Meetings Faith and Practice committee for suggestions for a new section they are writing on Conflict in Meeting which prompted this blog.

The first thing I think is to realize that many Friends come to us from other traditions and are attracted to our reputation as peacemakers.  I think there is a hope that this means no conflict.  We must surrender our pretense about this.  We have as many conflicts as any other group!  Conflicts happen because people have different needs or point of view. Conflicts happen because there are difficult personalities or personality combinations in any group of people.  Conflicts happen because we have an opportunity for change that we maybe trying to avoid.

For many Meetings the most important thing would be to start to recognize the conflict amidst us.  This means that when someone disappears we do not assume they are busy, or have changed their minds about our Meeting.  We need to have a practice of M&O, Oversite, or Pastoral Care (depending upon what you call this in your meeting) – keeping track of people and doing a friendly check in if someone has disappeared.

It also means that when something is bothering us in Meeting, rather than gritting our teeth and assuming “they” will handle it, and why aren’t “they”  (who is they?) that we decide what committee should be addressing the issue and go speak to the committee stating clearly what our concern is and what if anything we see as a way forward on the issue.

It means that as a community we need to reclaim what eldering is suppose to be about, nurturing people in faith and holding them accountable lovingly if they are behaving in unQuakerly ways.  For example if someone is starting to make people in meeting uncomfortable with their behavior that we speak to them stating clearly what the behavior is and how it effects people rather than hoping the problem will just stop and waiting till a bigger crisis arrives when they upset someone who then also acts inappropriately.

It means that when there is a “difficult” personality in the Meeting, that the committees which are affected need to talk about how to respond lovingly.  This may mean setting clear boundaries for the person, consistent feedback, support so they can observe requirements of the meeting, mediating between them and other Friends they have upset, or naming clearly to community what the problem is.  The committee handling it needs to consider whether there is a mental health issue at hand.  Ignoring this question often leaves the committee under prepared and misguided in their approach.  If it is a mental health issue, consulting with a mental health professional, and tailoring an appropriate response will be more effective and ultimately more loving.

Some examples of this:  One Meeting had a man who was schizophrenic who came and would regularly stand and give long delusional paranoid rambling messages.  Pastoral care first gave him guidelines for appropriate speaking in Meeting.  When he was not able to observe these guidelines, they told him that some of them would meet with him each Sunday in the library for worship until he could observe boundaries.  He came to the library a couple of times and then chose not to attend anymore.

Another Meeting had two people who were very provoked by each other and often responded to each others messages, “arguing” in their responses.  M&W met with each separately reminding them of the ground rule of not responding to each other in Meeting for Worship.  When this did not work they convened a meeting with both present to discuss the problem and their reactions to each other.  While this was not wholly successful either, it is an example of engaging the problem rather than avoiding it.

In a third example a person regularly had “tantrums” during business Meeting – nothing was done, awkward silence followed month after month.  More and more members started leaving the Business Meeting and also the Meeting as a whole.  This is an example of not handling the conflict and the price that is paid.

Sometimes a difficult issue may cause huge conflict over a period of time in business Meeting and when the issue is finally resolved or laid down, there are still hurt feelings and disturbed relations within the Meeting.  Again best to address this directly, sometimes M&O can facilitate healing dialogues with parties especially estranged.  Another practice used successfully by many Meetings is holding a “Meeting for Worship for Healing” after the conflict ends.  Someone reads a brief statement of what has occurred that has left wounds and then the hour is give to worship for healing.  Remarkable messages and forgiveness can arise out of such Meetings for Worship.

I want to recognize also that conflict is different in Meetings of different sizes.  In very large Meetings often things can fall between the cracks because not everyone is even aware of a problem, it is often unclear what committee should address it, etc.  In more medium size ones members maybe stressed with other Meeting demands and find it hard to marshal time and energy around conflicts.  But in small worship groups or Meetings conflict can be really deadly.  There is no “neutral committee” because everyone is involved in some way.  Conflict can threaten to have people leave and this can than threaten the very survival of the group itself.  Those who contribute more to the Meeting, whether energy or money, maybe attended to more than others, etc.   So in small Meetings it becomes especially important to figure out how to pull in outside resources.

Seeking outside resources may mean inviting someone from M&O of Quarterly or Yearly Meeting, or a FGC traveling ministry Friend, or even sometimes inviting speakers or outside Quaker visitors can break up the dynamic and bring new ideas, points of view, etc.  It may mean knowing social service resources available in the community.  In general I think a Meeting has to view realistically the energy and people available within the Meeting and figure out when to pull in outside resources or when they maybe more appropriate.  For example a couple having problems in the Meeting may better be served by a referral to couple’s counseling than by a clearness committee trying to work with issues beyond their skill level.

The Chinese character for conflict also contains the character for opportunity. Perhaps if we approach conflicts in Meeting this way we can also reap its benefits.  Just as we experience in consensus decision making that by listening more deeply to each other we can sometimes to come to more eloquent and complete responses.

Birds of Many Feathers

Benigno Sanchez-Eppler spoke as the Friend in residence at NPYM.  One of the things he shared with us about is both the evolutionary path of salamanders as they went from the south end of the desert in California around both sides and meeting again at the top, and also a certain song bird in the Gobi desert also evolving around both sides and meeting again at the top.  He explains the salamanders change a little in each range while containing outliers in each range like salamanders from the other groups.  But by the time the two groups again meet at the top of the dessert they are too different in their internal structure to mate.  With the song birds he says he finds most tragic that "they do not recognize each others love songs."  He says that scientists however cannot categorize them as separate species because they share the common ancestor and are still genetically far more similar to dissimilar.  (My daughter tells me that scientifically they would be different species but the same genotype.)

While Benigno does not directly compare these creatures to the Society of Friends, the parrells are fairly strongly apparent.  All branches of the Society of Friends claim George Fox as their founder and are influenced and inspired by his life and words in different ways.  And it is also true that for the most part we are no longer able to comfortably worship together.  There are outliers in each branch that look more like and might more comfortably fit in other branch.  There are Quakers that have moved from one branch to the other.  And yet if we were to try to merge back together eliminating the splits- there are differences so great that a great violence would be done - alienating or destroying many of the flock"  of each branch along the way.

However, Benigno points out by the diversification and adaptation of each group "they cover a lot more territory" and the cross mating by the most closely related groups strengthens both groups.  I feel a sigh of relief and contentment at this.  Yes I am happy that Quakerism took an adaptation that allowed it to reach millions in Africa, and that it took forms that allowed it to survive in revivalist corn-belt communities, etc.  I am glad that there are "birds" like me across the world who hold up ideals of non-violence, simplicity and equality and integrity.  I don't need them to be just like me or worship like me, nor do I wish to be just like them.  Some life long feeling that we are out of integrity with our own peace testimony because we cannot heal our own splits, melts in me.  I feel my whole body relax.  Maybe we can just appreciate the diversity with which Friends show up in the world and breadth and depth of our reach upon the planet!

Balance and Spaces

The worship sharing I sat in asked us queries about our relationships: family, friends, work, community, nature, self, spirit, etc.  and if our relationships were in balance.  As friends shared it became apparent that balance wax and wanes in life with both predictable and unpredictable events: the birth of triplets, the loss of a job, a sudden health situation, changes for others in our life.  Some events allow us to grow in areas of our lives, others complicate things.  We ebb and we flow.

Later one man spoke of the role of grief in our process and spoke about grieving for some trees lost out of his yard after a storm.  I thought of trees that were cut out the 2nd Growth grove of trees around my Meeting when we did our remodel and also one big one that just fell in a windstorm.  The man commented that when trees leave they leave a space for light to come through.  That I thought was an interesting way to think about it.  At our Meeting when the tree fell some member asked if the "other trees had noticed" (and in fact grove trees our connected by their roots.  The sense then was of a space left that was grieved by the other trees, but now his comment suggested to me that with a new space, a place for light to come what also is now possible? 

I realized there are always little seedlings working year by year on becoming bigger trees, but we tend to ignore them because they seem so small and relatively insignificant compared to the bigger trees.  I realized though with more light they would grow more quickly.   We would notice the loss of the big trees and worry that there were "less" and "cannot be replaced", have a scarcity thought.  But in fact their replacement is already on its way and in the seasons of the woods there are always big trees and medium trees and small trees - in balance (unless messed with by humans.)   This Quarterly the adults were all pleased that half our attenders were children.  Long I have worried about the big gap of Quakers in their 40's, but somehow despite this....the children are now coming.  The promise of possibility is always there.

And so in our lives also where things maybe off balance and we cannot anticipate the next thing, the next change or the next possibility or the next lost.  Somehow it all does flow exactly as it needs to.

Membership in the Society of Friends

The April issue of Friend's Journal raises a number of interesting issues about membership.  One being the peculiar habit Friends have of identifying through their membership in a Meeting (specific Congregation), a trait not found in other denominations.  It also asks us to look at whether this emphasis on membership also makes some (especially young adults not yet able to put down roots) feel unwelcome or like second class citizens.  These are good questions.  Too some degree the concept of membership is one that belongs heavily to another time and place.

However, I think, that like other things, in a heavily secular world we begin to forget the religious reasons for membership.  Early Friends believed deeply in an accountability to the fellowship which was held in a Meeting and a group of people. Quakers had rejected both a Pope or clerical hierarchy as the source of Truth and even said the Bible was not the primary source of truth (but A source of Truth), but rather that Truth was to be found experientially.  After the James Naylor incident, it became clear to Friends that there had to be some sort of check and balance on the truth that was found individually - that it had to be tested and held accountable to the collective wisdom or Truth of the fellowship.  Thus membership in a Meeting became the group which would discern with a member all of the most important decisions of a lifetime: to marry, to pursue a specific career or a call to ministry or activism.

Fast forward 350 years to the United States where the entire population is highly mobile - usually living in many locations during a lifetime - and where young adults are the most transit of all and our current way of doing membership does not fit particularly well.  I personally favor moving to allowing young adults to place their membership in their Yearly Meeting until they feel rooted enough in one place to move it to a specific Monthly Meeting.   I was raised a Friend and so went off to college with my membership sitting in the Meeting I grew up in.  I knew it did not make sense to transfer it while I was in college (often to tired to even get to Meeting on Sunday.)  And in my twenties and early 30s, post college I lived in 6 locations before I settled.  I then moved to Seattle which has 4 Meetings and worship groups.  For one reason or another I was in each of them before I finally knew I was home at the 4th one.  By then I was 36!  In other words it was a long journey, yet I had the convenience of having my membership sit in my patient Meeting I grew up with, while being able to list where I was sojourning at the time.  What if I had not already had a membership somewhere?

It makes more sense to me that we hold young Friends membership in their Yearly Meeting than go the direction that some would suggest of simply discarding the idea of membership.  They could pay theirannual fee directly into the Yearly Meeting.   Although of course there is the practical reality that Meeting Houses cost money and that membership is a shared agreement to shoulder together the costs of our collective existence.

For those who come to Quakerism from another faith I think our approach to membership is somewhat puzzling.  For many churches becoming a member is not any more significant than signing up for a book group.  We however, hold a clearness committee for potential members and report back to Business Meeting whether we feel clear to accept the person into membership.  For many this is an intimidating process.  I recall in my Meeting growing up a long time attender who never applied for membership out of concern that her husband's employment for a major arms manufacturer might "disqualify" her  - she was never talked out of this concern because there were indeed members of Meeting who felt they would not be clear to accept her under that circumstance.   Is membership as value free as taking out a library card?  Or does it stand for a set of values?  This I think is something we must continue to grapple with and not ignore.  I also recall someone in my Yearly Meeting not applying for membership because they felt they were not "good enough" morally pure enough.  That seemed tragic to me.

For those older attenders who are ambivalent about membership - unclear what's its purpose or benefits might be, I would offer the following:  Some of us look for the perfect Meeting waiting to apply for membership till we find that Meeting- like some singles on the dating scene that will be an eternal wait - there are no perfect mates or Meetings!  In fact I think it is very helpful to think of membership sort of like a marriage - it is a two way commitment.  At its best it brings great gifts and fulfillment, at its worst it can be a lot of work and sometimes painful.  However, like a marriage when we find it not wholly satisfying or lacking in someway it is time to work at improving it, rather than treating it like we are spectators of a sporting event, uninvolved in the outcome.  Like a marriage we may also be asked of in ways that stretch us and lead to growth.

Both as a place of accountability and as a place of spiritual work and growth, I think the spiritual aspects of membership are compelling and not to be cast aside as some sort of old fashion idea.  We need to not confuse it with membership in a more secular group like a social club, or membership where memberships either help define social status or identity.  That is not I think what "the society of Friends" is about, or what membership means in this case.

Of Holy Obedience and the River of God

In the fall of 1980 Ronald Reagan was elected President and in Jan. 1981, as a student on office campus study in D.C., I watched his administration come to town.  Thousands of Republicans swooping down on the city, with special hats and buttons, celebrating that “happy days” were coming again.  I watched in horror and shock as the streets were taken over on inauguration day by the military, including tanks, and it felt like a coup de tat. This was followed quickly by an avalanche of legislation to cut social services and the safety net of the poor, and his new budget came out proposing cuts that would take services back a decade or more.

The Community for Creative Non-Violence, a Catholic Worker house that served the poor in Washington, DC called for national days of actions, people getting arrested for days at the White House to protest these cuts.  I felt drawn to this action, but also nervous about the idea of getting arrested having never done civil disobedience.  I was leaving town soon and was mainly concerned about possibly needing to come back to town to attend court.

As part of wrapping up my stay in D.C., I did something I had intended to do for all the months I had been there: visit the Smithsonian Museum of History.  A friend dropped out the day we were to go, so I went alone.  I went through an inspiring exhibit documenting political protests in the US of many eras.  But then I went through an exhibit I will call “This American Life” although I don’t know what it was really called.  It started with a panorama of Native American images, then of life in the colonies, and on decade by decade showing the dust bowl, the great depression, many wars, etc.  Each a room of a home – some desperately poor some modestly middle class, some even opulent.  Slowly technology enters in and transforms.  My journey through it felt like a deeply mystical experience.  At the very end was a bench which I sat on for about 10 minutes aware that I was deeply centered as if in Meeting for Worship, aware of what I have come to call “the River of God”- the deep, eternal journey of humanity across all recorded history.  Of how people have always struggled for survival, for dreams, for a better life for their children, against wrongs real or imagined, and slowly, but surely eeked out a better world even while creating our next set of problems.

In that quiet on that bench I knew with absolute clarity that I would indeed participate the next day in the civil disobedience, that I was part of this eternal chain of humanity struggling for a better future.  I knew I was also part of the chain of protesters who had won the safety net for less advantaged and that it was now my turn to help protect it.

The next day I took public transit to the CCNV house, and met an affinity group from Buffalo who welcomed me into their group to be arrested.  Mitch Snyder drove of us in a Volkswagen bus over to the White House to wait in the tour line, because like a weeks worth of protestors before me, we were to go through and pick a place to sit down and be arrested.  Our group had decided to go all the way through and come out onto the lawn to be arrested.  To our surprise the Secret Service responsible for security at the White House, stood beside us (and no one else in the group) moving with us through the tour.  Clearly they had followed up from the CCNV house and knew who today’s arrestees were to be and were poised to pounce before we would “disrupt” people’s tourist experience of the White House.  I started to feel in this cat and mouse game like I was playing the game Clue:  “Will it be in the parlor with Mrs. White, or in pantry with Professsor Green?”   I think however by the time we got out the front door they thought we had lost our nerve and wandered off briefly, only to come rushing back when we veered onto the lawn against posted rules.

As we sat down in a circle on the lawn I quickly found myself in deep and centered prayer, with a sense of White Light all around me, really in one of the most holiest of moments in my life.   Faintly behind me as if coming from some other reality I could hear the voice of one of the secret service reading the rule against being on the lawn and warning us that if we did not leave within 5 minutes we would be arrested.  I almost laughed out loud because it seemed so funny to me that in this deep place of Holy Obedience that I found myself that this mere mortal thought he had the authority to move me from the place I was so anchored.

We were arrested, held for a few hours and released to our own recognizance, and a week later at our trial plead nolo-contender (meaning I do not admit guilt but do not contest the truth of the charges.)  We were given suspended sentences and sent on our way.

Today almost 30 years later as I study the economic crash of 2008, and the slow destruction of the middle class that has taken place over that time, of the ever widening inequality gap in this country between the rich and the poor and the very deliberate strategy on the part of the Koch brothers and other members of the most rich elite of this country carried out over those thirty years, I see that indeed that moment in time was a turning point.  I am once again convinced that Spirit led me to just the right spot and the right moment on the White House Lawn.

As we face Climate Change we are again at just such a pivotal time and some of us will again need to heed our place in the chain of protestors who have acted to protect life, and we will again need to find where
spirit would have us sit or act to say No to destruction.