Gratitude and Expectations

I have been thinking about Gratitude.  I remember a f/Friend of mine who sent out a Christmas letter in which she invited us all to play the "thanksgiving game".  She said it is easy and gave examples that she is thankful that she can see so she can read, that she is grateful that she can walk so she can go places.  She is slowly loosing her eyesight and had polio as a child and so it makes sense that she is grateful for such things.  As an able bodied person it , unfortunately, never occurs to me to be thankful for such things.  I have an expectation that I will see and walk and because I have that expectation I take it for granted.  In fact I sometimes struggle to find what to be grateful for, focusing on problems and feeling sorry for myself about those things.  My expectations often cause me problems as I get upset by things which are not as I thought they would be.

Right now I have a lot of gratitude- in fact I feel a little like someone who has won the lottery and keeps expecting someone to come knock on their door and ask for the check back because it is all "a big mistake".  I have been thinking about how expectations, like goals and dreams are generally a good thing and help us aim for things and collectively move forward in life.  And yet I am aware of how we can become so attached to a dream, or a goal as to have the expectation that life will be a certain way and experience great disappointment or frustration when it is not that way.  So I have sat in the silence of Meeting trying to reconcile those two things - the good of our dreams and the problems of our expectations.

I thought about the old saying:  "I will do X tomorrow, God willing and the Creek don't rise".  One thing about that saying is it makes the assumption that all or our intentions are subject to God's will.  It occurs to me that the problem with expectations, dreams or goals is not having them, but when we do not subject them to The Divine Author, but rather see our lives as separate from God wholly of our own making.  Among other things this does separate us from the source of our blessings.  When we are not busy being our own Creator, it is easier to notice all the many small and large blessings and goodness of the Creator.

Is There a God?

I was 12 years old and I was sitting on a bench in Meeting for Worship and I was wondering: "Is there a God?"  This seemed like an important question to which it was not clear how one could get an answer to this question.  As I sat there I looked at a purple Iris outside the window with a huge dew drop on the petal.  The sun was hitting it refracting a rainbow within the dew drop.  I rejoiced in the beauty and majesty of all this!

I reflected upon what we had just been studying in biology: about how flowers reproduce, about how light is refracted, about how water evaporates and goes up in the air and is held in clouds and then is released in rain, and the whole rather perfect cycle of nature there, and in reproduction of plants, and of birth and death and rebirth of plants and animals, etc.  "It is all perfect", I thought.  And suddenly I knew; I knew there is a God.  Because I realized nothing could accidentally or randomly occur that was this perfect.  I saw there was an intelligence in the universe.  I felt an energy that could be turned to for guidance and wisdom.

As I got older I would contend with questions like: Why does God allow suffering? What does God want me to do and how do I know?  How do I pray?  And what is the correct name of God?  But for then, for 12, it was just good to know there is a God.

When I was much older I had a long argument with a friend who identifies himself as an Atheist.  I told him that while I could understand someone being Agnostic, not knowing if there is a God that I did not know how he could claim to know conclusively that there is not a God when others say they have experienced God directly.  He made various arguments and asked me several times to what my experience of God was.  I described it and he said he had not had that experience. I acknowledged that but said I still did not think he could dismiss others experience. 

He did acknowledge that there is a principle of intelligence within the Universe, but then said crossly that he did not understand why I was calling that God.  I said that I did not understand why he would refuse to call it God.  He talked over and over again about the evils of the church throughout history.  I acknowledged that the organized churches have done many evil things and that that is the doing of humans while hiding behind the cloak of the church.  I said that you could not throw God out with the churches.  He eventually said that if I was calling the Mind of the Universe God that he agreed that it existed, but found it unnecessary to call it God.

We were young then.  I have not asked him where he turns for comfort when the world looks dark?  Or where he finds strengthen when he has to do the hard things? Or what helps him to find connection to all people around him even the crappy ones?  But these are reasons why I have discovered there is a God not just a Mind of the Universe.

A Matter of Convenience

A commercial crackles over the radio...it is presenting the idea that a man proposes over the phone and then his cell phone cuts out so he does not get his intends response, thus destroying the engagement.  The commercial makes clear that life will only be good if one has the right cell phone service.  In fact a myriad of ads tell Americans on a daily basis that our lives will only be good and "right" if we have convenience, if it is easy.  The message line over and over again is our lives are supposed to be easy.

Right now the globe requires of all people living in first world countries that we live less energy intensive lives which means less convenient lives.  Several years ago my family peace group decided as a group that we needed to stop using plastic bags in stores because they are made of petroleum.  This meant needing to own and bring to the store our own bags.  Now that sounds SO simple right?  Wrong.  I discovered keeping them in the car was easy, but time and time again I would get in the store to realize I left them in the car.  If I was not all the way in the checkout line I would make myself go back out and get them which eventually ingrained habit. 

But I was amazed how hard I found the habit to make.  I realized I had been RAISED to never have to prepare for going to the store - to just have what I needed there.  It is the same with using real products over paper plates, cups, plastic silverware and paper napkins or paper towels.  All these things waste resources and can easily be replaced with real items....All it requires is preplanning and the willingness to clean the items afterwards.

My favorite example of this engrained American way of thinking is a friend of mine decided she was going to start a campaign to get people to bring their own mugs to coffee shops.  She went to her favorite coffee shop to ask them something about how much the cups cost them and while she was there ordered a coffee. She then looked down and realized she was drinking out of a paper cup that the coffee she had just ordered was put in!

In a support group I later joined to look at Climate Change issues a friend joked:   "Hi my name is Rick and I'm a carbon addict"  at first we laughed at this 12-step parody.  But very quickly we began to realize it is NO joke!  We are addicted and it actually requires focused attention and support to change the life time American habit of believing we are entitled to convenience.  In that group I struggled to reduce my driving by riding a bike more.  (I have mainly failed.)  It is so hard for me to decide that it is ok to spend more time getting around because it is so much quicker and thus convenient to dash somewhere in my car.  Opps I forgot an ingredient for dinner and now it is half cooked and almost dinner time; just jump in the car and go get that ingredient.  A 10 block drive each direction for a can of one item.   We do this sort of thing all the time, doe it really make sense? Do I want the planet melted for a quick can of beans, or for the right to throw away my napkin?

Several years after my peace group decided to switch to carrying our own bags,  (I now have a nylon one folded up the size of a wallet in my purse at all times) my city first had a referendum to abolish plastic bags.  The petroleum industry actually spent X number of  dollars to defeat the referendum claiming it disadvantaged the poor.  A few years later the city council, not to be as easily bought, passed a law outlawing plastic bags after July lst.

The second week of July I encountered an old woman running through the parking lot back to the check out line with her plastic bags in hand:  “Not yet a habit” she cheerfully called out.  I asked the cashier how this was going.  He said: “Some people are fine and some are really mad”. At Christmas I got to witness a grown man having a tantrum in the store because the cashier could not give him a bag.  American addiction to convenience is not always pretty!  What will we have to feel if life is not always easy?

Most recently my sweetheart has challenged me to look at being completely vegetarian.  I was completely vegetarian for 10 years and partially vegetarian for some two decades more.  I added fish back in as a matter of convenience.  I was driving three times a week along a hwy where I had to purchase my dinner and it was littered with only fast food restaurants.  After a year of bean burritos three times a week I could not look at one without feeling slightly sick, so I added fish back in.  For years and years I ate meat only outside of my home in restaurants because it was hard (read inconvenient) to find restaurants with vegetarian options.  (In foreign cities it often requires careful internet research ahead of time.)  However eating no meat is the carbon equivalent to going from a gas guzzler to a Prius. I must once again look at this peculiar American obsession and feeling of entitlement to convenience. Eating no meat is the greatest reduction in carbon most Americans could make.  Since I have been in the business for the last few years of encouraging Americans to reduce their carbon foot print, it certainly makes my witness more integral.  So for New Years I will eat a ceremonious last fish and then stop eating all meat.

 "How inconvenient."  Good thing Al Gore named it an inconvenient truth that our planet is melting.  Which thing is ultimately more inconvenient?

Holy Obedience?

Recently in a lesson on Quakerism, Friends in my Meeting reacted with surprise to the fact that in 1660 Charles the II released some 700 Quakers from prison and in 1661 4,000 were arrested as the 5th Monarchy uprising was suppressed.  My guess is if we knew the total population of England and the total number of Quakers at the time this indeed would be a significant proportion of both populations.  We know early Friends were imprisoned for refusing to doff their hats and for simply practicing their religion, but it is hard to comprehend how deeply a part of early Quaker experience this was!

Certainly over the centuries Quakers have also gone to jail/prison for the suffragette movement (some being force fed), for refusing conscription in any number of wars, and for various individual acts of non-violence.  But basically at this point in our history it is fairly rare; in fact most Meetings no longer have funds for suffering: the funds Meetings traditionally set aside to help provide for the individual and their family who were suffering for conscience sake, who were carrying forth the Quaker witness.

It is not that there are not things happening that contradict our basic testimonies: 50-60% of our taxes going to war and preparations for war (not to mention interest on war), the refusal to marry Gays & Lesbians in most states violates our testimony on equality, the basic American lifestyle violates our testimony on simplicity, all kinds of human rights violations take place inside American corporations everyday, and many would say we have a new testimony on the environment which every one of us lives in violation of every day.  So how do we square our love of Friendly heroes like John Woolman who traveled the country appealing to Friends to release their slaves with those of us who burn carbon to do our work for us at the cost of  a livable planet for our children?  How do we square our love of Lucrettia Mott's work in prisons and behalf of the poor, with the current blight of racism that fills our prisons with the new workings of Jim Crow disenfranchising and imprisoning more black men than there were slaves in the South?

Our testimonies are testimonies and not creeds because we say that truth is known experimentally, that these are testimonies to what we know to be true so far.  Are we still listening?  Some would say that we are not doing more because of a lack of creativity to create effect campaigns on these issues.  Others would say it is a result of a graying Quaker populations (but what comes first the chicken or the egg?  Are youth attracted to a group that does not lead the way?),  Some would say we have sat in American luxury too long and become complacent and lost our courage.   I would say "Are we still listening to the still small voice within on these issues?

Recently, I went to the opening night of the "Do the Math" tour by Bill McKibben and 350.org.  This organization that has sounded the alarm on climate change for over a decade is now calling people nationally to divest from all fossil fuel companies, and to commit civil disobedience as needed at their stockholder meetings.  We have already experience 1 degree of warming and are on our way quickly to 2 degrees.  The horrors of two degrees are were we get sea rise from the melting of Greenland, and droughts and crop failure and species extinction.  The fossil fuel companies have 5x the amount of fuel still under the earth than can be burned and not take us to 2 degree warming and beyond.  The idea is to put pressure on them to change their business plan to alternative energies or risk loosing their profits. 

This will require thousands and thousands to take a stand with their pensions and their investments and thousands more to be arrested.  In the dark theater Bill McKibben asked people who had already been arrested opposing the Exel pipeline to stand, and then he asked who would be willing to "consider" being arrested in Texas in the Spring at the Texaco stockholder meeting, and who would be willing to consider being arrested in the spring in San Francisco at the Chevron meeting, and slowly more and more people stood until at last he said who would be willing to read his email about the campaign and 2400 people were standing.   You could not be there and avoid the internal question:  "What are you willing to do to stop the madness?"  This is a question that I think all Quakers need to be sitting with in the silence and asking themselves?  What does The Creator require of us at this critical moment in the history of Creation?  Are we still listening to that "life and power" that can move us at great personal cost into the path of righteousness?

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.