Living Water

2008-05-31T17:52:00.001-07:00

The most wretched of Quaker bloggers am I, having neglected posting here for as long as I have. God bless Robert Hopper for posting here most recently. I have also been reading various religious tomes, purchased on the cheap from a used bookstore that opened up down the street from my old house.

I may post my thoughts -- which will be much briefer and more visceral than Robert's very thorough review below -- on a number of these books. But in the immediate term, wanted to share some quick thoughts on a piece of pop religious fiction I bolted through in the last couple of days.

Judging from book sales figures, I may be one of the last people around to read Joshua, A Parable for Today by Joseph Girzone. I have to admit that the writing was a bit stiff and hackneyed, but since the central character was in fact a modern-day incarnation of Jesus, the book does have a certain appeal that pulled me through the text. I also understand the book has been made into a movie.

Girzone's work has received its share of criticism, some from those who criticize the Joshua character's opposition to religious authority. Indeed, I found myself thinking of George Fox regularly when reading this book, and felt that Quakers reading the Joshua books may see this character as a Fox surrogate. Lutherans may find him to be a stand-in for Martin Luther

While I do not want to be a spoiler, I will say I found the ending of this book anti-climactic. Moreover, I detected a strong anti-Catholic bias in the book. To those reading this book, it should come as no surprise that Girzone is a former Catholic priest.

I may pick up others of the Joshua series -- most certainly if they come up in the inventory of the used bookstore down I patronize. This is fiction, and is not the stuff of deep works that are to be meditated upon. But if they make us more mindful of our relationship with God and cause us to contemplate the role of Christ in our daily lives, these books are certainly preferable to other literature.

2008-01-05T13:31:00.000-08:00

7th Day 1/5/2008
Robert L. Hopper

Several months ago, during the latter part of summer, I visited Charles and his family. As I was leaving, I saw several books that caught my attention, and mentioning this to Charles, he offered to give me any one of them if I would write a short review of it for this blog. I agreed, and I chose The Imitation of Christ by Thomas A Kempis. Though I lack any formal training in the practice of book reviews, I submit the following in the hope that it, at the least, encourages others to read the book for themselves.
Thomas A Kempis’ sought a life, in contrast to the culture around him, of devotion, zeal for spiritual truth, and simplicity. He divided the work under consideration into four books, each one containing a number of chapters. The first book, “Counsels on the Spiritual life,” is divided into chapters that address, among other topics, personal humility, reading of the Holy Scriptures, peace and spiritual progress, avoidance of rash judgments, and bearing with the faults of others. In the second book, “Counsels on the Inner Life,” he addresses, among other topics, purity of mind and simplicity of purpose, self-knowledge, loving Jesus above all things, humble submission to God, and the cross. In the third book (the longest of the four), “ On Inward Consolation,” he addresses topics such as Divine love, how Truth instructs us in silence, how to bear sorrows, trust in God, that our peace cannot depend on man, etc. The fourth book, “On the Blessed Sacrament,” addresses communion in the form of bread. The third and fourth books take the form of a dialogue between the believer and Christ Jesus, or a monologue of Christ Jesus and the believer.
I found much of insight as I read this work; some of what Kempis wrote squares with Friends’ experience, understanding, and doctrine. His stress on the need for humility, simplicity, trust, and silence, reminded me of similar counsel given by tender Friends both past and present. In the third chapter of book one (entitled “On the Teaching of Truth”) he writes: “Those to whom the Eternal Word speaks are delivered from uncertainty. From one Word proceed all things, and all things tell of Him; it is He, the Author of all things, who speaks to us” (p. 30). In the same chapter, further on, he writes, speaking of those who seek knowledge without humble knowledge of themselves, and talk of spiritual matters over regeneration in the renewing of their mind and amendment of life: “If only such people were as diligent in the uprooting of vices and the planting of virtues as they are in the debating of problems, there would not be so many evils and scandal among the people...At the Day of Judgment, we shall not be asked what we have read, but what we have done; not how eloquently we have spoken, but how holily we have lived. Tell me, where are now all those Masters and Doctors whom you knew so well in their lifetime in the full flower of their learning? Other men now sit in their seats, and they are hardly ever called to mind. In their lifetime the seemed of great account, but now no one speaks of them” (p. 31). This latter quote recalls the words of Paul to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 1:17-31). There were many other such points of contact between Kempis’ work and Friends’ experience, understanding, and doctrine, and this should be no surprise, for as Barclay wrote in his Apology:
§V. Thirdly, though according to the knowledge of God revealed unto us by the Spirit, through that more full dispensation of Light which we believe the Lord hath brought about in this day, we judge it our duty to hold forth that pure and spiritual worship which is acceptable to God and answerable to the testimony of Christ and his apostles, and likewise to testify against and deny not only manifest superstition and idolatry, but also all formal will-worship, which stands not in the power of God, yet, I say, we do not deny the whole worship of all those that have borne the name of Christians even in the apostasy, as if God had never heard their prayers nor accepted any of them. God forbid we should be so void of charity. The latter part of the Proposition showeth the contrary; and as we would not be so absurd on the one hand to conclude, because of the errors and darkness that many were covered and surrounded with in Babylon, that none of their prayers were heard or accepted of God, so will we not be so unwary on the other as to conclude that because God heard and pitied them so, we ought to continue in these errors and darkness, and not come out of Babylon when it is by God discovered unto us. The Popish mass and vespers I do believe to be, as to the matter of them, abominable idolatry and superstition, and so also believe the Protestants; yet will either I or they affirm that in the darkness of Popery no upright-hearted men, though zealous in these abominations, have been heard of God or accepted of him?2 Who can deny but that both Bernard and Bonaventure, Taulerus, Thomas à Kempis, and divers others have both known and tasted of the love of God and felt the power and virtue of God's Spirit working with them for their salvation? And yet ought we not to forsake and deny those superstitions which they were found in? The Calvinistical Presbyterians do much upbraid (and I say not without reason) the formality and deadness of the Episcopalian and Lutheran liturgies, and yet, as they will not deny but there have been some good men among them, so neither dare they refuse but that when that good step was brought in by them of turning the public prayers into the vulgar tongues, though continued in a liturgy, it was acceptable to God, & sometimes accompanied with his power and presence: yet will not the Presbyterians have it from thence concluded that the common prayers should still continue; so likewise, though we should confess that through the mercy and wonderful condescension of God there have been upright in heart both among Papists and Protestants, yet can we not therefore approve of their ways in the general or not go on to the upholding of that spiritual worship which the Lord is calling all to, and so to the testifying against whatsoever stands in the way of it. (http://www.qhpress.org/texts/barclay/apology/prop11.html)

I, too, am of a mind that we cannot deny the working of the love of God within those whose manner of worship and understanding is not entirely consistent with that of Friends, and we can glean great insight and encouragement for our spiritual growth from the writings of such persons. It is in this understanding that I recommend the work of Thomas A Kempis.

2007-08-22T21:04:00.000-07:00

Review of George Fox & the Book of Revelation, by Arthur Berk, with an introduction by Daniel Berrigan (New Foundation Fellowship publications).

In my experience, no other book of the Bible is as misunderstood, misused, or avoided as the book of Revelation. I can recall my own misguided thinking about this book of the Bible, shaped by the children’s bible study and the preaching in the Baptist churches I attended with my aunt in central Illinois, and the United Church of Christ I attended with my mother near Chicago. In the former, it was seen as conveying a prophesy about a distant future, unrealizable in the present age, and preached upon with a heavy dose of gloom and doom as incentive to get right with the Lord. In the latter, it was referred to as an example of apocalyptic literature, written for those people in that day and age, but having only symbolic meaning for us today at best, or as having no place or value in our enlightened age and time, except as an academic study, at worst. As a young adult, when I lived in Colorado Springs, CO, I overheard many street corner preachers using the images in the book of Revelation to scare their listeners. Sadly, today, we have a world filled with “end-times” theologies, in which this wonderful book of the Bible is used to frighten and enslave, or in the service of a particular geopolitical ideology, and the popular media, which thrives on sensationalism, promotes these misguided views of the book of Revelation. Recently, in a letter, I wrote the following in regard to this: Many Christians, of whatever stripe, have been misled, including myself before my convincement, about the meaning and place of the book of Revelation in our faith, and others avoid it for the same reason, thereby denying themselves a precious volume that, as George Fox pointed out, was written for us. I can recall how radically different, and refreshing, when I first read them, were Fox's openings on this book as recorded in his journal. Arthur Berk, of the New Foundation Fellowship, has written a small booklet entitled George Fox & the Book of Revelation, a work that I highly recommend.

I must say, when I read Fox’s journal for the first time, prior to my convincement, my reaction to his openings on the book of Revelation were that his thinking was so far ahead of others of his time. After my convincement, though, it became clear through my own experience that his openings had nothing to do with him being ahead of his time, and everything to do with being in the Spirit which gave forth the Scriptures. It is only by being in the same Spirit that gave them forth that one may rightly understand them. Arthur’s work is a succinct guide and aid for reflection and study, as it pulls together Fox’s writings on the text and the text of Revelation itself. As said in the excerpt from my letter above, I highly recommend this small but essential work to Friends and others who seek to be turned “from darkness to the marvelous Light of Christ” (p.12)

2007-08-22T21:00:00.000-07:00

Consultation for New Meetings and Worship Groups 8/12/2007-8/14/2007 Friends Center, Barnesville, Ohio.

This consultation, organized and convened by Jack and Susan Smith of Rockingham Monthly Meeting, brought together Friends from near and far, to share, to learn, and to build fellowship with one another. We worshipped, we had Bible reading, we shared in the preparation of our common meals and the clean-up chores, and we also had unstructured time to enjoy the surroundings and one another’s company. There were eight sessions held over the two and a half days of the consultation, with several topics covered in the first six sessions, each led by one of the participants. Among the topics were: The history of new meetings among Conservative friends; What mistakes have happened, how can they be avoided, what does seem to work, and what we have learned; Recognizing and encouraging spiritual gifts, and how much structure is needed? To what extent should new groups be part of a big picture?; What is the role and place in the group of the convener, and the role of the sponsoring established monthly meeting?; What are the responsibilities of the new group? There was time in each session for questions and sharing. The last two sessions were left open for discussion and sharing on previous topics, and the discussion of topics arising as a result of what had taken place in the previous sessions. It became apparent during the sessions, and in our discussions during times of common labor and fellowship, that we shared some common experiences in-spite of having such varied and unique circumstances, and even that which was unique to the experience of another was encouraging to all, for it confirmed that the Lord does not use a cookie-cutter approach to how we develop as branches of the true Vine.

2007-05-10T08:06:00.000-07:00

Knowledge of what is right versus the strength to do what is right.

"For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it and do it? But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it." (Deut. 30:11-14)

Within our hearts we usually have an inkling of what is the morally right course of action. In Deuteronomy, Moses presents the 10 Commandments and makes clear that these commandments are written in our hearts that we make follow them and on our tongues that we may speak them. We know this Word of God not in the letter but through an unspoken relationship with the Divine.

Some people would claim that this inborn knowledge of right and wrong is not theological in nature, but rather biological. Biologists like Marc Hauser suggest that our intrinsic sense of morality is the product of natural selection, as following certain moral codes tends to preserve a species or a society.

The exact mechanism and turn of events that led to the fact that we have this Word of God written in our hearts is not important, and while most Conservative Quakers would not take issue with various theories of how evolution took place or the process of natural selection, to see morality as biological rather than teleological presents certain problems.

First of all, if morality is seen simply as a tool for self-preservation or the end result of centuries of natural selection, it becomes very easy to decide to disregard that moral sense when it seems advantageous to us. We know it is wrong to kill, but if someone can argue that more lives will be saved, values defended or world conditions improved, we may decide to go to war. Making grave decisions on what are right and wrong courses of action based on what we feel the outcome of those decisions will be is an act of vanity. Events in the world unfold with too great a degree of complexity for us as individuals or groups of individuals to know for certain what the end result of our actions will be. Yet we regularly defy God's laws for the apparent convenience of men -- often with unintended, distratrous consequences.

Moreover, in situations where we know what the right course of action is, how can we stay motivated to take that course of action, particularly if we have no fear of negative repercussions? What of the embezzler who may feel that their employer is evil and deserves to be stolen from? What of the wife who feels neglected by her husband and considers an affair? If we are careful to avoid being caught, and if the people we are wronging are in the wrong themselves, why don't we simply commit these sins and feel the satisfaction of having had our way?

In order to stay on the path of righteousness, we must see righteousness as its own reward. While we love our neighbors as ourselves, sometimes our neighbors are hard to love, and in order to remain moral we have to look to higher, non-human-centric reasons to behave ethically towards them. Humankind, the earth, our daily life situations, are all transitory. They are as the grass, and will pass away like the passing of the seasons. In God's time, we will pass in mere moments.

This being the case, why not take the transient, illicit pleasures of life because they are there for the taking? If the reason that monogamy is right is that it supports the development of children, why not engage in adultery if no children are to be produced? If the reason we know stealing is wrong is that it viloates an inbred social contract, as someone like Hauser may contend, why should we avoid the temptation to steal if we don't think we will get caught? If the reasons that we have for walking a righteous path are biological or practical, and if they are based only on what is right or even desirable for us in the moment, our morality is built on shaky grounds indeed.

Fairness, justice, balance, love -- we need to see these things as divine and everlasting. And when we are moral because it is what God wishes for us, and because we delight only in His presence in our hearts, then we can succeed in being moral when otherwise we might fail.

2007-04-21T12:03:00.000-07:00

7th Day 21st 2007

Dear Friends,

Three items of news caught my attention this past week. One of them is well-known to most, and that is the tragedy at Virginia Tech, while the other two may not be so well-known. On PBS this past week, there was a report about the ecological disaster of commercial fishing. Of interest is the fact that over 90% of the ocean's large fish have been harvested in the past 30 years. Commercial fishing is not a "mom and pop" operation, for the most part, rather it is an industry with huge ships, factories that ply the waters, destroying the natural environment and discarding an obscene number of marine wildlife in pursuit of the most desirable ocean fish, and other seafood, in the developed world. In addition to this ecological disaster is the human cost--almost 1/3 of the population in the developing world depends on ocean fish for its sole source of protein, which means that the depletion of the ocean has its greatest impact on the weakest and poorest. I could not help but think of the words spoken by the Prophet Hosea, chapter 4: 1-3:

Hear the word of the Lord, ye children of Israel: for the Lord hath a controversy with the inhabitants of
land, because there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land. By swearing, and lying,
and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery, they break out, and blood toucheth blood. Therefore
shall the land mourn, and every one that dwelleth therein shall languish, with the beasts of the field, and
with the fowls of heaven; yea, the fishes of the sea also shall be taken away.

The reasons for this, and other ecological problems, are many, but the core reason is little if ever mentioned or discussed--the sins of killing, greed, idolatry (literal and metaphorical), nationalism, selfishness, and so on. Until this core reason is admitted, is faced and dealt with through repentance and coming under the government of Christ Jesus in the heart and in one's conduct, all other solutions will be nothing more than Band-Aids. The sin of Adam and Eve was the desire and the act of going their own way and choosing to place their wills in subjection to the Adversary of their souls rather than God--disobedience to the voice of the Shepherd of Israel.

The second item, story of NPR about the new Reaper drone--an air force drone that can seek out and drop bombs and kill "targets" while being controlled by specially trained pilots anywhere in the world. Each of these drones cost $8,000,000. NPR interviewed one of the pilots in training, a fighter pilot chosen for this new duty. He described this new job as less "sexy," but it would enable him to "complete my missions and be home for dinner at night with my wife." I was shocked by this, not that I haven't heard such statements before, but it struck me, and it angered me, and it saddened me. Again I though of the above quote from Hosea. Again, the core reason reason for such callousness is the same--it is sinful disobedience and worldly lust disguised as honor, and duty, and truth.

The final story related to the tragedy at Virginia Tech. One of the survivors was interviewed on the evening news, and it was his forgiveness of the young man who killed himself after killing 32 others. He wished that he had been able to speak to and try to help in some way the young man who shot him. The tv reporter remarked and asked him if he knew how crazy this sounded. This reminded me of the some of the remarks about the Amish community's response to the shooter at the Nickel Mines school--it was seen as beyond understanding, strange, even unnatural. There were those who saw this response as a beautiful example of true Christianity, but it is my experience that even these folks saw this as beyond the ability of most people living in the larger world--this is the same as those who claim that the Sermon on the Mount is for some future point, and that God's commandments are for that future time. I was encouraged to hear what this young man said about forgiving and reaching out. It speaks of what we know, that there is a Light that enlightens every man that comes into the world--Christ Jesus the Word of God.

2007-04-09T07:56:00.000-07:00

What do you feel moved to do?

When I read this story about a man here in Milwaukee who was so upset by a 17th century painting hanging at the Milwaukee art museum that he tore it off of the wall and started kicking it, I was simply amused. Amused and a little embarassed for my home town.

Upon reflection, I have been left with another impression. What if this was the exact response the artist was trying to elicit? After all, art is not designed to depict an event or a scene, but rather to cause an emotional reaction in those who behold it. Vannini certainly wanted to stimulate some emotional response with his painting of David holding the head of the vanquished Goliath. It is almost certain that he did not intend for anyone to be quite so disturbed as to put a foot through his canvas, but it could be he would prefer that reaction to no reaction at all.

Friends, we can apply this truth to our understanding of the Gospel as well. We must not simply read the scriptures from an intellectual standpoint. Rather, we must allow them to affect us, to change us, on an emotional and spiritual level. That is what the human authors intended, and it is that transformation that the Lord wants us to experience.

2006-10-02T21:22:00.000-07:00

A philosophy of children.

Over the last 20 years, I have seen my own feeling about children gradually change, perhaps in parallel with my religious sensibilities.

In my early adulthood, I was adamant that I did not want children. There were too many children in the world already, and in retrospect I know that the idea of the responsibility of children was not something I was interested in.

I eventually married a woman who was also adamant that she did not want children, and when I became single again I was still not overtly interested in children. The tide probably began to turn for me when my niece Cassie was born. I felt something moving within me when I held her tiny, premature infant form in my arms. What moved was not so much my position on whether or not I wanted children, but rather my understanding that we need to love each individual child completely and with as much understanding and patience as Christ can grant us in the moment. This makes children not so much something that is wanted as much as a ministry that one can be called to by the Lord.

I came to think that while some people wanted children, and other people did not, this was not important. You see, at one point in history, people who got married either had children or did not. If the children came, they were a gift from God. If not, that was not God's plan. Later, we obtained technology that would allow us to avoid having children. And while in the past there were impolite words to refer to children born out of wedlock, we now were saddled with new terminology -- unwanted children. Now, we could prevent unwanted children, so that every child would be wanted. Now I am the first to admit that it is best to ensure that one can provide a stable and loving home for a child before having children, but I do believe that in recent years we have seen a continuation of the progression towards parents seeing children from their own, human, self-driven perspective rather from a Christ-centered perspective.

While more and more technology was marketed to prevent children for people who did not want them, other technology was created to allow people who did want children to have children, despite natural barriers. As a result of selfish human nature and aggressive marketing by the reproductive health industry, I believe that currently children are primarly viewed unconsciously as a consumer product. If you want them you can have them if you have enough money and are willing to pay the reproductive doctors.

Adoption is another avenue where money and children can become intertwined. As a recent adoptive parent, I can only relay the nature of some of the discussions my wife and I had about what we would and would not do to afford the adoption process. We had both heard horror stories of adoption agencies that milked prospective parents for all they could, justifying their various fee structures by the end result of the process -- a baby. Web sites and periodicals regarding adoption stress that obtaining second mortgages and even using credit cards are ways to afford the adoption process.

But clear thinking can put the cost of adoption into perspective, and help remove the emotional need one might feel to parent from the financial costs of adoption. Adoption agencies do not provide babies. They fulfill certain functions -- often required by regulation -- to provide foster and adoptive homes to children. By law, a child offered for adoption must be given freely, and very limited compensation can be offered for specific child-related expenses. But just as a Quaker may be critical of paid ministers for selling for money what Christ gave all men for free, adoption agencies can be guilty of the same thing. My wife and I chose a Christ-centered agency and were therefore less worried about this, but as Christ said, "you must be innocent as doves yet wise as serpents." These words of Christ Jesus should be one's constant guide in the adoption process. For just as the heart can be a vessel for God's love, if manipulated by others it can be a betrayer.

Each child is a gift from God to the world -- a gift that comes with a loving and joyous responsibility for those who would be parents. Even days into this experience called being a parent, I can feel myself changing, my concerns being less for myself and more for this child who depends on me -- currently for everything. This parenting experience will bring Carla and I closer to Christ Jesus, as we understand more fully the challenges that he has caring for and bringing man to the Father, and as we execute His teachings within the walls of our home.

Wanted? Unwanted? These are not valid questions when it comes to children. The child's worth does not rely on these things having to do with a parent. The child is wanted by God, and the parent's role is to instill that realization in the child, and prepare the child to grow not only physically and mentally, but spiritually in the eyes of the Lord.

2006-09-27T08:33:00.000-07:00

Blessed are you when you are persecuted in His name
I feel doubly blessed tonight. Not only has my Christianity made me a target for criticism among liberal Quakers -- but now my Quakerism has made me a target of criticism among those who call themselves Christians. Through a search tool fond here on blogger, I sought out Quaker blogs -- and found a discussion thread at the forum at Christianity.com. To my dismay, the thread was dominated by a pack of individuals whose sole purpose seemed to be denying that Quakers were Christians!I could site as much scripture as I wanted showing that yes, Fox's description of the Light of Christ in each person is scriptural, as is direct communion with the Lord. Truly, we can claim to accept Christ all we want, but if we are ignorant of Him in our hearts, are we really Christians? If we continue to live lives characterized by sin and cynicism, are we Christians? From Jeremiah to John the Baptist to Christ, those who sought to bring man into union with God have been chastised by those who honor the doctrines of man over the Word of God!

2006-09-18T18:51:00.000-07:00

Books about children, books about parents.

Okay, this likely will not be the last post on this blog that mentions the adoption process that my wife and I are embarking on.

But it will not be entirely adoption-centric.

As we prepare for the arrival of Faith (the child's name -- the concept already resides in our home) we purchased the book "What to Excpect the First Year." A friend of ours gave us a copy of a book from the same series on the toddler years.

We are of course going to devour these and other books on child-rearing. And I have wondered how helpful, in my misspent youth, it would have been to have similar books on getting the most out of and living with parents. Lord knows I missed opportunities to learn things from my father and caused my mother undue stress and strain. But were such books to have been available to me, I am sure I would not have read them at that stage -- if only due to my own level of development and maturity.

There are myriad books on parenting, and those of us bracing for or the difficult process of parenting will read them, often paying good money for the opportunity to do so.

After all, others have walked this path of parenthood before us, and have gained wisdom that we could benefit from. They face the same challenges, trials and tribulations we will face, and if we are smart, we will take advantage of their memoirs and even scholarly research. Naturally, recommendations by these experts vary and tend to change over time. While no book on parenting can be the last word, we should do all we can to gather an understanding of the joyous task we face.

At the same time, we have the opportunity to read texts on others who have grappled with not their earthly parents -- but their Father in Heaven. And if we have put down the immaturity of our youth, we will read these scriptures, and put into practice what they say.

We should benefit from the experiences of others, in our earthly relations as well as in our relationship with the Lord. As is the case with books on parenting, the scriptures can not fully contain the Lord's intentions and communications for us, but they must be read and learned for the value they contain.

The point is that yes, the scriptures are imporant, and we should read them as a source of wisdom, encouragement and instruction in righteousness.

ON THE OTHER HAND, how much sense would it make to read books on child rearing and ignore the input, signals and attempts to communicate on the part of the child? The answer, obviously, is that it would make no sense whatever. Yet that is exactly what those who stress the scriptures over the Holy Spirit are doing. If we make the scriptures the begin-all and end-all of our understanding of the divine, we cut ourselves off from the continuing revelation of the Lord.

2006-09-12T21:19:00.000-07:00

Earth shifting beneath my feet.

Over the last year, I have have felt more and more moved by the Holy Spirit towards conservative Quakerism. A large part of that has to do with my wife. When I was accountable only to myself, I could hold Christ in my heart in the midst of a more secularly-focused meeting.

I have a harder time asking my wife, who comes from a Missouri Synod Lutheran background, to do the same.

But now that we are adopting a child (photos), who in her formative years will not have the wherewithal to separate the Christ-laden wheat from the secular, politcal chaff, I feel a great responsibility to see the influence of the Christ Jesus in our home.

I feel the Lord's hand in this adoption, which has proceeded much more quickly than any adoption I have ever heard of before. In Wisconsin, you must be certified as foster parents before adopting (kind of like a regulatory quality control process). Our home study and red tape were not even signed, sealed and delivered when LCFS called to let us know they had a child in their care and a birth mother who wanted to meet with us the following night. The young lady had already met with two adoptive families, but the following week we got the call.

Faith (the birth mother named her, and we are obviously keeping that name) is now a month old and will be under our roof as of the 29th of this month. We were hunkered down for a wait of months or years -- which is par for the course -- but a way opened for us. The waters may part for some in a miraculous fashion. The stone may roll away, the skies may open and the Lord himself appear. We all have our miracles if we look for them. The difference between the believer and the agnostic might be not so much the acceptance of doctrine as much as a willingness to look for and see the miraculous and the many tiny ways in which Christ ministers to them.

2006-09-03T21:35:00.000-07:00

Living Water

9-1-2006
1st Day

The Peace Testimony in Action

Dear Friends/friends,

Recently my wife and I visited Friends in Ohio, members of Ohio Yearly Meeting-Conservative (OYM-C). We were warmly welcomed into fellowship; hearts and homes were opened, and the blessed unity of hearts and minds was palpable as the Lord was over all. These dear Friends have been faithful witnesses to the Truth, and not without struggle. They openly shared their ups and downs without pretense.

I was struck by the number of men in the history of OYM-C that bore witness in action to the peace testimony of our Society by serving time in jail or in alternative service. The hardships of this witness fell not only on the men, but on their families as well.
It was made clear to me that their adherence to the peace testimony was more than a witness to Truth in time of war; it was also a practice lived in everyday life in the context of the relationships of husband and wife, parents and children, workmates, and within the relationships one to another of the members of the monthly meetings themselves. I was reminded that Jesus said that we are his friends so long as we do all that he commands; there is no political strategy in this, nor is there a fine philosophical argument necessary to understand this simple truth.

Robert L. Hopper

2006-08-21T19:18:00.000-07:00

Causative versus transactional.

Have grappled for years with the terminology describing Jesus' death as being substitutional in nature -- for the sins of mankind. This is such a huge, symbolic concept that I think a lot of people who otherwise would come to Christ stumble over it.

Recently, I have begun thinking more of Jesus' death as being caused directly by man's sinful nature. Using this as a logical stepping stone, I think it is easier to see the substituional nature of the event.

After all, why did Jesus die? He died because man is full of pride, and we like to be called rabbi, teacher, priest, emporer, ruler. We like to have the illusion that we have power over others and over our own circumstance. A prophet calls attention to the fact that all of these things are meaningless -- illusions of our own making and products of our own attempts to put ourselves in the seat of God. There is but One to whom we should bow down before. There is One who wields real supreme power.

The fact that Isreal tended to kill and persecute its prophets is a consistent theme in the Old Testament. How much more quick and certain would be the death of the one who is transparent to God -- the doorway, the Lamb. This One so directly called into question the common, secular order -- and the secularism of the Temple order -- that he called immediate attention to the depth of human sinfullness.

And this sinfullness reared its head, and struck out and killed Him. Jesus' death was substitutional because in the inward struggle between that of God and that of Satan, one must ultimately win -- it is a them-or-us confrontation. Our collective evil killed Jesus, so by virtue of this, Jesus died for our sins. Our sinfull nature thinks of and can see only the carnal -- the outward -- and that is what of Jesus we managed to kill. The Indwelling Power of God that was in Jesus -- the Christ -- is everlasting and could not be killed. We destroyed the giftwrapping and left the precious gift for all of humankind.

The transactional nature of the cross flows from this causative relationship -- but is not a mere intellectual argument but rather something that must be known experiencially. The fact that the crucifiction can work in our hearts to cleanse us of the very same sin that lead us to kill Christ -- that is an element that can not be explained in some awkward fashion by a layperson like me. Others as well can do a better job of pointing out the relationships between events surrounding Jesus' death and prophetic passages in the Old Testament. Others can make a hard theological case for the redemptive nature of the Cross.

I can only point in the direction my heart has wandered ...

In the Light of Christ,
~ Charles Rathmann

2006-08-14T12:11:00.000-07:00

An Important Plug ...

www.leytecd.org

My associate Perf DeCastro has organized a group of Philippine musicians located in their home country and elsewhere for this benefit CD. All proceeds go to help victims of the Leyte mudslide in the Philippines

Details on the disaster ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Southern_Leyte_mudslide

I have had the pleasure of working with Perf on another musical project, and know the Light of Christ is shining through his efforts for his countrymen. Buy a few copies and be a part of this effort!

2006-08-11T15:24:00.000-07:00

I Had A Dream ...

No, this is not along the same lines of MLK Jr's "I Have a Dream" speech. Although I feel his reference to "the mountaintop" is Mosaic in nature and refers to the fact that he was delivering a prophecy to the American people.

But that is a topic for another day.

No, this post refers to a literal dream I had, while sleeping. This has been residing in me for a week, and I have some interpretations for the dream that perhaps you can critique.

In my dream, I float into what looks like an immense hotel lobby. People come and go into elevators at the far wall. But in the foreground, is an immense bed, perhaps 200 feet wide, with dozens of people sleeping in it. I recognize many of these people from my youth, and as I hover over them, I reach out to one of them and wake them. I tell her she is certainly going to die. She is confused, and drives me beneath the bed. It is at this point that I wake up.

My initial thought is that this dream suggests that I feel the need to deliver a prophetic message, but that I have yet to develop the power to do so. Or perhaps a message may be received by some but not others.

I am too much of a frugal German (every nationality seems to have its reputation for being cheap, and I will not abuse the Scottish here) to pay someone to interpret my dreams. But those of you who are tender to the Spirit ... what thinkest thou?

2006-08-01T13:14:00.000-07:00

ABOMINATION!

I saw this graphic on another blog by someone who identifies himself as a "confessing liberal Quaker."

The blogger in question was writing on Christian socialism, which for me is a contradiction in terms. Socialism after all involves using coercion to steal from one party and give that stolen property to another more "deserving" party. Of course the delineation between the deserving and undeserving is subject to the same capriciousness that affects all secular, human-focused institutions.

But let us consider this image that seems to compare Che Guevara to Christ.

Che Guevara ordered the execution of countless of his countrymen when he was in charge of La Cabaña prison in Havana. He imprisoned anyone he considered an "anti-revolutionary," and personally dispatched many of his political enemies with a bullet to the back of the head. He advocated nuclear war.

Consider this advice that Guevara wrote to Cuban soldiers fighting in Angola:

"Blind hate against the enemy creates a forceful impulse that cracks the boundaries of natural human limitations, transforming the soldier in an effective, selective and cold killing machine. A people without hate cannot triumph against the adversary."

Contrast this will Jesus' instistence that that we love our enemies, and that his followers were seeking a Kingdom not of this world, and therefore would not fight in this one.

Exactly why any Quaker or other Christian would want to identify themsleves with this thug is beyond me. But it is interesting how many secular political activists will project their beliefs upon Jesus -- regardless of how misguided their beliefs may be. It is also interesting how members of hte "religious left" can look and feel exactly like members of the "secular left" as they drift away from the central doctrines of Christianity and the guidance of the Inward Teacher. But any comparison between Guevara and Christ does not warrant any further response, so I will fall silent.

More Reading:

http://seekingthelight.blogspot.com/

http://www.nationalreview.com/nordlinger/nordlinger200501050715.asp

http://www.rejesus.co.uk/expressions/faces_jesus/gallery/che.html

http://www.cyberexorcism.com/2004/11/jesus-of-nazareth-vs-che-guevara.html

In the Light of Christ,

~ Charles Rathmann

2006-07-27T17:27:00.000-07:00

4th Day 7-26-2006

Dear Friends/friends,

There is no doubt that we live in turbulent times, with an ever-increasing pace of change both in the world at large, and on a local level, and with conflicts and wars raging in many places. For many in our world the focus of life is on meeting the basic and essential needs for food, shelter, and clothing, with little opportunity for what many of us in the developed world take for granted, while for many in the developed world, the focus is on acquisition, and poverty generally takes on a spiritual dimension exclusively. The rates of depression, suicide, mental illness, and other social problems in the developed countries exceed that of populations in the third world, which blatantly contradicts the popular view that having material wealth leads to a better, and more fulfilled life, and is a manifestation of an inner spiritual emptiness. The problem is not the material things or wealth in and of themselves, no the problem is a spiritual problem. When Jesus was preparing the disciples for his impending death he told them:

Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world
giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither
let it be afraid. John 14:27

These words are for us as well, and it is so very important for each of us to experience what the Lord promised; experience his peace not in the letter but in the Spirit. I know that my inner life can be as turbulent as the world around me. Often my thoughts race to and fro when I sit in silent, expectant waiting worship at meeting or with the worship group that meets in my home. This is a spiritual problem too, and its solution is found in Christ Jesus, the one who can speak to my condition just as he can speak to the condition we observe in the world around us. The peace that Jesus promised is not an escape, for he also said that there would be trouble in the world and in our lives, but we need only take his yoke upon us and therein find the deep and abiding peace that overcomes the world and its trials and tribulations both global and personal (Matthew 11:28-30).

2006-07-23T07:23:00.000-07:00

Was bouncing back and forth between reading a collection of Quaker essays and correspondence called The Lamb's War (which does not include James Naylor's essay of the same name) and a book by jazz piano phenom Kenny Werner -- Effortless Mastery. I re-read bits of Werner's book on a regular basis, and it is an inspiration and an excellent guide to any improvisational musician who wants to set aside their intellectual baggage and play emotively in the moment. Players who can do this can actually leave the listener in a state of spiritual elation and uplift, according to Werner, and this should be the ultimate goal of a true musician.

Werner stresses that in order to do this, we must draw from a deep spiritual well, and must restrict our playing to that which we have absolute physical mastery of. Playing the notes or patterns of notes become autonomous activities, and we can focus our minds on listening to the other players around us and interacting with them. A certain amount of spiritual strength is necessary to believe that the limited amount of skill we have allows us to play the "right stuff," and not second-guess ourselves, robbing our music of the power that confidence brings. The ability to move people with music comes not from the intellect, according to Werner, but from our ability to step aside and allow the music to channel itself through us.

The Lamb's War, frankly, is growing on me slowly, as its format is a bit disjointed and like an hors d'oeuvre, is meant to be nibbled instead of consumed in a single sitting. But there is an excellent essay on the early spiritual life of George Fox. In "The Pre Pendle-Hill Spirituality of George Fox," Alan L. Kolp culls Fox's Journal for insight on Fox's keen early awareness of his spiritual need. This innate hunger for meaning and for God -- that inward Light -- let Fox see that others around him were deadening and distracting themselves with other things when they should be opening their condition to Christ, the Inward Free Teacher. Christ had come to teach his people himself! We could have the same relationship with Him as did the disciples -- a true return to early Christianity.

So what is the connection between these two texts? Why are they thus lumped together? I suspect there might be a point here, let's see ...

Fox saw the Lord not in those who studied at seminary, or those who "professed" religion but did not practice it in their hearts. Werner stresses that it is not an intellectual study of great players and that allows us to communicate spiritual truth with music, but the ability to limit ourselves -- to build our skill up and strip our playing down to the point where we need not think about it. There are certainly well-educated players with advanced degrees whose playing has no impact on an audience. Sometimes in the moment, self-doubt and intellect even interrupts the performance and sabotages the academic player's performance even on a technical level. The mind must yield, the body must surrender, to the beatific heart which shines out over all.

There are also many individuals who have advanced seminary degrees, can quote scripture ad nauseum and are called pastor or minister or reverend. They wear fancy robes and collars, and address their Followers each week in a church not of the Lord but a church made with human hands. But do they move the spirit? Do they direct people to the well of Eternal Life, or are they just moving air with their lungs, loosing meaningless words into a cavernous space?

Fox, on the other hand, came to ministry not by vocation but by a calling, and felt moved by God to share his revelations on the world. Fox's revelations were certainly not intellectual, and his physical self had to be internally crucified to allow himself to become a vessel for the Lord. In George Fox's Journal, we repeatedly see situations where the "priests" challenge him, but fail in their confidence in the moment. Sometimes they do not show up at the venue of the planned debate, and other times they simply do not rise to the occasion with a credible front as Fox uses scripture to prove that hireling ministry and institutions are against the spirit and letter of the scriptures, and that the Kingdom of God has come and is coming!

Whether we are reading the scriptures, delivering vocal ministry, or playing an instrument it is this shining soul drenched with Christ that must reign supreme. Werner outlines that it is not important for a jazz trumpeter to play like Dizzy Gillespie -- or a piano player to play like Thelonius Monk did (how could anyone get away with playing the dissonant stuff that Monk did -- THAT takes confidence) -- rather it is important to FEEL like Gillespie FELT -- TO FEEL like Monk FELT. Talking about the Kingdom or pronouncing words about the Kingdom is not the same as living in the Kingdom.

It is not important that we know every bit of scripture -- but it is critical that we consume and digest the scriptures necessary to sustain us, and incorporate them in our lives the way a musician incorporates a scale or arpeggio in their playing. It is not important that we believe as the Disciples believed. But it is crucial that we feel the way the disciples felt, that we open ourselves to the Lord as did the prophets and allow God to make us his Instruments on earth.

We must play skillfully with a joyful noise until the Lord!
http://www.carm.org/kjv/Psalms/Psalm_98.htm

2006-07-16T00:58:00.000-07:00

Finished reading A.N. Wilson's "Jesus, A Life," the biography of Jesus mentioned a few posts down. Here are some cursory thoughts on the text.

Reviewers have criticized Wilson for not doing any of his own research for this book, and for various other shortcomings. I appreciate scholarly work on the scriptures as much or more than the next person, and they have their usefulness in biblical exegesis. A book like Wilson's can ideally serve as an aggregator for these various works, and a layman's voice can render abstruse comments in a more accessible manner.

In a few instances, Wilson I think succeeds in this de-mystification of basic New Testament analysis. But he does so with a sardonic tone that reminds me of groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation, and it is noteworthy that Wilson has vacillated between the Catholic and Anglican Churches, but in the most recent reports I can find Wilson declares himself an atheist. So as Wilson chooses and analyzes information, he does so not through the eyes of faith, but as noted in a post below, still seems to have a deeper appreciation and respect for the Quaker Gospel of John than many other writers. According to Wilson, subtle linguistic and cultural clues suggest that content in the Gospel of John was influenced more by the Jewish origins of Christianity, and elements of the language suggest the content likely started off in Aramaic -- with some words tying in more closely to the way Jesus and his disciples would have spoken and understood things.

However, Wilson also spends a good deal of ink suggesting that the evangelist Paul could have met Jesus before the Crucification, and that his conversion may have been a reaction to some type of guilt for a role in Jesus' death. Much of the content of the book is wildly speculative, and Wilson seems to my eyes to slip easily back and forth between suggesting certain scriptural passages are obviously not factual and then referring to them as part of the landscape of Jesus' life.

Some very liberal biblical scholars and theologians can see the scriptures simply as a spiritual history of a people -- a record of their religious beliefs and experiences. Yet, these scholars and theologians can have a deep relationship with Jesus Christ. But the one statement that convinced me with absolute certainty that Wilson is not among this aforementioned group was this passage from page 169 of my hardcover edition ...

"So the historian is faced with a double problem: the problem of seeing what, if anything, can be extracted from the Gospel writings which can be regarded as historical, and the problem of accounting for the faith which produced those writings in the first place. I am not here subscribing to the well-worn 'Pentacost' argument, which asks how a group of poor, frightened individuals, whose master has been crucified could have been transformed into a group of highly articulate men and women, prepared to die in order to communicate their faith in the Gospel (sometimes called in such arguments 'the Resurrection experience') to the world. The poorness of this argument is that it presupposes that we know what 'the disciples' were in fact like before they had 'the resurrection experience.' History is full of people who were willing to die for their beliefs. The Resurrection is important not because of the change it effected on his disciples, but because of the chage it seems to have effected on Jesus himself ..."

Here is my response to Wilson on this point. Imagine someone who believes every word of the scriptures -- including the physical resurrection of Jesus on the third day after his death -- but does not allow that belief to change the way he or she relates to God, and does not have any type of ongoing relationship with Christ. The point of the resurrection and Pentacost and Jesus' ministry is EXACTLY that it should affect us in our hearts. To separate the history and the theology from the religious experience is to my mind to crucify Jesus all over again. My own theology might be liberal enough that there are elements of the Gospels I do not believe refer to historical events as much as symbolic ones, but even for someone with squishy theology the meaning of the Gospels must be felt in their ability to change us inside of our hearts. Whether we encounter a risen, physical Christ and stick our hand in his side, see Christ transfigured on the day of Pentacost as did the disciples before their transformation from squabbling followers into Christ-filled leaders, or whether we simply commune with Christ Jesus the Inward Free Teacher, it is exactly our inward experience and the effect that Christ has on us that matters.

Wilson's book does do a good job of comparing the Passion stories in the three synoptic Gospels and in John, and the book has a few endearing qualities, including the fact that if you are lucky as I am you will find it dirt cheap at a place like Half Price Books while waiting for your alignment job to be completed. Christ-centered Quakers will find plenty to argue with Wilson about, so if a good argument drives you deeper into the scriptures, this could be a book for you.

2006-07-11T21:33:00.000-07:00

I am positive that I am not the only Christocentric Quaker to be wagged by members of their liberal meeting for being "inwardly focused" instead of being an "activist."

In these situations, I find myself thinking of the press conference held by Frank Sinatra to announce his new line of salad dressing. It is purported that on that occasion, a reporter mentioned that Paul Newman was donating all of his profits to charity. Sinatra is said to have answered, "Yeah, we do that too, but we just don't like to talk about it."

To a certain extent, some "activist" projects on the part of Quakers seems to be political posturing -- patting oneself on the back for being politically correct. After all, how many rallies does it take to end a war? If we all display enough bumper stickers, can we really change the way people think and behave? Or are we just stroking ourselves into thinking that we are Good -- when I personally think Quakers should believe that there is but One that is Good. There is but One who can work on the hearts of men and liberate them from their sinful ways.

Some conservative Quakers have a different world view than liberal Quakers -- with conservatives seeing history as being more episodic in terms of improvements and decline in social condiations and justice. In some eras and parts of the world, conditions might be good, while at other times conditions in these same nations might decline. Liberal Friends may see history more as a progression towards a more ideal social state. Despite this disparity, it could be that conservative Quakers are just as if not more giving to those in need than liberal Quakers, but might shy away from some social causes that are not as grounded in the scriptures or Christian witness as others. I am not sure what others' observations on this might be.

My own view has progressed more in the conservative direction over the years, and increasingly I wonder how the liberal wing of Quakerism will hold up as the social pendulum in the developed world swings back the other way. We live in perhaps the most permissive culture in history, and this has allowed us to take for granted our social freedoms. Secular activism is easy in the United States today, but if persecution, imprisonment and death become the reward of this activism, will secular Quakers keep up the fight? Or will only faith in Christ be powerful enough a motivator to stimulate Christian witness in the face of severe hardship? Would early Quakers endure the imprisonment and tortures they did without their sense of the immediate presence of God, and the knowledge that they were doing God's bidding?

Each time I am characterized as not being "activist" and indulging myself by pursuing my own spiritual journey in Christ, I find myself thinking -- first of all -- that in our outward works we are not to let our left hand know what our right hand is doing. If we are doing the work of God, does it serve the cause to tell anyone about it? Or is our communication purely self-congratulatory, or worse yet confrontational towards those who might not agree with us?

I then find myself thinking how this secular activist focus is robbing Quakerism of the power of its Christian witness. In an ill-advised attempt to cleanse Quakerism of Christ, we dishonor those who see their activism as a leading of the Holy Spirit. The Christian martyrdom of Tom Fox in Iraq is an example of this, and the paradoxical fact that Quaker organizations were ill-prepared to deal publicly with his death is analyzed at length on the blog of Martin the Quaker Ranter (whose blog you should check out anyway). Major Quaker bodies like the American Friends Service Committee and even Friends General Conference are so focused on the causes of this world that they have a hard time relating any of these causes to an inward leading by Christ.

This secular focus causes many Friends, I fear, to forget that the battle between good and evil is not an outward political one any more than it is an outward military one. We must first be strong in our spiritual selves -- a vessel for Christ -- empty as much as we can be of our wordly, human failings. Until we are at peace with God, we can not instill peace in anyone else. The source of that peace is not secular political thought, but rather a willingness to disavow this world in favor of the immediacy of the Kingdom of Heaven. It is this fact that requires us to spread the Gospel if we be true activists.

Just as a hireling minister can inhibit the spiritual development of a congregation, Quaker bodies can fail their members in some of the same ways. Hireling ministers can become a surrogate for their congregant's spirituality, and can also tend to sugarcoat the spiritual truth -- or tell congregants what they want to hear -- for the sake of avoiding offense and hanging onto their jobs. Quaker bodies can be guilty of this latter sin, distancing themselves from the prophetic Quaker message to appease their increasingly secular membership.

"He who is last among you shall be first" was the advice given Jesus to his apostles, and a concept that is alive and well in the ideal nature of Friends' decision-making. But at what point do attempts on the part of Quaker organizations to act as a "servant" to other Quakers turn these organizations into "enablers" of these same Quakers as they drift into apostasy, and forget the spiritual and scriptural underpinnings of the social stances they take? And should some of the current "politically correct" stances taken by many Quakers be abandoned? The Religious Society of Friends is structured in the loose, leader-less way that it is so it Christ can be its head. As these Quaker organizations turn away from Christ, who shall lead them back? Who shall provide that prophetic zeal to turn Quakers back to the inward free teacher, and back to the scriptures? Who shall be that much-needed traveling prophetic evangelist to ride into town, pull out the proverbial fire and the brimstone and put the "fear of the Lord" into folks before departing to the next venue?

2006-07-10T04:33:00.000-07:00

While perusing a bookstore last week, I came across a copy of A.N. Wilson's book Jesus; A Life. The book, which purports to be a biography of Jesus, looks at Jesus from the standpoint of his Jewishness, through the eyes of the apostle Paul, through the story of the passion, and other sources. Wilson's approach to biblical exegesis takes me back to my coursework in New Testament while I was in college.

In those years, I approached the scriptures from the standpoint of irreligion. I took delight in pointing out biblical passages that seemed to contradict other passages, or that were politically incorrect. I imagined that I was more intelligent than believers, more cultured. Yet inwardly, I lacked the confidence that my outward pronouncements suggested. No, there was no road to Damascus experience, but rather, a gradual movement of the heart. Or could it be that my heart was stationary and Christ entered it through its gaping holes.

Wilson, from time to time, approaches the scriptures in some of the terse, critical ways that remind me of my misspent youth. He points out the impossibility of Paul's own road to Damascus experience, explaining that Damascus was outside the reach of the persecutions that Paul may have been involved in. He ridicules the virgin birth narrative, and points out how the synoptic gospel evangelists each embellish their accounts to appeal to their respective audiences. He is particularly critical of Paul, delving into the internal conflicts and changing theological views of the prolific evangelist.

Yet Wilson is surprisingly kind to John, the Quaker Gospel. Wilson suggests that despite accepted scholarly dating, John may be one of the earliest Gospels, or at least may rely on earlier sources than do Mark, Matthew and Luke. Wilson's chapter on The Cooked Fish; Or How To Read a Gospel, I think makes the book worthwhile just by itself.

The Quaker approach to scripture -- reading in the light which brought the scriptures forth in the spirit of continuing revelation -- may remove some scriptural challenges experienced by those who rely on the scriptures entirely for their understanding of God. But I wonder how Christocentric Friends approach the concept of biblical criticism. As I delve into Wilson's text, I find myself drawn further into the scriptures, and perhaps coming away with a better understanding of their initial meaning. But what sayest thou? Are we better to take the scriptures as they are handed to us, without delving beneath their apparent meaning, concentrating not on the historical Jesus but the Jesus who walks the corridors of our heart? Or should we seek out more information, and try to gain a more complete understanding of the Jesus who walked the earth?

I am not settled on the matter. Were Wilson's book coming between me and Christ, I would put it down. Could material of this type be more valuable to some Friends than others, or to Friends at a certain point on their spiritual journey?

2006-07-02T12:23:00.000-07:00

I attended my local Quaker meeting this First-Day, and held myself as close as I could to the depth of Christ's inward fountain. Once again, the vocal ministry turned political, and a long-time member began to speak on the war in Iraq.

I oppose the war, but wonder how many modern Quakers came to the society because they are pacificists, and how many are pacifists because Jesus described his Kingdom of being not of this world, admonishing his followers to love their enemies. "Were my Kingdom of this world, my followers would fight. But as it happens, it is not here," Jesus told Pilate.

As Quakers, we must strive to live in that Kingdom and not in the world. Yet so many who consider themselves Friends still view war as a political issue rather than a failure of the spirit. In my heart, I have come to feel that attending rallies that demonize those we oppose is just another form of strife and contention. Individuals or politicians who oppose the war today on secular or practical grounds may reverse themselves tomorrow. Only a spiritual opposition to war can be reliable and permanent, but such is not the case in many Quaker meetinghouses.

This secular focus is to be found without the meetinghouse as well as within. Bumper stickers outside of the meetinghouse hold the names of political candidates -- despite the scriptural recommendation that we put our faith not in men. Other bumper stickers suggest that we outlaw war, even though Christ made it clear that the external law of antiquity now must live within us. Another sticker proclaims that the driver is a proud member of the religious left -- yet the love of Christ by definition transcends partisanship and political left and right, which are positions of convenience for those who value the opinions of men before the truth as revealed by God.

Where are the bumper stickers that proclaim that Real Men Love Jesus, or My Boss is a Jewish Carpenter? I am loathe to put any bumper sticker on my Mazda 3, but were I to do so this would be the type of bumper sticker I would choose.

Which begs not only the question -- not What Would Jesus Drive -- but What Bumper Sticker Would George Fox have? I would not presume to make assumptions on what Jesus would drive. Such a topic needs to be discussed by weighty theologians like Dan Daniels and Your No Good Buddies (see http://cdbaby.com/mp3lofi/ddyngb-03.m3u). But I feel Fox would drive a smallish, practical station wagon appropriate for his itinerant journeys. And his bumper sticker would say something like:

The Power of the Lord is Over All!

~or~

Christ is the Light of the World!

~or~

Hearken to the Inward Free Teacher!

Wars come not from being affilitated with the left or the right. They come from an alienation from God and from living in the temporal world rather than in the Kingdom of God. Fox stressed that the Kingdom of Heaven "has come and is coming." If we recognize this and live in the light of this Kingdom, we can not be moved to fight each other with outward weapons, and we will also disavow the political posturing and intrigues that are also parts of the secular world. Those who would prevent war should simply spread the Everlasting Gospel and allow God to transform the hearts of men.

2006-06-30T13:23:00.000-07:00

Early Christians wrote to each other frequently, and some of their correspondence has been cannonized in the New Testament. Early Quakers also wrote to each other -- much as the first-century Christians did -- to offer each other support and admonishment as necessary. Many of the challenges faced by the early church and 17th-Century Quakers -- including widespread persecution -- are no longer.

Instead, Quakers are facing a perhaps more insidious threat. The erosion of Christianity among liberal Quaker meetings is threatening to turn what was once a vital movement in Christ into an intellectualized, politically-correct body. Others -- like those with the New Foundation Fellowship -- can document this erosion better than I. But a simple way to monitor this transition is to compare Philadelphia Yearly Meeting's 1972 Faith and Practice (used widely by FGC meetings nationwide) with the current edition. More and more, we see a Quakerism cleansed of Christ, and the Quaker writings section now includes writings that are definitively universalist in their focus. Many meetings are welcoming places to goddess worshippers, Buddhists, aetheists, recovering Catholics, political activists and everyone else with the exception of those who seek communion with Christ through worship in the manner of Friends.

Even in the silence, I notice a dramatic difference when I am among Christian Friends, and the vocal ministry is like night and day. So often I come to a meeting with the fervent need to open myself up to the living waters -- as described by Jesus to the Samaritan woman at John 4:14 -- but go away thirsty. I seek the bread of life and go away hungry. Not yet am I among the Quaker saints who are always in the Kingdom regardless of their surroundings. I often feel the need for Christian fellowship and support.

Conservative Friends meetings are few and far between, and far outnumbered by FGC meetings in most areas. So while those who would be Friends of Jesus as outlined in John 15 are no longer under threat of imprisonment as we were during George Fox's time, we are often very much alone.

Currently, I am working to establish a conservative Friends meeting in my hometown, and relying on correspondence with others for daily admonishment and encouragement. On a semi-regular basis I will post my thoughts here -- thoughts on the scriptures and the Spirit and on openings I have had in them. I look forward and appreciate your ministry during these times.