Seeing a little Light.
Be forewarned, members of the “reality-based community”: the following is another “Quaker thing” post. Skip it if you’re not interested, rather than leaving me comments about how “deranged” I am for being a believer. We’ll stay friendly that way. Namaste.
See? I’m feeling cynical lately. This week wore me out. The students are starting to test us, union stuff is heating up, and family business is - literally - keeping me up nights (having a 20 year old “man” - my son - living in my house is a test of patience right now). So this morning, I went to Meeting for Worship hoping for something more than just the usual hour of peace and meditative quiet. I got that, and more.
I have spent time this week pondering something I posted about earlier last week, something I have been thinking a lot about recently, and that is the Quaker notion of seeking ”that of God in every person.” The psychic pain I’ve been feeling lately about the state of the world - repression overseas, the continuing bloodbath in Iraq and Afghanistan, a “leader” here at home who, for two examples, approves of torture and vetos health care for poor children - can’t be outweighed by the few glimmers of human decency I do see. I’m continually troubled by my own ability to see “that of God” in others. A lot of the people I “see” out there don’t seem to have anything “of God” in them. Their words and actions are positively “unGodly,” for want of a better word. So that adds to my cynicism, AND it makes me feel like I’m judging people. I’m thinking to myself “Where is that of God?” in that radio talk show host, or “That of God is especially strong in her” when I read about someone doing good someplace. It’s like I’m looking for a “God-O-Meter” in people. That last part is especially troubling to me, because following my faith and practicing it every day should be teaching me not to do any of that. It only works sometimes, however.
I went to Meeting today to pray and contemplate about this. I was close to feeling that “thing” that Quakers feel when they feel led to give vocal ministry, the physical and emotional ”quaking” that tells us it’s time to rise and speak, but it wasn’t quite there. It wasn’t going to be that kind of a leading. It was more for me to wrestle with than to share with others. But the more I thought about it, about what was really troubling me, the more I realized that I have had it all wrong.
A light went on. And then - I kid you not - at that very moment, a Friend rose who spoke to my condition. I mean, like, right to it.
We had a visitor at Meeting today, someone from Philadelphia Yearly Meeting (PYM) who was there to speak to the Meeting after refreshments about what’s been going on at PYM and how our Meeting relates to all that. I knew I didn’t recognize him and figured he was just another guest or new attender (our Meeting has had the blessing of growing quite a bit this year, and we have a new face or two almost every week now). He got up and began talking about the messages we had already heard today, all of which led him to think on George Fox’s well-known and oft-repeated quote about “walking cheerfully across the earth to evoke (or ‘recognize’ or something similar: he said this more than once) that of God in every person.”
I may have made a slightly audible little animal noise at that moment.
This friend continued by saying that, while that idea is fine as it stands, it’s the quote in its entirety that is more important for Quakers to remember, especially these days. I should have it memorized by now, as this version is posted on my bulletin board, right over my computer desk:
“Be patterns, be examples in all countries, places, islands, nations wherever you come; that your carriage and life may preach among all sorts of people, and to them; then you will walk cheerfully over the world, answering that of God in everyone; whereby in them you maybe a blessing, and make the witness of God in them to bless you.”
In other words, if I have this right, Fox isn’t asking us to measure “that of God” in each person (as in, some have some, some have a lot, some have… who knows?). He’s saying that ALL of us have “that of God” in us, and that, as Friends, we must start there. All of us are God’s creation, God’s children: we all have a place in the choir. It’s not about looking for the “goodness” or the Light in people, as much as it’s recognizing that, above all, we are all “of God.” This Friend went on to address the first part of that quote, that it’s up to Quakers, who recognize this, to move through the world in a way that is based entirely on this recognition. We must bring this out in ourselves, and perhaps by doing that, we will bring it out in others. If we do that, not only will we be blessed by “that of God” in those we meet, but we can bless others by blessing them with “that of God” in us, thus helping to improve the state of love in world. It was one of the better messages I have heard in Meeting lately.
If I have this right (and I am counting on my Quaker blogging friends who stop by here to help me out here), then this was - pardon the expression - a godsmack. A light switiching on in the old frontal lobe moment. It’s not like I haven’t heard or read this before in one way or another. But I guess it’s like anything else that comes this way: you kind of have to be ready for it. Today, I was. And somebody delivered.
This realization is going to take some seasoning on my part. I need to think about this for a while, because it has a lot of implications for me. One of those implications has to do with what I do right here. It’s going to mean that I’m to have to make some serious adjustments as to how I think and talk (and write and blog) about other people, not just myself. Blogging as a way of ranting about whatever is bugging me at that moment might not be the right reaction after all, if I’m reading this leading correctly. And speaking of reading, I’m going to have to do some more of that, to see what some other, more weighty Friends might have to say about it.
I need a blogging break anyway this week: my work has piled up, and interim grade reports are due next week. I have union meetings twice this week, too, so my plate is full. While I take time off to think, please please please, my Friendly friends, let me know what you think about this. Am I on the right “Quakerly” track? If not, help set me straight, or at least, let’s talk.
Filed under: Quaker stuff, Religion & faith, Religious Society of Friends
Dave, I too struggle with that most famous (for us) of Quaker quotes. Your Friendly visitor speaks to my condition as well, and I’m grateful for it.
Gandhi said it concisely when he said, “Be the change you want to see in the world.”
And then, of course, John Woolman said to let Love be the first motion. I think he was saying essentially the same thing.
I’m no weighty Quaker, and I’m just following a train of thought now, but in a way it’s a little like instituting a new discipline plan in your classroom (and you’ve done that a million times, right?) Is the point to control what the kids are doing and make them shape up for once and for all darn-it and get with YOUR program? Or is it to change your behavior in a way that shifts the entire situation? It might not happen overnight, but it changes over time and in the meantime, keeps you from getting an ulcer.
As for ranting, you might be on the right track there too. You can rant and rip and snort, and other people will slap you on the back and say they agree with you, Dick Cheney IS the antiChrist, but at the end it really doesn’t serve the right purpose. It’s frustrating at best, because it doesn’t get you anywhere … like eating a donut for breakfast! I’m as angry as the next person over the things you named and more. But negativity is all-consuming, it eats you up from the inside out.
And I think this is a place where Quakers really are peculiar. (Don’t you love that concept?) To the outside, it might look passive, Pollyanna-ish even. But it is anything but. It’s an acknowledgment that something is wrong, then you dust your hands and get to work. And for some people the getting to work might be taking a leave from your job and flying to Iraq to be on a Christian Peacekeeping Team. For others it might be a commitment to public witness for peace at a busy intersection once a week. And it might be just going to school and trying to be as decent as you can to each and every person, even the Evil Lunch Lady from Outer Space and the kid who gets your goat. Or making cheese. Let your actions flow from the Spirit, let love be the first motion.
And by the way (and I know I’ve commented this to you before) my dad was an avowed atheist, but talk about being a pattern and walking cheerfully through the world.
Thank you, Friend, for this thoughtful post.
Peace.
One more thing (boy, am I long-winded!) It’s such a mystery and a blessing to be sitting in Meeting and ruminating on something, and then have someone across the room stand up and speak about THAT VERY THING, often using the VERY WORDS that were churning in your mind. That too makes me quake.
Or canning tomatoes?
Thanks, Suzy.
That truly was the weirdest part, and the aspect of it that made me think the most.
Inspiring post. I am a teacher at a homeless shelter and we have a pastoral advisor, (an Eastern Orthodox priest at this time; it varies, even though we are nomially affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church), and he always, but always manages to speak to what we are struggling with as individuals or as a staff. It is amazing and I am glad to hear that others have this experience, as well. By the way, to what do you attribute the current growth you see in the number of people at your meeting? I hope it is due to people waking up to the tragedies the current administration is creating here and around the world.
Welcome, “LSA”!
I think our Meeting is growing because we’re doing a better job of welcoming and nuturing new attenders, and because yes, I think people see Friends’ Meetings as a place where they can combine their faith with social concerns. Plus, ours is a pretty universalist Meeting, so folks from all backgrounds feel comfortable there, I think.
I’m only a friend with a small “f,” but I have to say that I think what you said here is deeply moving.
Hey, ALL (F)friends are free to chime in!
Good morning! I loved your oist, which I got to through Shambles…
My experience as an Episcopalian is very similar to yours, though I find the responses speaking to my needs and ponderings come at coffee hour, in the grocery store, on the phone with friends, on blogsites, as well as during worship. It’s almost like wordship opens the chakras, fixes the settings, so I’m open to hear and see the godness in creation, not only people, through the week. Thank you for your thoughtful words!
As for ranting, you might be on the right track there too. You can rant and rip and snort, and other people will slap you on the back and say they agree with you, Dick Cheney IS the antiChrist, but at the end it really doesn’t serve the right purpose . . . But negativity is all-consuming, it eats you up from the inside out.
Sometimes it takes agitating, feeling the pain, or just raw anger before one will act. And getting others to act with you requires stirring up an awareness of the injustice. (As you quite eloquently and often do, QD).
But, without loving acts, life would be one big scorched earth campaign, I fear. Love heals. Our desire to bring peace and justice is God’s way. It’s our job to help heal the world.
I’m not a Quaker. But that’s what I think.
But, without loving acts, life would be one big scorched earth campaign, I fear. Love heals. Our desire to bring peace and justice is God’s way. It’s our job to help heal the world.
That’s the thing. Ranting isn’t healing.
I was thinking about some of this the other day after stumbling on the website of South Jersey “klan leader” who was planning to march everywhere this summer (I don’t want him vanity- googling his way over here so I’ll just call him J.B.). For various reasons of relations and circumstances that I won’t go into, I’m in touch with the less-rarefied South Jersey world–clerks at Wawa, night shift workers at Shoprite, guys pumping gas alone all night at Sunoco getting robbed every six weeks, recently-released ex-cons trying only half-succesfully to stay out of trouble, brain-scrambled Vietnam vets trying to work their way out of the V.A. halfway house at Ancora, twenty-year olds on their second baby with their second man and he skips off with her bank account (all people I know or have met).
So when I heard about J.B., the “klan leader” who had formed his own group and given himself his own grand title because the national organization wouldn’t have him, I understood. When I read he still lived with him mother, I nodded. When I learned he was fired from Wawa his second week, well, of course he was. Sifting through news account his demonstrations were usually just him and a buddy. But it got great press! Channel Six Action News Live! Bloggers all a-twitter! Groups mobilizing for a counter-demonstration! All for this beaten-down guy from Millville. Think of him as as some blustery down-and-out hustler from a Kerouac novel and you’ll be closer to the truth of the situation. (He’s repented now. Closed his organization, called off his marches, issued apologies. He’s now a born-again Christian, Lord help us.)
Political bloggers were all ablaze when he announced a march about this time last year. But I wonder if your own personal reaction would have been the same if you had just met him on his smoke break around the back side of Wawa and been able to find an opening to talk for fifteen minutes and hear through whatever blather he was dishing out that day, to hear through a crappy life and to see what it felt like to get all this attention, to be taken seriously for once as a man and as a leader.
I don’t know J.B.’s details, but I know the type. Maybe you would have heard him talk about how badly his teeth hurt and the dentist says it will be $10k to get them fixed. Maybe you would have heard him talk about how had lost his license and could only look for jobs along the sparse bus routes. Maybe you would have heard how he had listened to one of those radio ads and spent six months learning to be a computer technician but couldn’t find anyone willing to hire him on his worthless certificate and he’s now $20k deeper in debt. These are all real stories from different people I’ve met. And they’re stories you could probably connect with on a political level–the need for universal healthcare, public transportation, job training. A person like J.B. probably embodies the whole laundry of issues on top of the liberal agenda.
I think it’s actually pretty easy to see “that of God” in people when we sit down with them one-on-one and just listen. It’s not all pretty and we won’t necessarily like them any better. And the violence isn’t just words, there’s real potential violence under the surface and it erupts nasty and mean and deadly and racist. But there’s more to all of this than the simple cartoon figures the mass media dishes out for us. Forget trailer park South Jersey: how much do we really know about guys like Cheney, Rumsfeld and W? If we could catch them on a smoke break maybe we could understand the crazy brew of arrogance, fear and insecurity that drive their public actions. We must oppose their wrong-headed policies
Sorry for the long reply. I don’t know where this all goes. I’ve actually just learned a lot about myself in writing this. I just wonder if the can’t-imagine-God frustrations have been more with media figures that actual people you know. I’m sure you get your share of rough students at your school. What are the differences connecting with them and understanding God in them from understanding the media figures? Maybe the most important part of that wonderful Fox quote is that we must do more “walking in the world.”
I gotta’ tell you, I nearly skipped this very retrospective posting of yours…, It’s just not in my “wheelhouse” as they say, and every time I get into a banter of anything relating to faith I stick my foot in my mouth…. continually!
That having been said, -and being a self-proffessed agnostic-, I am a believer in searching for that spirituality in all of us. I spoke about this just yesterday at another Blog. Another way of looking at the things “that of God” is that man needs to fill his voids,… man needs to justify his existence and aswer those philosophical questions we all have…, where do I go from here? What is my reason for living and being here? Is there nothing else?….
Man’s quest for answers -as is his nature for being self-aware-, is the fire that drives most of us to look for a philosophy that dovetails with the inherent “good” in most of us,… in essence, to find “that of God” in ourselves and others.
I find it humbling, yet terribly amusing that in spite of there being more than 4 billion people on this 3rd rock from the sun, and in spite of the available communication tools,…. man has never benn lonelier than today.
I hope my rambling made sense,… it is a difficult subject for me,… religion that is.
But ranting is not without its merits. However, I would agree that when it becomes all-consuming it is destructive. Not unlike (except in scale) to the ineffectiveness of nagging. Sometimes we need reminders, but we resent the nag.
We need the rants to fuel the anger so that we get off our butts and speak out against our virulent and unfettered ruling class. We feel particularly powerless against this juggernaut, because . . . well . . . we are. One person against “The Man” can hardly expect to be effective. But together we can recognize an injustice, feel moved to do something about it, and draw our strength from the successes of the abolitionist, women’s suffrage, and civil rights movements. There is hope that God’s love will prevail when we come together.
Martin: Thanks for that longish reply. I appreciate the effort you put in to express those views. And I appreciate the fact that, as you’ve been a Friend longer than I, you’re willing to express that particular perspective so eloquently.
This is EXACTLY the battle I’ve been fighting, as a person and as a person who blogs. I remember this guy, and I also remember his story. He made me angry, and I did go after him. And your willingness to see “that of God” in him is the struggle I face, and that I am looking to deal with.
The answer, so far, for me, at least, is to stop attacking so much and to start listening much more, and looking a little closer. And “walking” a bit more, perhaps in another person’s shoes sometimes as well.
T-P: You’re doing just fine. Appreciate that perspective as well.
Hmmm…I’ve been thinking about this post a lot. During discussions with my boyfriend, I’ve talked to him about your blog a few times, and the reasons I like it. Here’s a way too long-winded version of how I describe it to him:
1: It’s a blog that combines a social consciousness with a big heart. It covers many topics, and questions the injustices of the world. There’s outrage, yes, but it’s tempered with love.
2:It makes my heart happy to read about a teacher who genuinely cares about his students and educates them in creative ways.
3: I learn a lot about the beauty and inclusiveness of Quakerism and its teachings, and it encourages me to visit other blogs and discover more.
4: You question your own beliefs, thoughts, and emotions, without being annoyingly introspective. This makes me stop and ponder some of the same issues, which may not have occurred to me before.
5: You talk a lot about sports, which I completely skim over, but I still like the pictures!
Last night, we discussed being aware of God’s presence in others, and what you came to understand about it. It generated a lovely conversation.
So there it is, for what it’s worth. As you know, I really like your blog, and although you wonder about too much agitating, I believe that you do a great service here.
Okay, when I stop, like, being choked up here, I’ll say thanks.
Now you’ve given me more to think about.
I heard a message once in Meeting that I keep with me. “You don’t have to see that of God in someone to speak to it.”
ok…. I’m hopping over the Moonbeammcqueen’s and give her some serious props. That had to be one of the nicest and most heartfelt things I’ve ever heard one Ranter give another Ranter…. I can’t get over how kind it came across. Very deserving.
I was close to feeling that “thing” that Quakers feel when they feel led to give vocal ministry, the physical and emotional ”quaking” that tells us it’s time to rise and speak, but it wasn’t quite there. It wasn’t going to be that kind of a leading.
Oh my gosh! Is that really where the term “quaker” comes from? I often do that when I’m in a discussion that I feel rather passionately about. I just figured it was a bad case of the nerves. Does your religion teach that it has a deeper significance?
BTW, isn’t MoonbeamMcQueen the greatest? Love her.
“Quaker” was originally a derogatory term applied to members of the Society of Friends (or Seekers or Children of the Light, as they were originally called) because some folks noted that Friends literally “quaked” because of the intensity of their beliefs. As members of persecuted groups are led to do sometimes, Friends adopted the term and made it their own to take some of the sting out of it.
My experience, based on the less than one dozen times I have felt moved to rise and speak at Meeting, is that yes, I feel a physical reaction to what’s going through my head. My pulse quickens and there is definitely a physical nature to it that’s hard to explain and unlike anything I have ever felt. About the closest thing to it (though not as powerful) is the adrenaline rush I used to get before playing a game when I was involved in sports. But even that pales in comparison.
It’s hard to describe in words, but it’s real.
Yes, and Moonbeam is a sweetheart.
Listen, you guys– stop it right now! My keyboard is blushing.
I didn’t know that Quakers were originally called “Seekers.” That’s how I describe myself when I think of my own spirituality– “a seeker.”
Always learning something new here.
I’ve much enjoyed following this conversation! But I’d like to offer two small comments on points of history, if I may —
First, when Fox wrote in his letter of “that of God” in every person, he wasn’t referring to the person’s soul, her intelligence, her awareness, her lovability, or anything else innate to that person. Fox was referring to the voice of God in the person’s conscience, something conceived of as being entirely separate from the person herself: a voice that would condemn the person in her own heart for her wrongdoings, but that would approve whatever good the person did.
Thus a person can be totally, utterly fallen and despicable — a Jeffrey Dahmer, an Idi Amin — and still have “that of God” in his conscience calling him to repentance. And Fox was talking in his letter (which was addressed to his fellow Friends) about a condition that Friends like you and me can rise to, in which we are full of “cheer” and yet still mirror and amplify the voice that the Dahmers and Amins are already hearing and feeling, albeit faintly, in their own consciences.
So Fox’s message wasn’t that everyone has a place in the choir, or in the Friends community. It was a message about bearing untroubled witness to God’s righteousness in a desperately fallen world.
The reinterpretation of “that of God” which you set out in your blog essay here is fine and good, and I’m much moved by your story of how it has inspired you! But — let’s be honest, here — it is purely a product of the rise of liberalism in the late-nineteenth-century and early-twentieth-century Quaker world. It doesn’t actually go back any further than that, and it isn’t supported by Fox’s own writings.
Second, early Friends didn’t quake because of the intensity of their beliefs, but because they experienced themselves in the presence of that God Who spoke in their consciences, Who could either save or damn them at will, and Who saw all the ways in which they had chosen the wrong thing and were continuing to chose the wrong thing. If you enter that experience, even just for one moment at a time (which is about all that I have ever personally managed; I’m not strong enough to handle more than that), it’s an overwhelming thing, and trembling (”quaking”
is the very least of what it can do to you!
MM: Thanks for all that.
MM, while your points are historically accurate, they seem to present a box that I don’t think quite fits. For instance, if “that of God” speaks essentially as a separate entity there must be some element intrinsic that responds at some level however completely and quickly it may be suppressed.
As for “quaking,” whatever historical and conditional explanations may be given, it IS a reaction I have sometimes when impelled to vocal ministry, so there may be more than one reason for self-identity as “Quaker.”
I guess I just hesitate to assign settled meanings on my or anyone’s experience
I don’t believe we’re called to judge anyone. Those people who are the least pleasant and most un-godly may very well be our teachers in disguise, and we’re all failing the test.
I heard a quote from Gandhi recently that said “You either see God in your neighbor, or not at all.”
I heard a quote from Gandhi recently that said “You either see God in your neighbor, or not at all.”
…. or not at all. Wow.