Quakers and Anabaptists

Christian ethics and theology with an Anabaptist perspective
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by Josh »

Bill Rushby wrote:Josh wrote: "Quakers never recognised (sic) the principle of headship at all."

Josh, can you document this assertion? I doubt it!

What is Quaker teaching on 1 Cor. 11?
0 x
temporal1
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by temporal1 »

Hi, Bill! - Welcome to MN, and this topic. :D
i know you're busy with lambing, but looking forward to reading from you when you're able.

if this thread is too jumbled, begin fresh .. we'll find it.

here's one question to add ..
in "The Calverts who were Quakers," there are pages with lists of marriages, also, pages titled, "Hopewell Monthly Meeting Disownments." i've read the word, "disowned" used in other places.

is this practice similar to Amish/Anabaptist shunning? is it still in use today in any Quaker groups?

(from what i recall, as a young one) shunning in different Christian groups was not uncommon even just a few decades ago (?) .. probably not identical to the Amish, but, it was used in varying forms. maybe mostly abandoned in the 60-70's (??) .. when lots of church standards were loosened (??) .. esp dress standards, but not just dress standards. (my perception.)

as i read over pages of names of those married, i recognize so many surnames! even some uncommon ones.

(the 1600's names i'm following are John Chenoweth and Mary Calvert Chenoweth, married 1705; then their 7th child, Thomas, born 1720, married Mary Pritchett.)

it's interesting to read how widespread Quakers were in the early U.S.
reading all those names makes me wonder if most folks with families in the U.S. for very long don't have some family connection to early Quakers?
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
Bill Rushby
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:01 pm
Affiliation: Conservative Quaker

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by Bill Rushby »

Hello, Temporal1!

In *The Churching of America, 1776-2005: Winners and Losers in Our Religious Economy *, Rodney Stark and Roger Finke claim (as I recall) that at one time one in four people in the American colonies were affiliated with the Society of Friends. So lots of Americans of British descent (including Irish and Welsh) have Quaker ancestry. For better or for worse, Friends are by nature destined to be a minority religious tradition.

Yes, "disownment" is still practiced among Friends. My wife and I were disowned for rather spurious reasons. They called it "releasing" us. These days disownment is a naughty word! We were put out for alleged lack of interest in the Society of Friends! The same month we were "released," I read a scholarly paper at the conference of Quaker historians and archivists. Doesn't sound like a lack of interest in Friends, to me!! After having read the paper in various incarnations at three academic conferences, it was finally published in the Fall, 2016, issue of *Quaker History*; the title is "Ann Branson and the Eclipse of Oracular Ministry in 19th Century Quakerism."

That same year the Southeastern Conference of Mennonites began a mission outreach in Highland County VA, where we lived. We had prior Southeastern connections, and began attending the new fellowship. My wife and I both had previous Mennonite (and in my case, German Baptist) relationships. We remained Friends, but were warmly received by members of the new group. My wife and son are buried in their cemetery.
0 x
Bill Rushby
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:01 pm
Affiliation: Conservative Quaker

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by Bill Rushby »

Concerning whether Friends are Anabaptists, much depends upon whether these terms are construed loosely or very narrowly. Friends have not on a widespread basis practiced the ordinances, so a narrow interpretation would exclude them from the Anabaptist category. Also, many Friends would not approach their faith from an Anabaptist frame of reference, so they would be excluded too. The problem with a narrow interpretation of "Anabaptist" would be that many Mennonites and Brethren would also be excluded by that understanding of "Anabaptist." From an operational standpoint, the Conservative Friends (and sometimes other Quaker groups) are treated by the larger Anabaptist community as falling within their purview.

If you want to read my paper on "Conservative Friends," it is available online at http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/qrt ... loads.html. That list also includes papers on Friends United Meeting and Evangelical Friends International. The paper on Friends General Conference didn't make the list, and there was no paper on Central Yearly Meeting of Friends, a Holiness body with Anabaptist features.
0 x
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by MaxPC »

Thank you, Bill. I look forward to reading it this evening.

Welcome!
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
Bill Rushby
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:01 pm
Affiliation: Conservative Quaker

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by Bill Rushby »

Hello, Josh!

Asking a counter-question is a clever way of not answering my question! But, in the final analysis, I was not trying to work you into a corner!

I don't think there is one and only one answer to your question. The Society of Friends is fragmented into vastly different traditions, and they offer few if any common answers to important questions. For many contemporary Friends, asserting complete equality between men and women in religious matters comes as close to a common answer as one is likely to find. They would also read this answer back into Quaker history, claiming that this was always how Friends saw things.

However, if one goes back to George Fox's time, he advocated and was able to institutionalize separate meetings for men and women concerning business matters. And the women's meeting was subordinate to the men's meeting. I am not deeply interested in early Quaker theology, and don't know exactly what his rationale was. However, the early Friends practiced equality between men and women in testimony, but not in decision-making.

They believed that public testimony should be prophetic, in which matter both men and women were seen as called; "your sons and daughters shall prophesy..."
0 x
temporal1
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by temporal1 »

Bill wrote:
Hello, Temporal1! :D
In *The Churching of America, 1776-2005: Winners and Losers in Our Religious Economy *,
Rodney Stark and Roger Finke claim (as I recall) that at one time one in four people in the American colonies were affiliated with the Society of Friends.

So lots of Americans of British descent (including Irish and Welsh) have Quaker ancestry.
For better or for worse, Friends are by nature destined to be a minority religious tradition.
reading through those pages+pages of marriages, i saw so many surnames of people i've met all through my life, it felt almost eery to think how there may be so many more family ties than most of us are aware. i used to wonder about this when i visited a certain cemetery with my mother. her grandparents were buried there, but, as i walked around, i recognized a number of family names i recognized of local business people, lawyers, etc., so, thinking, those people must have roots in this same nearby small town in earlier years.

on my father's side, the German names, are not found on those Quaker lists. however, they were in similar proximity, Pennsylvania and Virginia, for instance .. i'm not sure, yet, about any details.
Bill wrote:
Yes, "disownment" is still practiced among Friends. My wife and I were disowned for rather spurious reasons. They called it "releasing" us. :-| These days disownment is a naughty word! :-|

We were put out for alleged lack of interest in the Society of Friends! :shock:
The same month we were "released," I read a scholarly paper at the conference of Quaker historiansj and archivists. Doesn't sound like a lack of interest in Friends, to me!! :P

After having read the paper in various incarnations at three academic conferences, it was finally published in the Fall, 2016, issue of *Quaker History*; the title is "Ann Branson and the Eclipse of Oracular Ministry in 19th Century Quakerism."
i will have to try to remember not to use the naughty word. :)
thinking it over, i realized, some use the word, "excommunicate;" also, ban, expel, exclude, denounce, banish, and more.

"released," almost sounds as tho a favor is being done, rather than punishment. much more 21st Century PC. ;)
Bill wrote:
That same year the Southeastern Conference of Mennonites began a mission outreach in Highland County VA, where we lived. We had prior Southeastern connections, and began attending the new fellowship.

My wife and I both had previous Mennonite (and in my case, German Baptist) relationships.
We remained Friends, but were warmly received by members of the new group. My wife and son are buried in their cemetery.
i wonder if this happens with some frequency? Friends attending/joining Mennonite fellowships? may be.

more later. :D
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by Josh »

Thanks for your response, Bill. I asked the question because I honestly do not know. I do know that plain / conservative Quakers whose women still wear some kind of headgear do so out of a commitment to plain attire, not a commitment to cover their heads per 1 Co. 11 (please correct me if I am wrong).
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by Josh »

This topic is highly personal to me. Please forgive negative emotions I may express when talking about Quakerism.

My family has strong Quaker background. My great-grandmother was a committed Quaker, and her own ancestors were so committed to nonresistant Christianity and to loving Jesus that they left their farms and wealth in North Carolina behind because they could not stand anymore to tolerate slavery. They relocated to Ohio, which was not an economically prosperous move for them, and they participated in the Underground Railroad once the Civil War broke out--refusing to take sides or to take up arms, but offering help to any runaway slaves in their time of need. To this day the town my grandmother and mother grew up is 11% African-American, mostly descended from a population that ended up just staying and not continuing the migration to Canada and other points north. This is otherwise a rural area that is almost entirely white. A few miles away is a defunct town that used to be an African-American settlement. There is still a small historically black congregation that meets there. All of this took place long before the civil rights movements of the 1960s.

Unfortunately, the nature of that Quaker faith was that it was not one parents were really focused on passing along to their children. My grandmother grew up with really no Christian upbringing at all. She did not come to faith until her 40s, long after my own mother was grown up and out of the house. And my mother in turn did not come to faith until herself was in her late 20s.

Our spiritual heritage was completely lost. And nowadays today, the Friends in my area are all nearly entirely evangelical. The doctrines of nonresistance, peace, and the zeal that would have led my ancestors to abandon wealth and instead fling open their doors to needy people who could never repay them is mostly gone. Instead, people who attend Friends churches are proud Republican voters, with much scepticism towards refugees. (I do not want to get into a debate about immigration law, but merely point out the long term change in attitudes.)

Conservative Quakerism is virtually defunct where I live. There are Friends churches everywhere, sometimes quite thickly in the towns to the east of me. A few miles south of me is a Friends mega-church. But the only Conservative Quaker meeting in Salem, Ohio, near me, is a tiny group of less than a hundred people. The last time my mother went to visit, there was no meeting, and she and my sister showed up, waited, and left disappointed. They weren't able to reach anyone to find out more.

The other Conservative Quaker meeting near (I believe) Mt. Pleasant, Ohio is the only meeting in that once-proud bastion of Quakerism where my great-grandmother grew up. You can go to a museum there to see an old Quaker meeting house, though.

I hope my own Anabaptist faith never ends up becoming so either engulfed by evangelicalism and politics, or else becomes just something seen in museums, à la the museum at what used to be Germantown Mennonite Church.
0 x
temporal1
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: Quakers and Anabaptists

Post by temporal1 »

From above -
Bill wrote:
Concerning whether Friends are Anabaptists, much depends upon whether these terms are construed loosely or very narrowly. Friends have not on a widespread basis practiced the ordinances, so a narrow interpretation would exclude them from the Anabaptist category.

Also, many Friends would not approach their faith from an Anabaptist frame of reference, so they would be excluded too.

The problem with a narrow interpretation of "Anabaptist" would be that many Mennonites and Brethren would also be excluded by that understanding of "Anabaptist."

From an operational standpoint, the Conservative Friends (and sometimes other Quaker groups) are treated by the larger Anabaptist community as falling within their purview.
Bill wrote:
If you want to read my paper on "Conservative Friends," it is available online at http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/qrt ... loads.html.

That list also includes papers on Friends United Meeting and Evangelical Friends International.
The paper on Friends General Conference didn't make the list, and there was no paper on Central Yearly Meeting of Friends, a Holiness body with Anabaptist features.
i have read your paper, i will have to read it again, as i mull over all that you covered.
i was hoping to find a list of acronyms, i think i'm able to figure them out, but lack confidence. :)

by the end, i was left wondering, how different things were for George Fox, how quickly so many chose to join him in the early days, when it must have been a dangerous choice. at that time (most?) were coming from Puritan roots? with Anabaptist influences? .. Puritans, Anabaptists, Protestants, had not been in existence a very long time (?) .. "dangerous" was the case, across the board, as people sought the Holy Spirit over state churches and monarchs. there's a lot to think about. the printed Bible, in common languages, changed so much.
From Page 12 / Conclusion
Historically-normed Conservative Quakerism proclaims Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, the critical importance of the Bible, and the continuing relevance of the Quaker tradition. This faith commends itself to serious seekers, and draws them to Conservative meetings. What these inquirers actually find among Conservative Friends is often disappointing. Many Friends have cast aside their own heritage, choosing Quaker liberalism instead. Others are unable to articulate their faith, and do not know how to relate to seekers. In Ohio newcomers have frequently run up against kin- and school-related barriers to acceptance, and have been told “you are not one of us.”

Conservative Friends need to address several basic issues before they can move forward. Some I have already identified. But there are others. They equivocate concerning the role of the Bible in the faith community, in an age and culture where such equivocation does not work well.
They retain birthright membership, which compromises the integrity of the church.
Personal holiness, once viewed as indispensable, is no longer seen by many as essential.
Silence and beside-the-point queries are often used as covers for avoiding honest dialogue about serious problems. Back-room maneuvering and manipulation frequently supplant genuine searching together for God’s will. Friends go unchallenged when they confuse their personal agendas with the Shepherd’s voice.

Sometimes, it seems that the Conservative Quaker tradition is a vision in search of a people!
“Would God that all the Lord’s people were prophets” Num. 29.14 (KJV),
and that Conservative Friends would be found among them!
(i added bold.)
.. and, then, helpful Endnotes.
(i noticed a reference to "swimming upstream" in number 29, a phrase that has had some discussion on this forum.)

Bill, thank you for sharing your paper. :)
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
Post Reply