Reading the following:http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-john-mccain-and-his-secretive-plot-to-kill-the-un-903998.htmlone cannot help wonder about the way of the world. Don't they teach geography in the USA?
However don't think this is just a problem related to the USA as today, 21 August 2008, the U.K. P. M. is in Afghanistan claiming that what the U.K. forces are doing out there is saving the world from terrorisim, strange that since the evidence we are reading daily in the press does not seem to support that. While he was claiming to quote Abe Lincoln Bob Dylan used lyrics to the effect
You can fool half the people some of the time,
Some of the people half the time,
But not all the people all of the time.
At present who is fooling who and at what cost?
Peter
Thursday, 21 August 2008
Monday, 18 August 2008
My experience at Canadian Yearly Meeting
I became convinced, and joined a meeting last year in Sheffield, UK, while on sabbatical. During this period, I read a number of inspiring works about Quaker worship and business. I had some taste of the worship through Sheffield Central Meeting, but the few business meetings I attended there didn't grapple with any substantive issues. So I came back to Edmonton eager to join in the life of the monthly meeting, and came to CYM particularly eager to experience the Quaker business process.
It was excruciating. A report is received, a proposal is approved, I think we're home free, the recording clerk tries a minute, I hold my breath ... But of course, some Friend stands up and needs to speak to the minute. The proposed minute ties in with some other minute that we already approved, or some other report we haven't received yet. Other Friends stand and speak to the connection between this minute and, say, the FUM affiliation issue, and it goes on. I'm trying to breath deeply and hang on to shreds of patience. Yes, the points Friends are making are valid, sometimes crucial. This is the Quaker discernment process I've read about and admired, but I hadn't realized how painful it can be to sit through. I'm not much of a praying man, but I pray now for patience, a spiritual lubricant to get us through the friction of labouring over these issues.
Other parts of CYM more than made up for this discomfort. I'm thinking particularly of the worship sharing which broke out Tuesday night after the ecology panel presentation. Friends spoke movingly of our world as the Titanic, the iceberg already struck, the poor folk on the lower decks already drowning. Friends spoke of letting go of attachment to unjustly acquired and maintained comforts and security, that underlie this crisis. For the last three years, well before joining Quakers, I've been under great concern about environmental catastrophe and the future of human civilization. Frankly I wondered whether I was going mad. The world as we know it is appears to be coming to an end, but in all the media, in conversations with family, friends and colleagues, I encountered at most a dim, superficial awareness of the issues, if not vehement or mocking denial, that left me feeling acutely isolated and powerless. I was afraid to raise the issue, afraid of sounding like a lunatic street-corner Jeremiah. Nevertheless, with support from Friends, and brothers in Mankind Project (a men's organization I belong to), I've been finding my voice. But to be in a room with over a hundred Friends who get it ... who have the courage to put aside glib denial, to wade into that scary swamp in pursuit of the Truth -- that ministered to me deeply, knowing that I am now part of this courageous and loving family.
I also unexpectedly found that this family I have joined is broader than just the thousand-odd (no pun intended) Quakers of Canada. During the morning walking meditation sessions (thanks to Friend Margot Overington), I had the strong sense that the trees, the flowers, the grasses, are also my Friends, delighted that I was at last waking from the mental illness that kept me from communicating with them. Leaves fluttering in the wind looked to me like "Quaker cheers," whether directed at me or just expressing general joy in the sunlight and breeze. In despair over environmental concerns, I have sometimes slipped into thinking of humanity as a disease that the earth would gladly be rid of. We are indeed living amid a human-caused mass extinction event (estimated at 200-400 species per DAY at current rates), and it seems likely that it will be our own turn very soon. Yet, I sense that the trees I met in walking meditation are not hostile or indifferent to us -- that would be a projection of our culture's inner emptiness and guilt -- they love us, and would mourn our extinction, as I am learning to mourn theirs. And who knows what wonderful new expressions of God/dess' love our passing, or perchance our survival, may make way for on earth?
During CYM's special interest groups, I struggled with Quaker traditions of "speaking truth to power," i.e. classic liberal political activism in the form of petitioning government figures, and/or electoral campaigning. I am frustrated that such efforts seem to lead to, at best, superficial, symbolic changes, that leave fundamental unjust power structures untouched -- perhaps even distracting our attention from these structures. One Friend at CYM particularly spoke my mind on this issue: we should not try to speak truth to "power", we should be speaking truth to people. Another Friend suggested the simple step of getting out and talking with our neighbours. More generally, my past political activism (and I have run the gamut of political orientations over the course of my life, from Reagan supporter to anarchist) always started with the assumption that my views were Correct, other views were Evil or Deluded, and that my job was to campaign, to mobilize, to persuade (if not coerce) others into acknowledging the Correct Position. Quakers know very well that we dare not approach our own business meetings in this "creaturely" spirit. We must speak our own truth, but also listen to the truths of others, always remaining open to the discernment of a larger truth that unites us. Do we approach all our social activism with this same sense of Spirit-led discernment? Do we listen?
Returning home after CYM, I am (at present) full of enthusiasm around making changes, large and small, in my life, in the direction of simplicity, and bringing ideas from CYM back to my monthly meeting. I was immediately reminded that I can't make these changes without practising what I preached in the previous paragraph: exercising though it may be, I must listen to my family, and to my Friends, as well as speak my own truth.
It was excruciating. A report is received, a proposal is approved, I think we're home free, the recording clerk tries a minute, I hold my breath ... But of course, some Friend stands up and needs to speak to the minute. The proposed minute ties in with some other minute that we already approved, or some other report we haven't received yet. Other Friends stand and speak to the connection between this minute and, say, the FUM affiliation issue, and it goes on. I'm trying to breath deeply and hang on to shreds of patience. Yes, the points Friends are making are valid, sometimes crucial. This is the Quaker discernment process I've read about and admired, but I hadn't realized how painful it can be to sit through. I'm not much of a praying man, but I pray now for patience, a spiritual lubricant to get us through the friction of labouring over these issues.
Other parts of CYM more than made up for this discomfort. I'm thinking particularly of the worship sharing which broke out Tuesday night after the ecology panel presentation. Friends spoke movingly of our world as the Titanic, the iceberg already struck, the poor folk on the lower decks already drowning. Friends spoke of letting go of attachment to unjustly acquired and maintained comforts and security, that underlie this crisis. For the last three years, well before joining Quakers, I've been under great concern about environmental catastrophe and the future of human civilization. Frankly I wondered whether I was going mad. The world as we know it is appears to be coming to an end, but in all the media, in conversations with family, friends and colleagues, I encountered at most a dim, superficial awareness of the issues, if not vehement or mocking denial, that left me feeling acutely isolated and powerless. I was afraid to raise the issue, afraid of sounding like a lunatic street-corner Jeremiah. Nevertheless, with support from Friends, and brothers in Mankind Project (a men's organization I belong to), I've been finding my voice. But to be in a room with over a hundred Friends who get it ... who have the courage to put aside glib denial, to wade into that scary swamp in pursuit of the Truth -- that ministered to me deeply, knowing that I am now part of this courageous and loving family.
I also unexpectedly found that this family I have joined is broader than just the thousand-odd (no pun intended) Quakers of Canada. During the morning walking meditation sessions (thanks to Friend Margot Overington), I had the strong sense that the trees, the flowers, the grasses, are also my Friends, delighted that I was at last waking from the mental illness that kept me from communicating with them. Leaves fluttering in the wind looked to me like "Quaker cheers," whether directed at me or just expressing general joy in the sunlight and breeze. In despair over environmental concerns, I have sometimes slipped into thinking of humanity as a disease that the earth would gladly be rid of. We are indeed living amid a human-caused mass extinction event (estimated at 200-400 species per DAY at current rates), and it seems likely that it will be our own turn very soon. Yet, I sense that the trees I met in walking meditation are not hostile or indifferent to us -- that would be a projection of our culture's inner emptiness and guilt -- they love us, and would mourn our extinction, as I am learning to mourn theirs. And who knows what wonderful new expressions of God/dess' love our passing, or perchance our survival, may make way for on earth?
During CYM's special interest groups, I struggled with Quaker traditions of "speaking truth to power," i.e. classic liberal political activism in the form of petitioning government figures, and/or electoral campaigning. I am frustrated that such efforts seem to lead to, at best, superficial, symbolic changes, that leave fundamental unjust power structures untouched -- perhaps even distracting our attention from these structures. One Friend at CYM particularly spoke my mind on this issue: we should not try to speak truth to "power", we should be speaking truth to people. Another Friend suggested the simple step of getting out and talking with our neighbours. More generally, my past political activism (and I have run the gamut of political orientations over the course of my life, from Reagan supporter to anarchist) always started with the assumption that my views were Correct, other views were Evil or Deluded, and that my job was to campaign, to mobilize, to persuade (if not coerce) others into acknowledging the Correct Position. Quakers know very well that we dare not approach our own business meetings in this "creaturely" spirit. We must speak our own truth, but also listen to the truths of others, always remaining open to the discernment of a larger truth that unites us. Do we approach all our social activism with this same sense of Spirit-led discernment? Do we listen?
Returning home after CYM, I am (at present) full of enthusiasm around making changes, large and small, in my life, in the direction of simplicity, and bringing ideas from CYM back to my monthly meeting. I was immediately reminded that I can't make these changes without practising what I preached in the previous paragraph: exercising though it may be, I must listen to my family, and to my Friends, as well as speak my own truth.
Thursday, 7 August 2008
What experience says...
I believe that E. Waugh the English novelist said something to the effect that he was glad he had not read Henry James in his youth. I totally agree with him and Dr Johnson who said that youth is wasted on the young - or so I believe.After watching a film about Shakespeare and the writing of the Sonnets I have re-visited them for the first time in a number of years and they not only speak to me they are shouting at me. I also have the same experiences with aspects of the Bible like Ruth and John and The Gospel of Thomas which I first read about twenty years ago. They are all full of things that make increasing sense with age.
I have read and enjoyed Shakespeare since I was about 13 and saw a school performance of scenes from Billy Spokeshake for about 4+ nights in a row. I had to be there as I was in the school choir who covered the scene changes with music but the more I saw the more I enjoyed.Similar issues relate to the Bible but that has come about through experience and having read broadly in other religions etc. just like the Shakespeare.Age has a great deal to say but we must remember that intellectually and spiritually we are not our chronological age in all things, like aspects of the body and sexuality grow at different rates.
As Wordsworth wrote in 2 poems:
Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive, But to be young was very heaven!
when speaking of the French Revolution but later he wrote:
For I have learnedTo look on nature, not as in the hourOf thoughtless youth; but hearing oftentimes
The still, sad music of humanity,
Nor harsh nor grating, though of ample power
To chasten and subdue. And I have felt
A presence that disturbs me with the joy
Of elevated thoughts; a sense sublime
Of something far more deeply interfused,
Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns,
And the round ocean and the living air,
And the blue sky, and in the mind of man;A motion and a spirit, that impels
All thinking things, all objects of all thought,
And rolls through all things.
Age has its virtues. What we may lose one way we may gain greatly in others.
In Friendship
Peter
Monday, 28 July 2008
Love the Sinner....
This is a rather delayed response to Gordon and Sharon's posts earlier this month on the theme of gay relationships. I applaud you comment Gordon on your response to letters in 'The Friend' on this theme, particularly the Love the Sinner letter which I've copied below:
'Hating the sin, loving the sinner
Time after time in your letters and articles the overwhelming suggestion is that a homophobe is one who hates homosexual people, and this indeed accords with the dictionary definition. However, it is possible to hate a sin whilst loving the sinner. Sadly we do not yet have a word for this in this context, though it is a condition in which many sincere Friends find themselves, and is in accord with the truest Quaker insights. I pray that homosexual people will accept that true Friends do not hate them personally, but only what they do. If any Friend can coin a word for this condition, I should be glad to hear from him.
Ralph Hill'
I find this notion of hating the sin, loving the sinner, in this context deeply offensive, and nonsensical. I hope that the view expressed in this letter really isn't representative of many Friends in this country.
I do however want to keep the subject open for dialogue as that's the only way to improve our understanding and tolerance. People need to speak there minds, hopefully with their heart and mind open, in an attempt to find a meeting point with those who hold opposing views. Maybe we need to create more spaces within our Meetings for owning our fears and prejudices in the hope of moving towards greater equality and tolerance/ understanding of difference.
It would also be good to get more posts from women on this Blog, where are we all?
'Hating the sin, loving the sinner
Time after time in your letters and articles the overwhelming suggestion is that a homophobe is one who hates homosexual people, and this indeed accords with the dictionary definition. However, it is possible to hate a sin whilst loving the sinner. Sadly we do not yet have a word for this in this context, though it is a condition in which many sincere Friends find themselves, and is in accord with the truest Quaker insights. I pray that homosexual people will accept that true Friends do not hate them personally, but only what they do. If any Friend can coin a word for this condition, I should be glad to hear from him.
Ralph Hill'
I find this notion of hating the sin, loving the sinner, in this context deeply offensive, and nonsensical. I hope that the view expressed in this letter really isn't representative of many Friends in this country.
I do however want to keep the subject open for dialogue as that's the only way to improve our understanding and tolerance. People need to speak there minds, hopefully with their heart and mind open, in an attempt to find a meeting point with those who hold opposing views. Maybe we need to create more spaces within our Meetings for owning our fears and prejudices in the hope of moving towards greater equality and tolerance/ understanding of difference.
It would also be good to get more posts from women on this Blog, where are we all?
Friday, 18 July 2008
A place for C.O,'s
I found this on the Ohio Conservative site
http://www.conservativefriend.org/onlinecoform.htm
it may be of interest/of use to potential C.O.'s in Meeting
Peter
http://www.conservativefriend.org/onlinecoform.htm
it may be of interest/of use to potential C.O.'s in Meeting
Peter
An easy death?
From looking at the Ohio Conservative Friends' e-mail discussion about abortion I can across a mention of euthanasia and it brought back to me my mother's recent death. Myself and my two sisters' were unanimous when told by her doctor about what we should do. There was no discussion, though we had all obviously been thinking given that she had survived for longer than expected. She had cancer of the pancreas and secondaries had formed, one blocking her bowel. Having been taken into hospital they had to operate urgently because of this blockage. As they went in her bowel ruptured. They cleaned up as best they could and we were called to the hospital for the death watch - I'm sorry but I can't put it any other way.She revived in terms of her heart and, at times, could speak though I would ask her questions and she would grip my hand to say yes when I asked if she needed more morphine etc.. However her kidneys failed to work. We were given the possible outcomes. As I had an old lover die in a few weeks with cancer of the pancreas only 4/5 months before I knew the speed it grew.My sisters and myself were presented on the Sunday evening with the choices: take away all but palliative care, try dialysis but that would involve them finishing the operation they had begun on the Friday night and waiting until they could put a bag in plus dialysis. This meant 3/4 days a week travelling across town for treatment and she would not have been able she could do all she had before in terms of going to the market, visiting my sisters and coming to 'run me round' - she should have bought the 'tooit'. We opted to wait until the Monday morning to see if her kidneys did work. They didn't. They waited until the three of us were there and started to turn off the equipment except palliative care. She lived for nearly thirty six hours longer with her children and grandchildren around her as much as possible.I'm telling this story because I got the distinct impression that all should be done to maintain life and too a point I agree with this but where does maintaining life become the issue of keeping life for your own sake/wellbeing and when is it the best course of action for the sick person.This is not the 1st time I've been involved in this but the 1st time involving someone so close. No matter what others' think I am convinced that we all showed our mother the greatest form of love even though it created tremendous pain for us.No matter what arguments are presented I can only feel happy about what we did and how without discussion we had agreement - would anyone do anything other?In Friendship and memory of Edna Lawless 24/1/1926 - 22/1/2008.Peter
'Thought for the Day' on why not to judge people on their sexuality
Today's BBC Radio 4 'Thought for the Day' was John Bell talking about the need for tolerance/acceptance of the diversity of human sexuality. I recommend 'listening again' to it.
(I have also posted this as a comment on Gordon's piece below, but thought I'd put it here too for greater visibility.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/programmes/thought/index.shtml
(I have also posted this as a comment on Gordon's piece below, but thought I'd put it here too for greater visibility.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/programmes/thought/index.shtml
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)