tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4497531321890746707.post5121318663304761760..comments2024-01-31T15:10:55.111+00:00Comments on Transition Quaker: The Breaking of ImagesCraig Barnetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16201061939693242954noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4497531321890746707.post-74338875920170448472016-03-01T17:37:56.063+00:002016-03-01T17:37:56.063+00:00"We live by images."
It is true that ma..."We live by images."<br /><br />It is true that many people on this earth today "live by images." However, there is another way as many early Quakers (not all by any means) and many contemporary Quakers, among others, testify. There is a way that does not replace one set of outward creeds, institutions, etc. with another. We are neither Fundamentalist or Liberal as you characterize them.<br /><br />There were many founding Quakers who were not in agreement with other founding Quakers who established a new form of church organisation, and a unique Quaker culture, with its own ritualized forms of language and behavior. They testified (documented by Quaker William Rogers "The Christian Quaker ..." in 1860) to being led out of identity with any and all outwardly established forms. Their use of phrases and terms like "Living in the Light" and "Living in the Life itself" is, in essence, different from establishing a new image or form, the very words themselves negates established forms in and for direct and unmediated and unformed experience itself. They exhorted against the ritualization or institutionalization of their words. It is important to note: These early founding Quakers who were led out of identity in and with outward established and ritualized forms, and the instrumentalities that support them, did not suggest that those other founding Quakers refrain from turning back again to ritualized forms etc. if that was where their conscience led them. They merely sought the freedom to live their own conscience. The essence of the disunity between the two was that the establishment side sought to impose conformity to their conscience through institutional fiat or outwardly authoritative decree. <br /><br />Many of us today share the experience of being led out of ritual, iconography, imagery, similitudes, a life of and in images etc. We, however, are not iconoclasts in the sense that we find it necessary to go about smashing the idols or icons of others. We acknowledge the reality (or even the "integrity" as a contemporary Friend has suggested) of ritualized way of existence. History has shown that to fight that reality is to fight Truth itself.<br /><br />Many Quakers in the past and many today do not "live by images." Our conscious (mind) and our conscience (heart) are anchored or established in and informed by the direct and unritualized, uninstitutionalized, experience of inherent self-existence (Presence, God, etc.) itself in itself. We are in the living Gospel or Story in every aspect and moment of our lives. Our conscience (mind) is anchored in and our conscience (heart) is informed by living the Gospel or Good Story every moment of our lives on this earth so that outward ritual and images and institutions just do not carry the same value (because our conscious and conscience are not established in or by them) as they do for those whose conscious in anchored in and whose conscience is informed by outward form.<br /><br />As with some of the founding Quakers, ours is to share a different way and to leave it to the conscience of others whether that different way is sufficient or suitable. kfsaylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14180375154787300539noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4497531321890746707.post-92047119957526716932016-02-02T18:46:04.675+00:002016-02-02T18:46:04.675+00:00Indeed, and dreams were certainly taken a lot more...Indeed, and dreams were certainly taken a lot more seriously by early Friends than they generally seem to be today. John Woolman describes some very powerful dreams in his Journal, which he relates as truthful (although not literal) Divine messages.Craig Barnetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16201061939693242954noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4497531321890746707.post-26161420749249993562016-02-02T18:35:28.713+00:002016-02-02T18:35:28.713+00:00Thanks Mark. Yes, our stories (and especially our ...Thanks Mark. Yes, our stories (and especially our shared stories) are crucial resources, and again the issue of 'belief' is not really relevant.<br />In Friendship,<br />Craig<br />Craig Barnetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16201061939693242954noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4497531321890746707.post-87660279650620134932016-02-02T14:35:08.075+00:002016-02-02T14:35:08.075+00:00Thanks for this Craig. For me, this is where the i...Thanks for this Craig. For me, this is where the importance of shared story comes in. Stories can contain all sorts of allusions with which to communicate with each other, without you having to 'believe' in them.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11897220214876462462noreply@blogger.com