Dirty Words in Modern-Day Quakerism

Yesterday I convened a small group of Friends for the first workshop in a series to raise money to bring notable Quaker presenters to the midwest. The workshop was called Dirty Words in Modern-Day Quakerism and was intended to identify words and practices that seem to be dismissed or underappreciated by Friends today.

The challenge for me as the facilitator was to create a process that would allow participants to reflect on why certain Quaker terms, concepts, or practices left a bad taste in their mouth and then move them towards considering those same things in a new light.

To start us off, after opening worship and introductions, we spent some time talking initially about how the meanings of words change over time in the first place. I broke it down into four steps:

NAME - the word itself, usually with a neutral meaning or positive intention.

STAIN - a distorted understanding or a negative meaning is attached to the word, usually the result of power, schisms, stereotypes, pain, etc.

REFRAME - a new or renewed understanding is attached to the word. Often the negative meaning is removed and substituted with something neutral or positive.

RECLAIM - the new/renewed understanding is integrated into language, behaviors, attitudes, etc. and there is a reengagement of the original word.

Then I read aloud a list of Quaker-related terms, a good many of which are also steeped in the Christian tradition. I asked Friends to identify one or two words from that list which repulsed them. After sharing those words, and before we got into any discussion about the "stain" or personal baggage that led to their rejection, I asked Friends to pair up and focus on one of the words that had been raised. Each pair then worked together to come up with as neutral a definition as possible about that word. In the remaining time, the pairs talked with each other about what had happened in their life that wrought some negativity to the word or that led them to reject it.

Back in the large group, each pair shared the definition for the word they had worked with, along with why the word had become "stained" for them: corporate, salvation, perfection, authority, etc. I think people appreciated having the chance to say some of these pieces aloud and be witnessed in their discomfort and pain around them.

Immediately after that sharing, I asked the pairs to reconvene themselves and spend some time in worship around the word they had worked with, allowing the Light and the Spirit to work on their hearts and to listen and watch for what maybe was the original meaning of the word--the meaning that existed before the stain had occurred, before any personal baggage had attached itself to the word...

And then I asked them, in their pairs, to rewrite the definition.

When we came back to the group, we shared that new understanding--that reframe--and had a conversation about the insights that such a simple exercise had provided. We drifted into looking at other words and topics, too: discipline, evangelize, obedience...

I'll have to revise the list if I offer the workshop again. Other words that we mentioned that aren't currently there are: sin, fundamentalist, and Liberal Friend.

Over the course of the day, we talked about the in-creeping of the secular world into our faith tradition, which also contributes to the staining of certain Quaker concepts. And we reflected a bit on how much to "explain" to other Friends what we mean as we ourselves reclaim some of this language while other Friends are still repelled by it.

In turn, that led to a short conversation about our spiritual development as Friends and how many of us are moving from being a "spiritual refugee"--running from a religious tradition--to being a "spiritual citizen"--consciously moving into, adopting, and integrating a new faith tradition for ourselves.

Towards the end, I spoke a bit more about the subtle difference I've experienced between reframing and reclaiming the words and practices that I had discarded; and we looked again at the list of "words that may cause unease," this time allowing for a Q and A session in case there were words that Friends weren't familiar with in the Quaker vernacular--which there were!

Given that I continue to carry a concern for how we convey our faith to one another and what it is that sustains us in our faith, I felt this was a good next step toward deepening our corporate understanding of Quakerism. Each of the participants mentioned that they had gotten something useful out of our time together, for which I'm glad.

Next up is in two weeks, another workshop for the Seed Series, called Fear Factor: Getting Out of Our Own Way. I've barely begun to think about the sorts of activities and handouts to use but I'm looking forward to what develops!

Blessings,
Liz

P.S. These workshops and the work I'm doing to coordinate local and regional presentations is a growing part of what I am calling my work as a Quaker resource coordinator in the midwestern United States. I'd love to hear from you if you want to offer a workshop in this part of the country or if you have ideas of who I can invite here for a presentation.