Letters - 06 May 2011
From bin Laden to the arboretum
Death of bin Laden
There is something disquieting about the death of bin Laden and the public response to it. Bin Laden organised many atrocities, but I would question the right of any state to summarily ‘eliminate’ any person and dump the body in the sea. President Obama will gain a much needed surge in popularity, but I am not sure what can be gained, apart from the delight of vengeance, by this action.
Bin Laden’s followers may now seek retribution, leading to escalating violence by both sides, with innocent people caught in the middle.
I am alarmed by the ‘Cowboys v Injuns’ mentality which seems to be taking hold in the military and foreign policies of the Western powers. David Cameron claims that this elimination is good news.
I think the incident highlights even more clearly the need for the peaceful resolution of grievances, for the end of state-authorised assassinations, and for the establishment of an International Court in which all terrorists can be brought to justice.
Ken Veitch
Boycott, divestment and sanctions
Sarah Lawson asks (21 April) what unpalatable truths we might be evading regarding the position of the ‘facing bench’ in our Society to Israel. It is true that some groups of Palestinian Arabs support a boycott. Others – such as those producing Peace Oil or working with OneVoice or Children of Peace – do not.
Because of the rejection by the Arab League of UN Resolution 181 in 1947/8, no ‘high-negotiating power’ was passed to the proposed Arab State. This is the bare minimum for ‘illegal’ occupation and/or settlement.
If the terms of debate are now altered to what is held to be a consensus of international opinion or the rightness of the settlements, it raises in my mind the question of just how sincere the commitment to ‘international law’ is; just as insistences that we condemn violence on both sides is weakened when the issue of Israeli misfortune is evaded or linked to state policy in ways Palestinian Arab misfortune is not.
Martin Luther King considered a convulsive hatred of the Israeli state to be indistinguishable from Nazism. Criticism of Israeli policy need not be anti-Semitic, but where the mere possibility of it is denied, it is in danger of tending towards it.
Like Sarah, I have witnessed observers and enquirers develop a jaded view of the Society. Once a well is thought to have been poisoned, it becomes difficult to persuade people to drink from it.
Alexander Macpherson-Glasgow
The Eternal
The article by Howard Grace is the most thoughtful I’ve read on this subject. He clearly understands that, unlike the early church, we on this planet have little significance in the universe, and that we currently have no means of ascertaining how many of the trillions of stars in other galaxies have planets, some of which may have conditions suitable for some form of life. When our solar system reaches its inevitable end, our ultimate descendants are unlikely to have an answer to the mystery. However, that is no reason why we should cease to try to understand the ultimate mystery he describes as God. I suggest that we should try to remember that the valuable messages in the Bible are largely metaphorical; for example, the story of the good Samaritan illustrates an important principle, and no one really believes it refers to a live person.
David Pawlyn
Tapestry resource
The Quaker Tapestry is a wonderful resource that is being largely wasted. Ever since its completion I have tried in vain to persuade those who have custody to produce a complete set of seventy-seven slides – now the favoured medium would be a DVD. This could be used in children’s classes, but here in Bexhill we could also advertise a public showing and invite all our Churches Together in Bexhill members – an important step ecumenically and for outreach. I believe that those attending would tell all their friends and ensure audiences for further showings. The Tapestry could then also become known in other countries, entirely in accord with the exhortations of our founder.
Ralph Hill
Area Meetings
Do we need Area Meetings (AMs)? They are no longer monthly, and so few members attend them. We could leave all practical or financial decisions to trustees, and all spiritual or pastoral decisions to elders and overseers, and have a meeting of the membership once a year to ratify those decisions.
Yet, in AM we may share the religious experience of having two opposing views expressed, and then the Spirit speaks through one member and we unite behind a third way, leading us forward into God’s loving purposes. Business Meetings may be ‘Meetings for Spiritual Nurture’. A small group may not include the necessary disagreement and so proceed through mere human consensus rather than true Leadings.
Abigail Maxwell
Spending cuts
Tom Jackson’s article on the need for government spending cuts (15th April) refers to an earlier article by me, implying I do not see the need to live within our means. This is not the case – we will need to live within our means, both financially and ecologically. My objection to the government cuts is their speed and the way they are targeted. The rate the deficit is being cut leaves no time for sensible adaptation and will lead to more painful unemployment than would a more measured approach. The government is desperately hoping that private sector growth will make up for loss in GDP (gross domestic product) due to their cuts. Private sector growth is likely to be much more resource and energy intensive and thus more environmentally damaging than that associated with the government spending which is being cut. We have plenty of people, and more people are needed to support our health and social well being. Also, the sector of the economy that is shrinking fastest is construction – this is an opportunity for investment in sustainable transport, energy efficiency and renewable energy, which would help achieve financial sustainability in the longer term.
Martin Quick
Willing to forgive
Like Michael Woolliscroft, I too felt that the recent correspondence on theism/nontheism was rather sterile; angels and pinheads often came to mind. Giving ourselves labels such as theist, nontheist, agnostic and atheist creates division and can all too often lead to acrimony.
Whether we believe that God is within us, ‘out there’ or nowhere depends upon our own personal concept of the divine. The most important thing is that we treat our fellow human beings with love and respect, feel compassion with them and, as we all have frailties, be ready and willing to forgive. One sentence in Marigold Bentley’s article ‘Life in Bethany’ (15 April) put it more succinctly – ‘It has taught me that how we treat one another is far more important than religious doctrine’.
Leslie Tether
Arboretum theological muddle?
I note that any Quaker presence in the National Arboretum would consist of four seats carved with ‘peace, truth, simplicity and equality’ (15 April). I note that a recent book for Quaker children also referred to these testimonies.
I have always regarded my Quakerism as non-credal and the peace testimony to be credal and a document of seventeenth-century political expediency rather than at the heart of Quaker theology.
Now it seems we have invented four testimonies but I am at a loss to understand how they have arisen in a non-credal organisation. My understanding of creeds is they are not adopted by Quakers since they are provisional statements and await our full understanding of religious reality and the great mystery of faith. That is always my feeling when confronted by traditional Christian creeds.
Friends, when asked ‘what Quakers believe’, tended to say ‘we believe in that of God in all men’. Now we seem to have a set of new words, which have been raised to credal status and perhaps represent a form of lazy thinking. Not only have these testimonies suddenly sprouted, but they are becoming the reference point for all Quaker action.
I am uneasy with credal statement, because all truth, as I perceive it, is provisional. These testimonial words remain vague, undefined and are more akin to a liberal secular philosophy than a religious theology.
If we start to unpack these Quaker testimonial words, it seems we arrive at a Quaker theological muddle. If we subscribe to a testimony to peace, then which peace is it? Is it the peace of God and how does this play out in a complex world?
If we subscribe to a testimony to truth, then it seems this becomes a credal statement, which breaks the test of truth.
When saying we have a testimony to simplicity, I have to reflect on our view from a position of affluence and say, again, it fails the test of truth.
And finally, a testimony to equality: I find that Jesus’ teaching was about love, forgiveness, death and resurrection. My Bible concordance suggests the word equality is hardly ever used in the Bible.
Our credal ‘testimonies’, in my view, fail the test of religious truth. I remain a non-credal Quaker trying to understand religious truth and having faith in the Holy Spirit when undertaking this search. I think Quakers should stop seeking to find truth in creeds (and leave the seat backs blank).
Roger Hill
Comments
My understanding of the position of ‘Quaker Testimonies’ differs from Roger Hill’s. He seems to me to be assuming that a testimony is equivalent to a creed, a declaration of one’s beliefs, intentions or aspirations. For me, a testimony is a state of affairs. It is not a statement. We are confused if we think the statement about the Quaker Peace Testimony is itself the testimony. If the state of affairs is for instance that a distinctive feature of Quakers is that they hold to Truth, more so in general than non-Quakers, or that Quakers live simpler lives than others, or that they work for peace more keenly than other groups, or that they practice equality amongst themselves to a remarkable degree, then one can say that these characteristics are testimonies. An additional feature a testimony is that the reason for practicing it is as a public expression of one’s religious convictions. This is why we will not be entitled to say we have a testimony to the environment until we demonstrate a greater practical regard for it other groups, and that we do so as a feature of our religion, not merely because we rationally consider it to be a good thing.
By spetter on 7th May 2011 - 14:26
Please login to add a comment
