tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post759123596017336292..comments2023-10-28T02:59:37.028-07:00Comments on E m e r g i n g ...Q u a k e r i s m ..L i t e r a t u r e ..R e l i g i o n ... L i f e: A Portraiture of Quakerism, IDianehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12396312339372162866noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-84280473996767702452011-11-07T08:52:57.523-08:002011-11-07T08:52:57.523-08:00It will not work in fact, that is exactly what I t...It will not work in fact, that is exactly what I think.www.badajoz-3d.comhttp://www.badajoz-3d.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-59960896782176217492011-09-04T13:33:44.236-07:002011-09-04T13:33:44.236-07:00It's funny, but just yesterday I was talking t...It's funny, but just yesterday I was talking to a Friend who has just applied for membership. He was raised in the church of the Nazarene. He listed all the "worldly" practices to avoid, and they match up to all the same types of prohibitions from the 19th century, with the addition of movie-going (extension of play-going!). <br /><br />Also, I have been told by social historians that play-going wasn't just an activity to watch a play. People went to plays to be "seen," which is why they got all dressed up and paraded around. They talked and visited all through the dialog on-stage. This happened during one of Jane Austen's books (Persuasion?? Sense & Sensibility? Both??).paulahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08891195958481806488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-21222118199016460082011-09-04T13:22:11.400-07:002011-09-04T13:22:11.400-07:00I didn't realize this had been picked up by Qu...I didn't realize this had been picked up by QuakerQuaker--or I might have responded sooner (or not.) Eric, fascinating that you are reading Mansfield Park, as I would call that Austen's "Quaker" novel. Paula,<br />it is interesting that other groups had these prohibitions in the 18th century--Clarkson really plays up Quakers as different or Other--perhaps that was a convention of the genre he's using--"Exotic natives."Dianehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12396312339372162866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-56541089678479252522011-09-02T13:02:49.379-07:002011-09-02T13:02:49.379-07:00The list of "no's" for Quakers of th...The list of "no's" for Quakers of that period is really no more strict than for other conservative groups at the time. To use the example of Fannie Price in Mansfield Park, and her cousin Edmund, drama was certainly a bad influence for these devout young people, and gambling was an evil in their household as well. Other than bingo in today's Catholic churches, do churches these days encourage gambling? <br /><br />Further, novels weren't acceptable as proper reading material for many religious people far into the 19th century, and beyond.<br /><br />Perhaps the major exception to the attitudes of society at large among Quakers that held into the 20th century was the prohibition against music, still not allowed at Haverford College by about 1915. Otherwise, the list you present doesn't strike me as odd among devout Christians during the time.<br /><br />Because of my love of our Society and our history, and my firm belief in our testimony of simplicity, I resonate with the points you make about showing the world our faith community in easily discernable ways. And yet: I believe that there is the danger of spiritual pride in deciding to follow this route unless you feel an absolute call to follow God in this matter. We don't want to be accused of play-acting. I stand with Margaret Fell in my concern for empty forms.paulahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08891195958481806488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-80956900332054780642011-09-02T09:55:15.943-07:002011-09-02T09:55:15.943-07:00Hi Diane,
Thanks for the recommendation of Clarks...Hi Diane,<br /><br />Thanks for the recommendation of Clarkson, sounds intriguing (as I continue my quest through history).<br /><br />As to whether we Quakers should be more of a "peculiar people," yes and no;-)<br /><br />No--if that means we choose special "things" to cling to like the "nots," or certain forms like thinking that somehow "umprogrammed" is better than them.<br />Or how we dress, or how we speak of the days of the week.<br />Even Margaret Fell, early on, criticized the way that Quakers were becoming rigid about dress, etc.<br />Not the letter but the Spirit--the Holy Creative Spirit of God.<br /><br />Yes, in the sense that when as followers of Jesus we live in love and thus live differently from the world. For instance, we may not buy as many clothes or ones with designer labels, but it's not that we are thus "Quakers!" Rather we choose to lessen our expenses so we can give more generously to missions and social concern. We quake for God, not for ourselves:-)<br /><br />In the Light,<br />DanielDaniel Wilcoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05178375087492786696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-76717680464114363932011-08-31T14:55:05.713-07:002011-08-31T14:55:05.713-07:00I just started reading Mansfield Park this afterno...I just started reading Mansfield Park this afternoon. What a strange coincidence! I now look forward to reading Clarkson also.Eric H-Lhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12077757154110241467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-24345202141710828942011-08-30T20:58:23.641-07:002011-08-30T20:58:23.641-07:00Jesus had something to say about wahing the inside...Jesus had something to say about wahing the inside of the cup (Matthew 23:25&26). The only point I would add is that our light shines from a growing relationship and that the role of a faith community is to nurture and encourage that relationship.broschultzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07390392524612907532noreply@blogger.com