tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post8341756959227950685..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 II: ProhibitionsDianehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12396312339372162866noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-83811360660195262332011-09-06T21:21:33.104-07:002011-09-06T21:21:33.104-07:00The evils I sense in my own heart when I have take...The evils I sense in my own heart when I have taken an interest in gaming are:<br />--the anticipation and excitement for a potential gain, <br />--the sorrow over not gaining anything. <br /><br />But the potential gain is neither something I worked toward or something granted through God's grace. All that excitement and sorrow seems baseless, overwrought and screwed up. It doesn't feel blessed *or* deserved. <br /><br /><br />Typically I avoid door prizes and lotteries. For the last one I wrote on my event registration, "No door prizes, please." They still called my name. Twice. To quell the embarrassment and satisfy the prize volunteers, I brought a friend to the prize table to claim whatever it was they had for me. In order to avoid anticipation and sorrow, I didn't stick around to find out what it was. <br /><br />One of the sorrows I live with is the financing of a small percentage of public education by the Oregon State Lottery. I've worked in public schools since before that was enacted. I voted no, but the measure passed readily. <br /><br />So I've found it hard to avoid gaming.Jay T.http://jtblog.lindajohansen.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-24185874469129008972011-09-05T20:35:23.721-07:002011-09-05T20:35:23.721-07:00hey diane
write about this:
Or, as George Lindbe...hey diane<br /><br />write about this:<br /><br /><i>Or, as George Lindbeck suggests in the Nature of Doctrine, does the outward (social) form of the faith largely determine the inward experience? Where do you fall on lotteries? </i>kevin robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07336902422644197456noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-28819482695835629232011-09-05T06:09:18.682-07:002011-09-05T06:09:18.682-07:00A thoughtful and winning essay! I much appreciate...A thoughtful and winning essay! I much appreciated your take on this, and especially your thoughts about parallels with Jane Austen.<br /><br />A few thoughts of my own —<br /><br />Clarkson was certainly inclined to portray a “rational” Quakerism, and one gets the sense, reading his <i>Portraiture</i>, that the prosperous, respectable Friends he knew in London were inclined toward rationality as well.<br /><br />I doubt, though, that the Friends of the U.S. hinterlands, places like North Carolina and Ohio, were equally inclined to “rationalize” their Quakerism. My guess is that, for them, religion rested far more on the logic of the Bible than on the logic of the Enlightenment.<br /><br />My guess is that, in most though not all Friends meetings of Clarkson’s time, the prohibition of gambling was so interwoven with the general emphasis on perfection and mourning and the importance of maintaining the testimonies and everything else, that there was no “merely outward and not inward” about it: everything was known and felt as outward and inward at the same time.<br /><br />Still, an individual reared in the Quaker faith might be so shallow as to wall off the faith from his inward self, and only offer an outward conformity. Melville’s portrait of the two Quaker ship-owners in <i>Moby Dick</i> is surely a portrait of such people. I doubt that there is any religion anywhere that can guarantee to win through to the full inward comprehension and consent of every one of its children.Marshall Massey (Iowa YM [C])http://journal.earthwitness.org/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-1664121135854914912011-09-04T13:18:17.838-07:002011-09-04T13:18:17.838-07:00Hystery,
Amen, sister.Hystery,<br /><br />Amen, sister.Dianehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12396312339372162866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-20607271749001462182011-09-04T11:56:55.093-07:002011-09-04T11:56:55.093-07:00I was reared to avoid lotteries and games of chanc...I was reared to avoid lotteries and games of chance. This came not from a Quaker background, but from the influence of my mother's Edwardian Methodist grandmother. When I began to worship with Friends, cautions against gambling felt very much like home. I teach my own children to avoid such things because I want them to know that as far as possible, we offer our work to the world and do not expect to leave the enrichment of our lives to chance. I believe that all people are entitled to care and well-being, and that all must contribute from their store of personal treasure whether of property, intellect, talent, or labor. It has somthing to do with equality. Whether we are talking about a game or an economy, it doesn't sit well with me that good fortune rests only with a few. I'd rather not let luck play such a large role in life when learning to share both the work and the treasure could feed so many more of us.Hysteryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02044678910937934731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-4923140544950476102011-09-04T07:01:59.645-07:002011-09-04T07:01:59.645-07:00A friend, Ellen, who is not a Quaker, made the fol...A friend, Ellen, who is not a Quaker, made the following comment on this:<br /><br />I agree generally with all Diane has said -- the lottery is a strongly regressive form of taxation when the state indulges in it. Our founding fathers loathed the French lotteries -- these were part of the ancien regime in France.<br /><br />I didn't mention that Mill in his brilliant treatise on civil and social liberty was the one who had set me thinking -- because Mill makes it explicit -- how little tolerant the average person is of differing social habits.<br /><br />One problem - and it's the problem socialism (and communism by extension faced) is if you control the surface, do you reach the depths? You forbid people to game but by doing so how many people do you teach to dislike the value of trying to fleece others? or grow rich quick themselves as an ultimate goal. If you forbid the more egregious practices of capitalism, do you at all curb the values and type of person who would ruthlessly exploit.Dianehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12396312339372162866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-265511791146423221.post-49696955862150047612011-09-04T07:01:49.071-07:002011-09-04T07:01:49.071-07:00A friend, Ellen, who is not a Quaker, made the fol...A friend, Ellen, who is not a Quaker, made the following comment on this:<br /><br />I agree generally with all Diane has said -- the lottery is a strongly regressive form of taxation when the state indulges in it. Our founding fathers loathed the French lotteries -- these were part of the ancien regime in France.<br /><br />I didn't mention that Mill in his brilliant treatise on civil and social liberty was the one who had set me thinking -- because Mill makes it explicit -- how little tolerant the average person is of differing social habits.<br /><br />One problem - and it's the problem socialism (and communism by extension faced) is if you control the surface, do you reach the depths? You forbid people to game but by doing so how many people do you teach to dislike the value of trying to fleece others? or grow rich quick themselves as an ultimate goal. If you forbid the more egregious practices of capitalism, do you at all curb the values and type of person who would ruthlessly exploit.Dianehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12396312339372162866noreply@blogger.com