Friday, November 20, 2009

Radically Inclusive Does Not Mean Totally Inclusive

I hear people saying that the cumber of including non-theist Friends is that they say they aren't seeking the will of God. Since seeking the will of God is the center of "Quakerism," so this goes, people who do not acknowledge God cannot share in the center of our faith and practice (and, in a small and adroit further step, say that such people will ruin our ability to be in that center, as well).

(As I write that it strikes me as the logic of the Defense of Marriage Act and shows us the shortcoming of reasoning done badly. I digress...)

(And why didn't this arise earlier--at least to the extent it does now--re Buddhist Friends? Buddhism is a non-theist "religion." Trust me. I know this.)

(Also, I think, personally, that doing the will of God is the center of living out one's spirituality. It is not seeking the will of God or seeking an understanding of the will, character or purpose of God or any such other thing. I digress...again.)

How is it, I wonder, that people who say that they are not seeking the will of God in a meeting for worship for business can be sure that they aren't? Because their reason tells them they couldn't be doing that? Well, clear the decks and think that over for a moment in the context of people who say they are (or are not) "doing things" they are obviously doing.

"I am not angry, but..."

"I am not a judgmental person, but..."

"I don't hold a grudge, but..."

How do they know they aren't seeking the will of God?

How would they know if they were?

Are they making/jumping to conclusions based on "definitions" of God that very few of us would own? With all due respect, Dr. Dawkins does not get to define God and then dismiss us all as nut cases regardless of our spiritual experience. What makes him think that experiences he has had in his life were not the same ones that some of us characterize as spiritual or even "supernatural?"

When someone says "I don't believe in God" why do those of us who do take their word for it, or even care that they say this?

Have we taken so many steps (as a Society or as individuals) back toward propositional beliefs based on this or that reasoning from stories in the Bible that we have forgotten that it is how we live, and not what we believe, that saves us?

Have we given up on discerning and following the daily promptings we receive directly (from whatever we call the "source") that nudge us toward the love and charity that some of us express in the five (here today but called something else tomorrow) testimonies in the Liberal domain of the Society?

Does some propositional belief (like God doesn't want us to have same sex life partners or God demands that we all confess "Jesus Christ" by that name) cause us to ignore the promptings to love and live out our spirituality with those around us?

Not withstanding what they say they are up to, non-theist Friends seem to take part in doing business and other meeting process in a range of behavior not discern-ably different from the range of behavior as us "believers" in our meetings. And we are not sure whether we can include them just because they refuse to characterize as we do what we are all (more or less) doing in the same way?

I once heard a dharma talk on the radio during which the teacher said "...and then a thought bubbled out of my psyche..."

I snorted and said aloud "Huh! Nothing bubbled out of anywhere! You heard God talking to you."

And then I heard God talking to me: "Shut up and listen."

It was an edifying, helpful and skillful thing that was said and I might have rejected it or missed it altogether if I was hung up on "where" it came from.

Sure, I am a bit annoyed at times when people who never ask me what I mean by God (or people who classify me as "Christo-centric ") say that I believe in God because of some flaw in my character--some need to have a "God" to make up for some unwholesome hole in my humanity. But it's just as likely, you know, that a lack of a "belief" in God is based on the same human shortcomings in them that they decry in me.

If one can be kind to others, and respectful of them, and allow for all the same opportunity to go through the potluck (or any other) line or serve on a committee in a role consistent with their gifts then one can and should be included in my spiritual community (even if they say it isn't "spiritual" at all).

If one needs some work to be able to do those things then I say work with them--and abide with them. (It amounts to working and abiding with oneself, you know.)

But if they cannot do those things--and do not own that these are the things to which they aspire, to which they are being led (by whom or whatever)--then I don't care if they say they are seeking the will of God or not, whether they "believe" in God or not.

Call it what you will, it--just like all of us-- "is" and it "is becoming."