Wednesday, May 28, 2014

T is for Ten Years


“...for ye have no time but this present. Therefore prize your time for your souls’ sake.”
--George Fox in Letter 5, to his parents

I. No time but this present:

Tough decisions are not supposed to be made in haste. We have the aphorism, “Marry in haste; repent at leisure.” Membership in the Religious Society of Friends is often compared to marriage. Friends believe that both should ideally be life-long and life-changing commitments. Indeed, the comparison of the church to the bride goes back to the Bible. For this reason it is not surprising that, as common-law relationships have now often become accepted alongside formal marriage, many would have a similar relationship to our Religious Society. (For a discussion of this and related issues, see Alastair Heron, Caring, Conviction, Commitment: Dilemmas of Quaker Membership Today [1992] and the surveys discussed by Mark S. Carey, Pink Dandelion, and Rosie Rutherford in Quaker Studies 13/ [2009] pp. 238-245.)

I raise the issue of complexities regarding membership at the outset because of the paradox that the ability to change religious affiliation that we see in many western countries may make it harder to commit. Again, the parallel to marriage is useful. It is a commonplace of sociological research that people who have experienced their own divorce or that of their parents are more reluctant to marry (or remarry, as the case may be) than otherwise similar peers.

So, what can I say about membership? I will make the typical disclaimer cum biographical statement, although some details are atypical. I am a convinced Friend who became involved with Quakerism as a teenager. My parents belonged to a variety of ‘mainline’ Protestant denominations and also had connections at different times with the Unitarian Universalists. I attended what was at the time a Preparative Meeting under the care of a Monthly Meeting over an hour away. (This is not uncommon in North America, but British Friends may wish to bear in mind that Monthly Meetings here are not usually deliberately set up to be groups of several Preparative Meetings; for instance, Jesus Lane Preparative Meeting in Cambridge, England would be a Monthly Meeting if it were in New England or Canada.) That Preparative Meeting was being nudged into becoming its own Monthly Meeting in a process rather similar to a long-time attender being encouraged to apply for membership, but they were only initiating the process when I applied. I thus applied for and was accepted into membership into a Meeting which I never physically attended, because I obtained my driver's license only around the time I met with the clearness committee that considered my membership. (I had been to other Meetings, though.) This made me the youngest founding member of the “new” Monthly Meeting. Because of the vagaries of my life, I have participated in some six other Meetings in four Yearly Meetings and visited numerous others in different parts of the world. I have retained my membership in the first Meeting, however, in part because I was a founder but also because I vote by absentee ballot in a town within its catchment area. I contact the local Congressional delegation with some regularity, usually about issues of Quaker concern. I was married under the joint care of that Meeting and the one of which my husband (another convinced Friend) is a member. The Meeting I currently attend is quite small and encourages Friends in its midst who are members of other Meetings to participate in a wide variety of Quaker business, including clearness committees of all types. I have handled the gamut of membership issues.

I may not be the best person to talk about membership, but, like other Friends, I have my opinions. First and perhaps foremost is the infrequency with which we invite attenders to consider applying for membership. Although we Friends talk about transparency, the discussion of membership (at least in the unprogrammed Meetings familiar to me) is taboo because of our concerns about proselytizing. I learned just how taboo when I was a teenaged attender and was considering applying to a college that had a Quaker history. In those days, applicants with a Quaker background of any sort were encouraged to self-identify (that question became illegal under human rights legislation probably around the time “to self-identify” became a verb in English, and no doubt for related reasons). I asked the clerk of the local Preparative Meeting whether she would back me up if I made such an identification. “Of course, I would be happy to write a letter explaining your situation, but I think you should apply for membership. It is a pity that Friends almost never invite attenders to take this step. My husband and I attended (our previous Meeting) for ten years and were never asked or even encouraged to apply. We kept thinking we were unworthy. Finally, we gathered up our courage and asked about joining. They said, ‘We were wondering what took you so long.’ Ever since, I have felt that Quaker practice on this point was wrong, and not just because no one should feel the way we did.”

I applied for membership a few months later, coincidentally a matter of weeks after putting down a deposit to attend a college with no Quaker connections. Over the years, several Friends who were much older than I and who worked on membership issues have spoken with me with the thought that at some point I might have some influence, however minor, on the broader discussion. Although all of these discussions have been important, that first statement cut to the core.

When Friends who have been attenders for some time inquire about membership or moot about the possibility indirectly, I retell the story about the people who waited for ten years under the fear that they were “unworthy.” I explain briefly what membership entails and show them a copy of whatever document the particular Yearly Meeting has that discusses the process. In some Yearly Meetings it is Faith and Practice; in Canada, it is Organization and Procedure; still other Meetings have pamphlets, of which Philadelphia Yearly Meeting provides an excellent example written by Jennifer Goetz. However, I do wait for at least a broad hint from the other party: I think this is as proactive as my Friend from high school days ever got.

Buttonholing individuals about membership is no doubt contrary to Quaker practice because of our history of being on the receiving end of persecution. There are other reasons we usually wait for someone to approach us, rather than the other way around; most notable is the concern that some attenders have had a negative experience with a denomination with its own expectations of membership.  So, within these parameters, what can we do to encourage membership? Meetings that have regular discussions of Quaker testimonies and topics can put membership into the rotation if they have not done so already.

Such discussions can and probably should include information about how to apply and what really goes on in a clearness committee meeting. Faith and Practice and general guidebooks keep the description on clearness committees for membership general  because of the variety of circumstances. The description in Howard Brinton’s Guide to Quaker Practice is typical: “It is the committee’s duty to ascertain whether or not the applicant understands the beliefs and practices of the Society of Friends and is in substantial agreement with them and intends to conduct herself or himself accordingly.” (p. 47, 1993 edition) However, people are often terrified of these meetings, and not only because there is the chance, however unlikely, that they might be encouraged to wait awhile.  My thesis supervisor gave me more of an idea of what was likely to come up in my dissertation defense than most Friends tell potential applicants for membership (or marriage, for that matter, if one wants to carry forward that earlier comparison). When the latest person to apply for membership locally asked what the clearness committee was likely to discuss, I had only the information listed above. And yet we tell people that a clearness committee is not the Spanish Inquisition.

II. Some Queries for those contemplating membership or serving on a clearness committee for membership:

Neither a thesis advisor nor a clearness committee can or should anticipate all questions in advance. No one wants to give or hear answers that are completely rehearsed, but a list of questions for people to think about in advance would not hurt. It might help attenders decide if they were ready to apply for membership. Here is a list, drawn up primarily for those in unprogrammed Meetings who do not have an expectation that Friends will support a formal statement such as the Richmond Declaration. Some of these questions are of the sort that might come up in a clearness committee, although we would have time for no more than a fraction; others are more likely to be used for an attender's own reflections.

A. General issues of experience and comfort level:

How long have you been attending Meeting for Worship? Are you able to make attending Meeting a priority to the extent that physical proximity to the Meeting and other considerations such as work and family commitments allow? If these practical considerations are onerous, in what other ways can you contribute to the life of your Meeting? If you are physically distant from a Friends Meeting, are you aware of what resources your Yearly Meeting may have for you?

If your Meeting allows attenders to participate in Meeting for Worship with attention to Business, have you done so? If you are able, can you contribute to the Meeting financially if you have not already done so? How can you contribute to committee work or other responsibilities that allow Quaker Meetings and organizations to function, if such efforts are feasible for you? If a personal problem not relating to Friends (e.g., issues at work or family illness) were to arise, are there Friends with whom you would feel comfortable discussing it? If someone inside the Quaker ambit does or says something that makes you uncomfortable in belief or practice, how might you respond?

Membership in the Religious Society of Friends is through the Monthly Meeting, but it is nevertheless a membership in the worldwide Religious Society. Have you visited other Meetings and larger Quaker gatherings or Quaker-affiliated programs (e.g., Quarterly or Half-Yearly Meeting, Yearly Meeting, Friends General Conference, Friends United Meeting, Powell House, Pendle Hill, or Woodbrooke)? If you move, can you anticipate participating in a new Meeting? Friends have often accepted members, including students, who expect to move in the foreseeable future. We are experienced and (we hope) helpful in assisting with such transitions.

Do you have a rudimentary understanding of Quaker history and how Quakers in your area are organized (i.e., Monthly and Yearly Meetings), and do you inform yourself of broader current Quaker concerns?

Friends often have periods of dryness in their spiritual lives. Also, sometimes people come to a new faith community with the feeling that the community perfectly meets their needs. Friends are human beings and Friends’ organizations are comprised of human beings; we are fallible and have at least our share of warts. Can you anticipate dealing with a period of dryness or disappointment while maintaining your membership in our Religious Society?

B. Quakers and the family and close friends:

Most Friends have family members who are not Quakers. Indeed, this is often the case even inside one's immediate household. How do members of your family view your interest in Quakerism? If differences arise, as in the religious education of children, how might you approach them? If you are currently single or unpartnered, can you envisage a Quaker life for yourself if in the future you have a spouse or partner with no interest in Quakerism? Can you discuss your beliefs with family and close friends if the subject comes up without feeling the desire to try to win them over, or without being defensive if any of them try to do the same?

C. God and Christianity:

The Friends in this Yearly Meeting do not have a creed or formal statement of belief (see introductory paragraph for Friends that do have a formal statement). Nevertheless, you should have a broad familiarity with the religious traditions of Quakers, how they have developed, and the range of such beliefs today. What have Quakers traditionally thought about God and Christianity? What is your understanding, within the Yearly Meeting you now attend, about such beliefs today? Allowing for human limitations in describing the range of their own religious experiences, how would you describe your own beliefs about God and Christianity? How comfortable are you with the range of belief within your Yearly Meeting (or a lack of diversity, as the case may be)? In particular, how do you feel about the Christian history of the Religious Society of Friends?

How do you perceive the relationship between religion and science?

D. Vocal ministry and the general conduct of Meeting for Worship:

How do you feel about vocal ministry in Meeting, or the lack thereof? If your Meeting has long periods or silence and/or plenty of completely silent Meetings for Worship, how would you feel about attending a so-called “popcorn Meeting” with lots of vocal ministry, or vice versa? Can you listen respectfully to a message that may not be meant for you, but which may be meaningful to another?

Are you familiar with Friends’ principles about the outward sacraments (water baptism and communion with bread and wine or juice)? How do you feel about these?

If your Meeting is completely unprogrammed, how do you feel about the lack of designated periods for music in Meeting for Worship? If you enjoy religious music, are there other opportunities, inside or outside of the Religious Society, that provide what you need in this area? Likewise, how do you feel about the absence of religious art in most Quaker Meeting Houses?

E. Quaker testimonies:

There are a number of areas of community, national, and global concern in which Friends have traditionally been active. These concerns come out of core beliefs, which we call testimonies. Quaker testimonies include, but are by no means limited to: sincerity or integrity, equality (whether of gender, social status, education, or other aspects of the human experience), simplicity, and peace. Modern Friends have also developed a testimony of environmental concerns, including the welfare of species other than our own. In addition, the testimony on integrity has led Friends to use affirmations rather than oaths.

Friends approach these testimonies in different ways. How do you approach these testimonies yourself? Does it bother you if another Friend has a different response to one of these testimonies than you do (e.g., differences of belief and practice about the peace testimony or views on gender, marriage, and sexuality)?

F. The world of Quakerism:

The Religious Society of Friends has members and attenders all over the world. For historical and other reasons, they differ enormously in the way they understand Quaker belief and practice. Traditionally, the organizational “building block” of Quakerism is the Monthly Meeting, called a “church” in some parts of the world. Monthly Meetings in turn belong to broader organizations, usually Yearly Meetings that meet annually (often with regional gatherings that meet more often); these are in turn connected to the Friends World Committee for Consultation, which represents Quakers from all over the world. Do you have a basic idea of the range of Friends in the FWCC and what their beliefs are?

If your Yearly Meeting is part of another Quaker organization, such as Friends General Conference   (FGC) or Friends United Meeting (FUM), do you have a basic understanding of what that organization is and what its beliefs are? People in North America should be especially aware that some Yearly Meetings have dual affiliations with Friends United Meeting and Friends General Conference and that tensions have arisen due to differences in beliefs and expectations among members of these two umbrella groups. These Yearly Meetings are: Baltimore, Canadian, New England, New York, and Southeastern.

The Religious Society of Friends is a living organism. As such, it is changing and developing. In what ways can you see yourself contributing to any changes that might occur?  If any current trends make you feel uncomfortable (and many Friends have felt such discomfort), what are they, and how can you relate to them? Remember that there is no one answer to questions like this.

G. Other questions and concerns:

Is there anything you would like to ask a clearness committee?

III. Other issues related to membership:

I have some broader issues in mind as well. Committees on Ministry and Counsel or their equivalent can keep up with people who are in the process of drifting away, if only to maintain the conversation and have accurate contact information. (I have known of membership clerks being approached by Ministry and Counsel because they do not have current addresses of all members, only to reply that membership clerks are likely to be in the same position.)

We might also consider saying something similar to what some other religious organizations put on their monthly newsletter: “those who are interested in knowing what membership in the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) entails should feel free to contact the clerk, the membership clerk, or a member of the Committee on Ministry and Counsel/an Overseer (with names and contact information).” A letter applying for membership is sent to the clerk, but it is important to make it clear that the clerk is not a stand-in for a member of the clergy.

One final point: when the subject of raising the age limit for people on the “temporary list” (called “junior members” in some Yearly Meetings) came up in Canadian Yearly Meeting, I was one of many who were generally supportive. Times have changed. Whereas previous generations of Friends might have been likely to have permanent jobs and even children by their twenty-sixth birthday, the cut-off for many temporary lists, this has been unrealistic for some time. Although others have worked for some time and written at length on the subject, I also would encourage Yearly Meetings (and Monthly Meetings, where flexibility exists) to consider raising the age limit or to look at ways in which people who otherwise move a lot might feel comfortable applying for membership in our Religious Society.

Despite the noblest intent of all concerned, Friends who have served on committees to look over the membership list (the name and participants of such committees differ according to Yearly Meeting and sometimes within Yearly Meetings) sometimes have tales to tell about people who have applied for membership in the Religious Society of Friends and been accepted into it, only to sink into disillusionment later. Certainly some have applied when they had insufficient experience outside their local Meetings and were dissatisfied with a new Meeting in a different town. Some rethink their spiritual values and go elsewhere, the same as other people come to us. But does that make the idea of membership a hot potato? I hope not. The fact of a divorce does not by itself preclude remarriage under the care of our Religious Society (at least in the Yearly Meetings familiar to me). Likewise, we all know that “divorce” from membership happens from time to time. When people leave our Religious Society, it is important not only to see  why the Friend wishes to leave (like a marital divorce, such separations are occasionally called off) but also to ensure that the process is “no fault” and transparent. Friends try to arrange visitation for the member who wishes to resign not only to ensure that such a person feels “clear” about the Meeting (and vice versa) but to reduce the risk of hard feelings. Occasionally we have had a happy reunion later.

Exterior of Sparta Meeting House,  Yarmouth, Ontario
photograph ©Kristin Lord 2013

S is for Second Chances


Native Design inserted into the floor
between Air Canada Centre and Union Station
Toronto, Ontario
A reminder that Toronto's old nickname for itself was (and maybe still is)
"Toronto the Good"
photo ©Kristin Lord 2014
Serious study of early Christianity is not my field. I specialize in authors who were what we now call pagan. Right now I am devoting most of my research activities toward the Greek poets Sophocles and Euripides, although I have given conference talks on Catullus and Vergil, who are both on the Roman “side.” Nevertheless, in the final week of my introductory Roman civilization class I touch on what the Mennonite theologian John Howard Yoder calls the Constantinian shift, namely, how both Christianity and the Roman Empire changed when Christianity changed from the faith of the persecuted to the religion of the Roman Emperor under Constantine I (“Constantine the Great”) and ultimately of the Empire. This transformation is of particular interest to Quakers and other pacifists in the Christian tradition because it was part of the change in the attitude toward military service inside and outside of the early Church. In short, as a result of the changes in the period up to and during the rule of Constantine it became acceptable for Christians to serve in the Roman army, and the Roman army was for its part Christianized.

It might be argued that Constantine I, as a leader of exceptional ability, was instrumental in giving the western part Roman Empire a second chance that lasted for the better part of two hundred years. There is much to be said for this. As it happens, though, I think of Constantine as the emperor of second chances for another reason. He was involved in decisions about several movements within early Christianity that are now considered heresies. One of these movements was Donatism, which took a severe view about the readmission the Christian fold of both parishioners and clergy who had returned to paganism under duress during the persecutions of Constantine's immediate predecessor, the emperor Diocletian. The Donatists believed that people were out of the Christian fold once they were out. They were especially concerned about restoring priests and other leaders to position of authority, as they believed that the sacraments needed to be administered by a holy person in order to be considered sacred. Other people in the early Church believed that penance was there precisely to allow for people to be forgiven for making mistakes. If we consider the latter approach to be the way Christians normally believe —and by and large Friends adhere to it— it is, at least in part, because this view was accepted by Constantine and worked well for a huge number of people under different circumstances throughout later history. Although there are multiple reasons why the “orthodox” concept of forgiveness won out, it is worth noting that the pagans themselves were quite willing to give people a second chance to return to paganism by performing rituals in the non-Christian state religion. The Christian church needed to have a more attractive set of ideas, and being exclusionary would have ceded an important point to the pagans.

How do we view second chances today, in both religion and society? I have been thinking about this question for several reasons, both spiritual and political.  A telephone conversation a couple months ago with my father put the political aspect into high relief. “What is the deal with your mayor?” “I” don’t have a mayor, and my Dad knows it. I am an American expat who votes in the same Vermont town of  roughly 400 voters where he was on the checklist until he moved to another small Vermont town. Neither of these communities has a mayor. The rural municipality of Centre Wellington in the Canadian province of Ontario, where I now live, does have a mayor. A hard-working public servant who is respected by people across the political spectrum, she lives a few blocks away from us, but my father would not know that. In any case, when I replied, “What mayor?” he knew I was pulling his leg, as he had been pulling mine a moment before. My father lives on a sparsely-populated mountainside and has chosen to eschew Internet access, but one could never accuse him of being ill-informed.

I expect almost every person reading this blog knows to whom the phrase “your mayor” refers if the person hearing the question lives in the same province —maybe even the same country— as the mayor of Toronto, Ontario. Everyone, it seems, has an opinion about Rob Ford. (For an overview see Wikipedia, the Star, the Huffington Post, and the Globe and Mail.) People who live in parts of Ontario outside of Toronto feel especially justified in having one because all Ontario residents and taxpayers have a vested interest in seeing Toronto succeed as a livable and cosmopolitan city. Every year that Toronto fails to get a grip on its traffic problems adds to the expenses all of us will have to pay when it finally does make progress (see recent articles in the Huffington Post, the Star and the Globe and Mail for different perspectives on this issue). And that is just the beginning.

Panoramic Photograph of Toronto, September 2009
Martin St.-Aimant
reproduced with permission via Wikimedia Commons


A number of serious political commentators in the United States and elsewhere have been trying to figure out why a significant portion of the Toronto electorate has given mayor Rob Ford a multitude of second chances. From recent polling, he can probably rely on a core support of around 30 per cent of the electorate for his reelection in the fall (although that support has been dropping lately). Part of the answer to this conundrum is that conservatives in Ontario and elsewhere can be political or social conservatives, or both. Canada has a Conservative party, called by somewhat different names with different coalitions of voters in various times and places, and also has people who are conservative with a “small c” who do not vote for that party. In Ontario, people who are attracted to the conservative end of the political spectrum are more likely to be the small-government types and may have libertarian beliefs as well. This is Rob Ford’s general platform. Only a few are Bible-belt conservatives; in fact, they run the range of ethnic and religious backgrounds, although they tend to be socially conservative to some extent. (Municipal elections in Ontario are officially non-partisan, but municipal politicians run under partisan banners when they move to provincial or federal politics, and vice versa. The Ford family is associated with the Ontario Progressive Conservatives.) On the other hand, the politicians who try to appeal to this part of the electorate, even with a diverse and increasingly secular crowd like Toronto, often take a “tough on crime” approach. Mayor Rob Ford and his brother, Counsellor Doug Ford, will not be able to appeal to this latter demographic indefinitely.

Pollsters have so far found that the “Rob Ford Nation” can be divided roughly into two overlapping groups: those who agree with his economic approach and those who feel themselves hard done by elites. Although the Ford family is very wealthy, in political terms they are populist opponents of political, social, and —especially— intellectual elites. They also have the poise and charisma from which their opponents can learn a great deal (but probably not emulate, as experience can take someone only so far in the absence of innate talent).  In sum, there is a core group in Toronto and everywhere else in Canada and the United States that is sick and tired of being lectured at by people with advanced degrees. (In contrast, the late Jack Layton, the distinguished Canadian leader of the New Democratic Party/NDP, a social democratic party, had the kind of charisma that allowed him to attract wide support despite having an earned Ph.D.; his widow, Olivia Chow, who is also an intellectually engaged politician, is one of Ford’s opponents in the upcoming mayoral race.) For whatever reason, the Ford brothers seem to have an instinctive understanding of economically stressed people of average education.

Even these facts do not explain everything about Rob Ford’s popularity, let alone the degree of sympathy some have for him. (For an overview see Robyn Doolittle, Crazy Town: the Rob Ford Story [2014] passim, especially chapter 16.) Like many people, I have been trying to figure out what it is. The possibility of redemption is a part of it, and I will get to that in a minute, but related to redemption is the question of whether Rob Ford is a tragic figure. To a great extent he is a tragic figure, in the technical terms that would be familiar to a student of Greek tragedy. (Rosie DiManno of the Star, a fine journalist who has been following the Ford brothers for years, has a different definition and comes to a different conclusion.) Aristotle, whose understanding of tragedy and the ideal tragic figure forms the basis of much western thinking on the subject, believed that the ideal tragic figure is —in layperson's terms— of high status and better than average, but not blameless. The example Aristotle gives is Oedipus in Sophocles’ play Oedipus the King. To a great extent, Rob Ford meets this description, although for different reasons. Ford is indisputably of high social and political status; while he is no intellectual, his ability to “read” a large swath of the electorate, strike a hard bargain with labour unions (despite the controversy surrounding that bargain), and, perhaps most significant of all, to stay out of criminal court, shows that he is no fool. Many have underestimated him at their peril.

In Aristotle's view, the reason the ideal tragic character is successful is that he causes the audience watching a tragedy to experience a catharsis, i.e., an emotional release, of pity and fear as this character moves from good to bad fortune over the course of the play. (It is also possible, indeed likely, that the tragic characters themselves experience this catharsis, although this depends on interpretation.) The catch, once again, is that this character must be of the sort Aristotle recommends. If the person is completely innocent (for example, a toddler dying of a horrible disease), then one feels a sense of horror and outrage rather than pity and fear. If someone is a base character, then those watching his downfall feel he has gotten his just desserts. Indeed, some members of the Toronto electorate, and, by extension, some Ontario taxpayers, are feeling just this sense of revulsion. If nothing else, Rob Ford is a polarizing figure.

Mayor Ford's outrageous behavior is closely related to his substance abuse problems; for this reason, following his decline over the past year makes me feel a sense of pity and fear rather than revulsion or outrage. I have seen others suffer horrific effects of addiction, and, like many people, it is frightening because we know that many good people could be in the same situation but for a roll of the dice of heredity and environment.

Aristotle claims that the ideal tragic figure undergoes a reversal (in Greek, peripeteia), from good to bad fortune because of something called hamartia. Classical scholars nowadays translate hamartia as error, specifically, as D.W. Lucas puts it in his commentary on the Poetics, an error arising from “ignorance combined with the absence of wicked intent.” (Lucas, 1968, p. 302) For instance, Oedipus in Oedipus the King kills his father and marries his mother because he does not know that he was adopted. While we cannot say that Rob Ford acts out of ignorance in the formal sense of the term, the very nature of substance abuse problems often makes it impossible for the person suffering them to understand them in a way that allows them to act on them. I am giving a contemporary description of cognition, but one that is still relevant given what addiction does to the brain. Such an effect was not unknown to the Greeks. In Euripides’ tragedy the Bacchae, the character Pentheus, who is forced to participate in the rituals of the wine-god Dionysus, becomes unhinged to the point that he kills his own mother in a Bacchic frenzy. Aristotle himself uses the word hamartia in the Nicomachean Ethics, one of his other works, to refer to someone whose error occurs because he is drunk or angry; in this case the individual, although not seeming to be ignorant, actually is so because of these mitigating factors (EN 1110b.25-30; cf. Lucas, p. 301).

Thus, as the situation stands now (May 28, 2014), Rob Ford seems to me a tragic figure in the Aristotelian sense, except that he is living his life and not acting on stage. Those who are not convinced by this approach, Rosie DiManno probably among them, might consider how Rob Ford's time in office compares to another model of ancient Greek tragedy —and, indeed, Greek thinking about human behavior. In this model, which we see on stage in some of the plays of Aeschylus, a character becomes too full of himself or herself. Such an individual shows a kind of overweening arrogance with a bit of verbal and/or physical violence thrown in; the Greek term is hubris, which can also be found in Athenian law for verbal harassment or physical assault. This hubris invites the envy (phthonos) of the gods or other humans, or both. Inevitably, the individual involved makes a reckless error in judgment (the Greek word is atasthalia), which in turn results in his or her destruction. The trick for a writer turning this kind of person in to a character for the stage, or for a journalist describing someone in the media, is to humanize him or her so that the audience can relate  —which, I suppose, brings us back to that whole “pity and fear” shtick.

However, North American society is influenced not only by the ideas of ancient Greek tragedy but also the concept of redemption, which comes through Christianity and other religions. In fact, even Oedipus gets a second chance on the Greek stage, in the later play Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles.

When it comes to Rob Ford and redemption, the people of Toronto and Ontario are waiting with bated breath, as he undergoes inpatient treatment at a facility north of the city. What can I say about Rob Ford from my vantage point as a Quaker? As both a Friend and a human being, I can only hope and pray that his treatment is successful. If I were a Toronto voter looking for policies in passable tune with Quaker values, I would consider other mayoral candidates. Nevertheless, when listening to Rob Ford speak about the influence of elites and his sense of himself as an outsider (whether or not this is justified), I remember that George Fox had issues with the elites of his day. Some of the people to whom Fox appealed held roughly the same positions vis à vis the power structures in society that the “Rob Ford Nation” has now. George Fox upended the religious power structure by saying that one did not have to be educated at Oxford or Cambridge to be a minister of the Gospel (The Journal of George Fox, ed. by John L. Nickalls [1975], p. 11). He succeeded to a great degree because of his ability to create an alternative organizational structure for religion. Although the men and structures to which George Fox objected were spiritual elites, given the way England worked in seventeenth century, they had enormous temporal power as well. Both Oliver Cromwell and King Charles II had to be reassured that George Fox and his associates were not aiming to overthrow their physical authority. The first —and one of the most eloquent— expressions of the Friends’ peace testimony, the letter to King Charles II in 1660, was this very reassurance.

If George Fox was able to appeal to people who felt unsupported by the social structures of his day, might a less divisive figure than Rob Ford appeal to voters of varying degrees of affluence who are disillusioned by conventional politics? This is unlikely on the face of it, as lower taxes seem to be the “third rail” of politics for this group today. On the other hand, the situation demands thinking outside of the box, and a truly original and gifted politician will have ideas that we have not yet considered. It is possible that Olivia Chow (on the left) or John Tory (on the centre-right) or perhaps one of the other candidates could become this type of leader if winning the election. Certainly, whoever wins the election will need to gain the respect of people who voted for someone else.

How can Quakers, who are relatively small in number, help to bring about new ideas and encourage mutual respect? One of the major problems Toronto (and some other cities like it) faces is that it is a “forced marriage,” created by the Ontario government some years ago, of the urban core with some of its suburbs. People in different parts of the city often do not meet, except perhaps on a superficial level, and their children will probably not be educated together unless they attend the same university or community college. It might be very helpful if some of the religious groups in the area could facilitate informal discussions among both leaders and “ordinary” people who might otherwise never meet, much as Quakers have done with international political leaders through the United Nations in New York and Geneva.

Regardless of the form Toronto politics ends up taking, I am optimistic about the longer-term prospects of the city. God willing, all of us will have second chances, whether these opportunities are financial, political, educational, or spiritual. Although North Americans believe in the importance of these second chances, we are not always taught to use them well. When considering the life trajectory of leaders, be they Constantine, Rob Ford, or George Fox, it is instructive to see how they did or did not use their second chances, and how we may learn from what they did.
Native Design inserted into the floor
between Air Canada Centre and Union Station
Toronto, Ontario
photo ©Kristin Lord 2014

Thursday, May 22, 2014

R is for Ruts


The street near our driveway in Canada, high and dry (thank goodness)
and in the peak of repair
©Kristin Lord 2014

Rural dwellers in northeastern North America know that we have a fifth season: “mud season,” which usually occurs between the end of winter and the beginning of spring, although a late December or January thaw can cause the same effect. Mud season often coincides with maple sugaring season, as the sap runs when the weather goes above freezing during the day but plummets below it at night.

To all accounts, this was the nastiest winter in this quadrant of the continent in at least a generation, and for many people there were spring floods and axle-gripping mud baths as well. That said, the single “muddiest” episode, at least in my mind, occurred about 20 or 25 years ago. My husband and I were driving up from Bristol, Vermont to my parents’ house in Ripton on the Ripton-Lincoln Road, a dirt road with spectacular daytime views, which is real estate jargon for precipitous dips and inclines. It was about 8 p.m. and misting rain. My parents had insisted that the road was passible. They were so rarely wrong about highway conditions that we kept going even after we started slipping on that first hill. I was driving a Dodge Colt; between its standard transmission and new winter tires it had passable traction. Unfortunately, traction was not the issue. The size of the wheelbase was. When one of the tires got stuck up to the axle in mud, I had no choice but to get out and make my way to the only place with lights on, a winterized cabin in the distance on the left. (Almost no one had cell phones then, and in any case the area is still in a dead zone.)

My husband stayed with the car since he wasn’t as familiar with the area. About four feet into my trek, the mud sucked my left shoe off my foot. Wearing only a sock, I managed to get to the cabin. The owners let me in to phone my father. Since my father has that kind of alchemy with cars that will allow him pull a mid-sized Mercedes or an SUV out of a ditch with a small Toyota pickup, he had no trouble with the Colt. We didn’t even have any problems retrieving my shoe.

When we got to my parents’ house in Ripton, my mother greeted us at the door. The dining room rug was white with blue trim and she wanted to keep it that way, so she thrust an old towel at my feet. “Oh, I am sorry I forgot to tell you.” She pulled a strand of hair back around her ear. “Your uncle phoned yesterday and said that he had trouble on the Lincoln-Ripton Road.” My uncle owned a large domestic pickup.

So that’s what Vermonters mean by ruts. We don’t mean bad jokes about Rutland City, Rutland County, or Rutland Town. (“Rutland” is an English place name that apparently has nothing to do with bad roads.) Ruts are different from the kind of dry spells we Quakers are told about in Faith and Practice. A physical rut typically yields to a truck with a chain; at the worst, maybe we need some cement blocks in the back for ballast. It’s similar with a rut in one’s mind. The psychological equivalent for the chain is usually a deadline. The chief difference between the different types of ruts, however, is that while a rutted road usually becomes somewhat more passible in a dry spell, a mental rut can lead to a dry spell.

This year, the winter of 2013-14, was a nasty winter for ruts of all kinds. Before the first half of winter term was over, we had to replace the hot water heater and the furnace (both in weather that was well below zero Fahrenheit) and have the oven looked at, all the while fielding calls over departmental and family matters. Most spectacularly, like millions of others, we had damage from an ice storm at 6 a.m. on the Sunday morning a few days before Christmas. A downed tree limb tore off the electrical line to our house from the street, arcing perilously close to the neighbor’s car, and also destroyed the “stack,” the fixture connecting the line to the meter and the house. We were lucky, though, as the power company employee who removed the line from the road told us to phone an electrician before anyone else got up or we might spend Christmas in the dark. Others didn’t receive such prompt advice and were not reconnected until Christmas eve, when the thermometer had plunged to near-record cold.  We were deeply grateful to the three wise men who sorted us out.

Our two cats (both indoor cats) were quick to weigh in on the ice storm. Since we were uncertain how long we would be without heat and power, we booked a room at a pet-friendly hotel in town and tucked them into their cat carriers. As we stomped out the back door, trying to keep from slipping on the ice-encrusted snow and dodging branches that were still collapsing in the darkened neighborhood, it occurred to our feline contingent that their annual physicals might have been less stressful. The older, more introverted one became “haired out,” shall we say, although the younger thought it was a great adventure. Over the winter, I related to the older cat more and more but kept thinking of the younger as more worthy of emulation.
 
For some cats life is just an adventure which one can then sleep off.
©Kristin Lord 2014
Mud season brought a record season of potholes and flooding, and even city dwellers who drive those “very-un-Quakerly-cars-that-dare-not-speak-their-names” were worried about losing their mufflers. Those vehicles are actually the best ones to have for such conditions, as galling as it may be to people who own the more economical ones, but I digress. Was I going to be punished by the automotive gods for buying a “relatively-Quakerly-car-to-the-extent-that-one-exists?” SO... WHAT WAS that rumbling in the exhaust system? It kept deteriorating for the three weeks I had to wait for an appointment. The mechanic was thoughtful, but, like everyone else, he needed to be paid. “Just wheel bearings. They sometimes sound like a holey muffler. You can drive to work and back just fine, but, no, I wouldn’t go off to Vermont with the car acting like that.”

Then came the miracles: when the spring rains hit, the repairs that we had made last year after a sink hole opened up in the back yard managed to forestall basement flooding. Then the grades got done in the nick of time, and some other issues were resolved. I was grateful, or so I thought...

A week after the car was repaired, I was at my desk with two stacks of library books, thinking that this would be the most productive summer in years ....  and then I got bogged down in updating a petty bibliography. The gears in my mind had become completely gummed up with some unknown ooze. On Sunday I fidgeted at Meeting. On most days I practiced the piano for the requisite daily hour, to no avail, becoming more nervous about the adult “performance class” in June. I was staring past the ruts and thinking about a dry spell ahead.

I turned to Howard Brinton’s advice in The Guide to Quaker Practice about ruts (although he does not use such vocabulary) and dry spells. His advice about dry spells was not what I had hoped to read:

            The autobiographies of Friends nearly all report intervening periods of dryness when God seems far away and the very meeting for worship is formal and unfruitful. Almost everyone passes through such stages which should not become times of too deep discouragement. Drought is eventually followed by refreshing rain... Growth should not be hurried. (1993 edition, p. 19, emphasis mine)

Rain? Thanks a lot, Friend Howard. Rain is what they need in California and Australia. Maybe my problem is a simpler one of self-examination: “an obstacle may be ... merely a mind too busy with routine affairs.” (p. 17) Let’s hope that this is the impediment; it looks more straightforward and is certainly plausible. (He also cites “selfish or degrading desire,” which I cannot entirely rule out.) But Howard Brinton is right that some problems do come to an end. I remember that after retrieving my shoe from the mud all of those years ago, I somehow cleaned it up along with its mate and wore them for the next year. The socks came out of the wash unscathed. I think I finally got rid of them last week when I cleaned out my dresser drawers.
Stockbridge, Vermont in the summer of 1997.
This area was cut off in the flooding that occurred
during post-hurricane Irene in 2011.

Saturday, May 17, 2014

Q is for Queries and Advices (about paid employment)


Quakers do not have a creed, but we do have a tradition of Advices and Queries. Both are encapsulations of Friends' testimonies and practices; both are designed to make us reflect upon how we view our beliefs and put them into action. If an Advice or Query gets under one's skin a bit, then it may be doing its job; on the other hand, material that is not relevant for one person may be for another. The principal difference between the Advices and Queries is that Advices are written in prose, while Queries are in the form of leading questions. Indeed, because of the similarities, some Yearly Meetings, such as Britain, have amalgamated related Advices and Queries. The most effective Advices and Queries are those that speak to core Quaker values but which can be updated, either on their own or as a complement to new such contributions, as needs and ideas change. An example of the latter is the increasing emphasis on environmental concerns, which arise naturally from Friends' traditional testimonies of equality, peace, and simplicity.

I had occasionally read of individuals writing their own Queries and/or Advices as a way of bringing their own lives into clearer focus (an article by Mark S. Carey in Friends Journal in the October 1, 2009 issue provides an excellent example) but had never done so myself until contributing to this blog. Because of recent and upcoming changes at work I have decided to write some related to employment. With this set of Queries I am concerned about paid employment, although unpaid labor, especially internships, is also relevant to many of these Queries.

A note to readers who are not Quakers: while the use of Queries and their specific formulations may arise out of the values and practice of the Religious Society of Friends, others may find them beneficial. Please feel free to substitute your own religious tradition, if you have one, for "Quakers" and "Friends," or supply any relevant secular philosophy. The only Query that is particular to Friends (and a few other groups) is the one on oath taking, but even there, oaths and affirmations, especially those of loyalty, may cause a wide variety of people to be skeptical. The Advice about lawsuits does not derive from an absolute prohibition, as there are examples of cases involving Quakers and their beliefs that have gone to high courts (in the USA, one may compare the Supreme Court cases Tinker v. Des Moines on the rights of high school students to free expression and United States v. Seeger on conscientious objection, although these cases are not related to the workplace). Furthermore, while some faith communities do not have a specific peace testimony or pacifist tradition, all responsible religious traditions and leaders that I know of wish to reduce the incidence of enmity, violence, and strife —wherever and whenever they arise.

A bit of personal background information: except for a brief hiatus in the winter of 2001, I have been a contract academic employee at the same Ontario university since 1999. My specialty is Classical Studies. I have also been employed by other universities in Canada and the United States. I have been connected with the bargaining unit of my faculty association, which is a recognized labour union in the Province of Ontario, since its inception. I have served it in formal and informal capacities, including the Bilateral Committee on Contract Academic Staff Office Space. In 2010 I organized and chaired a panel presentation and discussion on contingent faculty (also known as "adjuncts" and "contract academic faculty" or "contract academic staff" at the annual meeting of the Classical Association of the Middle West and South (CAMWS).

1. When investigating new employment or changes in a current job, do you look at how the opportunity reflects Friends' beliefs and your own values, as well as your career goals, financial needs, and personal and family considerations? Try to ensure that contracts are clearly written and mutually understood, with questions and concerns resolved in advance. To the extent possible, anticipate any major ethical conflicts that may arise in this position, and consider how you might deal with them. Will you be required to take an oath or affirmation; if so, how will you respond? If asked to provide medical information as a condition for undertaking or continuing employment, is this necessary and appropriate? If a conflict does arise, use it whenever possible as an opportunity to develop strategies to reduce the incidence of similar issues in the future.

2. One of the oldest Queries among Friends is, "How are love and unity maintained amongst you?" While this Query was originally aimed at maintaining harmony within the Quaker community, it may be reframed for the workplace, regardless of how secular that may be. Friends should be mindful that those they meet on the job are human beings first and parts of an administrative hierarchy second. Remember that we are all children of God, and work as equals with those whose backgrounds and viewpoints differ from your own. Be prepared to be challenged by different perspectives and new ideas.

3. Friends' testimonies of peace, equality, and integrity sometimes put people in workplace situations that may be uncomfortable at best. Act justly and fairly, whether you are an employer, employee, or both. If you employ others, in what ways do Quaker principles intersect with your responsibilities and the law? Regardless of your own position, do you seek avenues for mutually satisfactory resolutions when conflicts arise, either among individuals, or between those categorize as employees and management? Remember that some may be particularly vulnerable, particularly those of limited finances or who belong to groups that have been and often continue to be marginalized or oppressed. Do you strengthen opportunities for mediation? Avoid gossip and tale-bearing and maintain confidentiality as needed, while working toward transparency when this is possible and appropriate. Recuse yourself from actual and potential conflicts of interest. When differences arise, listen to all sides before arriving at a conclusion. People on all sides of a situation may need support; indeed, Quakers have often been asked or felt called to assist those who have taken an unpopular stand or who are accused of wrongdoing. Remember that disputes sometimes have innocent bystanders, and that it may not always be obvious who they are.

4. Regardless of how your workplace is structured, remember the rights of all to fair employment, and be aware your rights and those of others under the law. Do your part to help rectify labor laws that you believe are unjust or that leave employees with insufficient livelihood. If you are in the position to do so, ensure that job searches are ethical and transparent, and that they meet the requirements of the law and any union contracts. What are the laws concerning discrimination and harassment where you are, and how can they be improved? If there are unpaid internships where you work, is this appropriate? Although mindful of the needs of employers, be aware that people require stability in their jobs in order to support themselves and their families. In what ways can you ensure that those needing accommodation because of religion, family responsibilities, and disability receive support in accordance with the law, and with good will and to the satisfaction of all concerned?

5. Consider the role of labor unions and collective bargaining for various sectors of the economy. At the same time, however, be aware of realistic constraints on wages and benefits, and the need for businesses in the private sector to provide a reasonable return on investment. Globalization may affect your workplace in various ways. To what extent do the pay and working conditions in your employment, community, and country aggravate or improve economic and social mobility, while still providing appropriate rewards for merit and risk? Does your work situation help you and others plan for illness, retirement, or disability? If called to represent others, as on a workplace committee or tribunal, do you have or can you develop the qualifications to do so effectively while respecting the rights and responsibilities of all? If you are a member of a labor union, or a manager with oversight of union members,  try to anticipate what you might do if there is a strike or lockout. In the event of a workplace dispute or disruption, consider how Friends' testimonies may help defuse anger and frustration, while being aware of your own emotions and limitations. Remember that third parties may be hurt, and that all sides in a labor dispute may try to involve these third parties.

6. Friends often work at large entities that serve others, such as educational institutions, hospitals, stores, offices, and factories.    How do you relate to people who are not employees where you work, but upon whom your work may depend? If you become aware through your employment of injustice in the broader community, in what ways can your work help to prevent or remediate it? Consider how your understanding of Friends' testimonies may help provide a needed perspective on discrimination. Examine the possible systemic roots of such problems and seek ways to alleviate them, being especially mindful of any privilege you might have. Be aware of how your workplace and your own job or career might address environmental concerns.

7. Problems at work are inevitable. Can you see ways in which you might help keep them from escalating? If someone should break the law, how might you respond? Consider the right place for legal assistance, especially if you find yourself on the receiving end of discrimination, harassment, or threats, or if you are asked to break the law or to enforce an unethical law. If you are faced with a crisis at work, can you get help in confidence, such as appropriate legal advice or personal counseling, or assistance from a bargaining unit or employee association? In what circumstances, if any, might a committee of clearness or concern from your Meeting be right for you? Friends should particularly consider the moral and practical implications of lawsuits. In general, if a crisis arises, try to view it as an opportunity — for yourself, for others, or both.

8. Be mindful of your use of time on the job. Consider the needs of any family members while accepting your responsibility toward your employer and yourself to avoid inappropriate interruptions. Avoid procrastination. What is the appropriate use of technology where you work, and what is its abuse?

9. Be sure to care for yourself. If you find yourself depressed or anxious due to workplace demands, or if you find yourself using alcohol or other substances inappropriately, seek help promptly. Does your employment encroach on your needs and those of any family for adequate exercise and leisure, a balanced diet, medical attention, and rest and sleep? If you have a companion animal, does your schedule allow you to care for it properly? A vacation does not have to be expensive; can you take one? Do you take the legal holidays to which you are entitled or, if not, are you fairly compensated? Can you take parental or elder care leave? Do you have time to visit friends and family and to fulfill your responsibilities as a member of our Religious Society?

10. Know in advance where you can get immediate assistance if you should find someone with a medical emergency, or acting or about to act as a danger to him or herself or to others. Do not try to deal with these situations directly unless you are trained to do so.

11. Even if you work only for yourself, your workplace will have questions of governance. Wherever you work, consider the rights of any stockholders and investors and any fiduciary responsibilities in addition to legal requirements. Those who work directly or indirectly as civil servants often face special issues and may bear the brunt of broader political pressures. Those considering going into business or restructuring an existing one might examine the place of employee-owned companies. If you own or share ownership of a small business, what plans do you have for the day when you will no longer be connected with it? If you work for a non-profit organization, how do your values mesh with its governance, goals, and mandates?

12. Despite the best of intentions, not all workplace problems can be resolved satisfactorily.  How can you and others best move on if the need arises?

Original material ©Kristin Lord 2014

If you find yourself swimming with the sharks at work,
maybe you should take a day off and visit them at the aquarium.
Ripley Aquarium, Toronto, Canada
©Kristin Lord 2014