• Shunning a Quaker practice? Don't think so

    From simmosboby@gmail.com@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jul 17 20:18:46 2019
    U are 100% wrong quakers do shun.a lot just because u dont belive like them and economicly also.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jon G.@21:1/5 to jeb on Wed Jul 31 03:44:15 2019
    On Friday, June 4, 2010 at 4:44:05 PM UTC-4, jeb wrote:
    Somewhere in a recent thread, someone indicated that Quakers
    shunned people. I think this to be quite incorrect. The Amish
    and some related sects do shun people. It is both a community
    and social sanction. Those shunned are expelled from the
    community, and socially ostracized -- even minor contact with
    them is forbidden. It is often an economic sanction as well.
    It is harsh orchestrated action directed by elders of a
    community to punish behaviors the community frowns upon. The
    whole thing is a quite repugnant aspect of a religion that in
    many ways I find quite likable.

    I cannot imagine Friends doing this, though they might expel
    someone from meeting who was disruptive, if the disruption
    was serious and persistent. But I can't imagine them trying
    to impose social or economic ostracism outside the confines
    of a meeting in an attempt to enforce their disapprobation or
    punish someone. It has none of Chrisitan love in it, nor
    would it be in any manner consistent with recognizing that of
    God in everyone -- even people you don't like.

    In my opinion, this is a good example of where this group
    lacks both discernment and Quaker presence. If Quakers and
    Friends do shun and condone shunning in the sense of the
    Amish, then I lose much respect for them as a collective
    religious group. If I am right that Quakers do not shun in
    the Amish sense, then the lack of Friends presence has
    allowed a very nasty practice to remain as a unchallenged
    notion of how Quakers behave and who they are.

    This group was trashed largely by me in my runaway mental illness. I had a deep resentment due to a homicide and my own suicide. Then the fellow died. I might revel in the possibility that my powers caused the death, but I doubt it. The group has one
    less participant as a result.

    I shunned the hell out of the pervert, although he probably didn't deserve it. He mysteriously died on New Year's Day, suggesting assisted suicide.

    Manslaughter consists of using spiritual tools intended for good but applied to hurt instead.

    I was running away from them. When I looked back the punk was wielding and ice pick to stab me. This is some of the BULLSHIT I've been put through, and I'm glad the asshole pervert is fucking GONE.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Henry S. Thompson@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jul 31 13:08:16 2019
    We need to be careful about labels here. 'Disownment' was sometimes a necessity in the early days, to protect early Friends from people
    claiming to speak in their names or otherwise making Quakers look bad, sometimes at the time referred to as 'disorderly walking'. But being
    disowned did _not_ mean being shunned. It was simply a removal of
    membership, the disowned former member was still welcome to attend
    Meeting for Worship.

    The above is based largely on what I remember of things Larry Kuenning
    wrote on the topic on this list and its related email lists 20-odd years
    ago. This document [1] by Larry and others has _much_ more detail and
    should be consulted by anyone who wants the historical and contemporary
    fact of the matter.

    Most yearly meetings, including my own, still have a process whereby
    someone's membership can be terminated, but that's all it is, no social exclusion is mandated or intended.

    ht
    --
    Henry S. Thompson, Central Edinburgh LM, SE Scotland AM, Britain YM
    [quaker mail from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Henry S. Thompson@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jul 31 13:28:41 2019
    Here's the reference I failed to include:

    http://www.qhpress.org/essays/disown.html

    ht
    --
    Henry S. Thompson, Central Edinburgh LM, SE Scotland AM, Britain YM
    [quaker mail from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)