HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe)
Subject: Re: Hour of Silence
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 20:03:02 GMT

aeb@philabs.philips.com (Anne Barschall) writes:

>I would submit that you cannot know what a silent meeting is like for you
>unless you go to one.

I would go one step further and say that after attending that one Meeting for
Worship, one will only know what *that* Meeting for Worship was like for you.
Every week is a slightly different experience, and some are *very* different
experiences.  Also, each local Meeting will have a different character.  What
I often say is that noone knows what will happen, but it almost always is the
best thing that could have happened.  (Argh, this sounds preachy.  Blech! :-(
Words don't cut it.)  If someone feels that Quaker Meeting might be right for
them, go try it a few times.  You can find out for yourself whether it's right
for you.  (I don't believe that Quakerism is right for everyone.)


              Merry meet, merry part, merry meet again,
                               Br'anArthur

Queer, Peculiar, and Wyrd! :-)

******************************************************************************
Newage is hypoallergenic spirituality--
it's for people who are allergic to the word religion.
                                   --Jon Jay Obermark
From: Joel Sax <jsax@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Date: 06 Nov 92 09:40 PST
Subject: What is gen.quaker?
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1744600018:000:476
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!jsax    Nov  6 09:40:00 1992


Gen.quaker is an in-house PeaceNet conference and, the
first, I am proud to say, universally Quaker conference
anywhere in the electronic universe (since 1989!!!)  (FCNL
appeared on Compuserve in 1987, so deserves acknowledgement
as the first Quaker presence on the electronic networks).

As it is an in-house conference, we want to keep a little to
ourselves.  However, I monitor the conference for this group
and have been moving the best material to this conference.

Joel
From: nelson@crynwr.com (Russell Nelson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Quaker Humor 
Distribution: world
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 04:25:42 GMT
Organization: Crynwr Software

In article <1992Oct31.051736.24697@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu> wisdom@picasso.ocis.temple.edu writes:

           The only two Quaker jokes I've ever heard:

           A Quaker farmer is asleep and hears a noise outside, he jumps out of
   bed, grabs his rabbit gun (Assume this is in bear country if you like) and runs   downstairs to find a burglar.  He stops dead in his tracks, thinks a moment, 
   and says:
           "Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world; but you are standing
   where I am about to shoot.

Or the similar:

The farmer Quaker says to his recalcitrant cow, "Friend cow, thee
knows I would not beat thee.  But what thee neglects to consider is
that I might sell thee to the Baptist down the road."

Or:

Herbert Hoover, a birthright Quaker (born into the faith), was
reputed to have said, when someone observed that the sheep grazing in
the field outside the train had been sheared, "On this side, yes".

-russ <nelson@crynwr.com> What canst *thou* say?
Crynwr Software           Crynwr Software sells packet driver support.
11 Grant St.              315-268-1925 Voice  |  LPF member - ask me about
Potsdam, NY 13676         315-268-9201 FAX    |  the harm software patents do.
From: wagner@ives.cs.unc.edu (Michael Wagner)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Re: Nixon
Date: 6 Nov 92 19:36:36 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

As a Quaker, I believe that our realtions with fellow
human beings should be guided by the Inner Light.  I
cannot always do this, but I hope that as I grow
closer to that light, I will be more able to do that.
As I have grown closer to that Light, it seems that
I am drawn more to a tolerance of people different
than myself, even when we disagree.  I hope that some
day, lead by this Light, I may truly learn to love
all around me, as creations of God and vessels,
however imperfect, of the Light.

One thing that I have learned is that judging other human
beings get in the way of such growth.  I am often called
to remember, "Judge not, lest ye be judged."  I
have found that when I am free of such judgement, I am
more able to speak to that of God in another, and in
myself.  I have tfound that when I am free of such
judgement, I am more able to listen to that of God in
another, and in myself.

I have a concern that the thread of disparaging remarks
made about Richard Nixon in this newsgroup will help none
of us to speak to or listen to that of God in Richard
Nixon, or ourselves.  I believe that the demonizing of
a fellow human being is really of the realm of very earthly
politics, and inappropriate for Quakers.  This is not to
say that I haven't done this.  In the heat of those years,
I too judged Nixon to be a criminal.  But I do think that
this kind of judgement is in appropriate.  He is a vessel
of the Light, and I have no real reason to believe that
he is any more or less prefect than I as such a vessel.
I believe that only the source of the Light can truly know
that.

Further, I am very happy that the Quakers in my meeting took
me exactly as I was.  They applied no litmus test to see if
I was a "proper" Quaker.  I was a seeker after the light, and
learned from them, and that was enough.  In a world filled 
with litmus tests (Are you for or against school bussing?  How
do you feel about flag-burning?  Is Nelson Mandela (sp?) the
answer to all of South Africa's problems?  How do you feel
about the Intifadah? Whose side are you on?), it was re-
freshing to find a group free of these.  I would hope that
I Richard Nixon came to a Quaker meeting seeking the Light,
he would be as welcome as I was.

Mike
Raleigh Friends Meeting
(still a member of Chapel Hill Meeting, but I'll
get it transferred real soon now)

Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
From: cs_jh@cox.nsac.ns.ca (Dr Jeff Hoyle)
Subject: Re: List question
Organization: NS Agricultural College
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 13:04:32 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.180150.10355@netcom.com> andyrose@netcom.com (San Francisco Fractal Factory) writes:
>From: andyrose@netcom.com (San Francisco Fractal Factory)
>Subject: Re: List question
>Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:01:50 GMT
>wall@cc.swarthmore.edu (Matthew Wall) writes:
>> Howdy. I've been on quaker-l for a while now, and I'm glad to see the net
>> list got approved and created.
>> 
>> Question: is there any overlap with quaker-l here? Should we do
>> "cross-postings" or try to keep the usenet group completely separate? 
>> 
>> I'm trying to decide whether to cancel my mail subscription...
>> 
>> - Matt
>> 
>> "I don't think I want to live in a country where George Bush gets to go to
>> the all-star game and Cecil Fielder doesn't." - R Rappaport
>
>Please don't cancel your mail until you are sure.  Things are still
>in the early stages.
>
>Discusssion regarding cross posting generally lead towards individuals
>taking responsibility and not relying on cross posting either way.
>It is clear that quaker-l could not handle all the stuff here,
>and it is clear that some stuff on quaker-l is simply not meant for 
>the entire NEWS community.
>
>
>-- 
>Andrew Rose andyrose@netcom.com FAX   end killing
> 


WHAT IS QUAKER-L ???  
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Meetings in the East Bay area
Organization: Cadence Design Systems
Distribution: ba
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 01:17:23 GMT

The more I learn about the Society of Friends, the more I become convinced
that I am a Quaker (maybe not the best example of one, but what I read and
hear seems to come from my own heart) -- but a Quaker without a meeting.

Would some kind friend be willing to point me to information about a meeting
(or meetings) near Fremont (anywhere from the San Jose area up through
Union City -- or farther -- or towards Dublin and/or Livermore).

Having never attended meeting, I would also prefer information as to how I
should prepare for my first meeting, and whether I should contact someone
before I show up.  Although I am more interested in the unprogrammed meetings,
I am interested in attending both (if there are both) in the area so I can
make up my own mind about which I prefer.

Thank you.

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)

Californians are not without their faults.
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Re: Quakers: What are they? conclusion
Organization: Cadence Design Systems
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 07:17:08 GMT

In article <warren.720713561@beloved> warren@pws.ma30.bull.com (Warren Lavallee) writes:
>	o Members are led to the truth by a "Light" that the 
>		Christians call the Holy Spirit.  What the
>		non Christians call it I would be extremely
>		interested in.

Well, speaking as a technically non-Christian person -- the "inner Light" seems
a pretty good thing to call it.  If one is comfortable with the word "God" one
could say "the God within".  Another term could be "Universal Spirit".

No matter what one calls it, I believe it exists, and exists within everyone
(as well as within everything, in my belief system).

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)

God must love the common man; He made so many of them.
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
From: ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe)
Subject: Re: Quakers: What are they? conclusion
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 21:12:04 GMT

rexm@teal.csn.org (Rex Mammel) writes:


>The conclusions are generally true from what I was taought as a 
>lifelong quaker in Meeting for Worship and Quaker schools  
>(George School, Newtown PA). On efact that ought to be corrected
>is that Quakerism is mildly Christian in that it uses the Bible as 
>the basis for most of the conceptual beliefs in inspiration and 
>holiness.  BUT THERE IS ESSENTIALLY NO BELIEF IN ANY TYPE OF 
>AFTERLIFE.  Holiness is something to be experienced when one is alive.

Um, I think it is true that there is no *requirement* that one believe in an
afterlife, but most Friends do.  The typical comment is that it is not
relevant what happens after life, since we can not determine anything about the
non/existence of an afterlife.  This is not the same as saying that there is no
belief in any type of afterlife.  After all, most Friends--both historically
and now--are Christians.  Your last sentence is quite representative, but the
lead-in is misleading.


              Merry meet, merry part, merry meet again,
                               Br'anArthur

Queer, Peculiar, and Wyrd! :-)

******************************************************************************
Newage is hypoallergenic spirituality--
it's for people who are allergic to the word religion.
                                   --Jon Jay Obermark
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
From: lms@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Max Stern 310-524-6152)
Subject: Consensus
Summary: Paul Goodman on unanimity [approx. = consensus]
Keywords: consensus unanimity
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not necessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 17:32:56 GMT

Eight days ago, I posted a response to Eric Celeste on the subject of
consensus, in which I promised to provide a reference to Paul Goodman's
writing on the subject.  Here it is.

The book is "Drawing the Line" by Paul Goodman, subtitled "a pamphlet,"
and published by Random House in 1962.  It contains six essays written
in 1945, and five more written in 1962.  Goodman writes in the Preface
that the two sets of essays "have an identical philosophical and
political position."

The essay "Unanimity" is from the 1945 set.  Eleven pages long, it has
the sections:

    i.    Dialectics of Positive Action
    ii.   Unanimity
    iii.  Positive Political Action
    iv.   A Wrong Notion of Unanimity
    v.    Another Wrong Notion of Unanimity

This is vintage Goodman.  Although its topic is more political action
than small group consensus, I think the essay is relevant to any
serious study of how persons in a group come to agree on anything.

BTW, I note with astonished satisfaction that when I read this pamphlet
in 1963, I made many marginal notes -- among which is the name of my
Uncle Lee Stern (see my previous post on the passing of a great
Friend), opposite the middle of the following paragraph:

      *In natural ethics there is no such principle as the choice of
    the lesser of two evils.*  Such a principle is self-contradictory,
    for any free action or abstention must draw on natural power and
    cannot depend on a negation.  When a social issue has come to the
    pass of a choice between evils (as, conscripting an army to resist
    a tyrant), then we know that the citizens have long neglected their
    welfare; the free actions that we can then invent are all attended
    with great suffering.  They must involve withdrawing utterly from
    the area of guilt, a painful sacrifice -- and more and more painful
    till all the consequences work themselves out.  The lesser evil is
    a sign that an interest has been allowed to develop in isolation
    until it now threatens even our lives.  *It is the isolation of the
    issue from its causes that restricts the choice to the lesser
    evil.*  Those who break the spell and again draw on all their
    forces will find other choices.

I would be happy to send a photocopy of this ten-page essay to anyone
who sends me an email request.
-- 

 |\/|  /_\  \/
 |  | /   \ /\                      Max.Stern@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com
From: jacob@cs.swarthmore.edu (Jacob Mattison)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Re: Quaker Humor
Date: 8 Nov 92 19:16:31 GMT
Organization: Swarthmore College

a couple of jokes:

(for those of us Jewish Quakers)
A synagogue has a fire, and burns down.  While the congregation is building
a new one, the local Quaker Meeting offers them the use of the Meetinghouse.
After all, they don't use it on the same day.  But in fact, what with various
meetings and socials and so on, the Jewish congregation and the Meeting get
to know each other pretty well, and some of the Jews, finding that the
Quakers don't insist of them converting or whatever, start coming to meeting
as well as to temple.  Well, finally the new synagogue is built, and the
congregation moves back there.  But the Rabbi notices a drop-off in
attendance.  He makes some inquiries, and discovers that many members of the
congregation have begun attending Meeting exclusively.  Now, a higher-up in
the rabinnical order comes to visit, and asks about the attendance problem.
And the Rabbi says, "Well, you see, some of my best Jews are Friends."



And, seen on a poster at some Meeting or other:
"Don't just do something, stand there!"
                                                Jacob
-- 
                              Jacob Mattison
jacob@cs.swarthmore.edu                    If God meant people to be bisexual, 
jmattis1@cc.swarthmore.edu                 there would be two sexes.
"It's a thingie!  A fiendish thingie!" -George Harrison, _Help_
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
From: cs331333@umbc8.umbc.edu (cs331333)
Subject: Re: FAQ minute
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:12:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.163030.2819@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com> lms@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Max Stern 310-524-6152) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.192232.16001@netcom.com> andyrose@netcom.com (San
>Francisco Fractal Factory) writes:
>


>In other words, in each moral choice, ask yourself, "Would I choose to
>have everybody in the world make this choice when in this situation?",
>and only proceed if the answer is "Yes."  This probably implies "One
>must never use another as a means to an end" as a specific case of the
>general rule.

	Not trying to make this alt.Kant, but there is question on the
topic of using others as _merely_ an ends, or as you said it.  We
come to realize we use everyone in some way, but hopefully, not just
for our own means.

					Joe
From: Joel Sax <jsax@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Date: 06 Nov 92 09:48 PST
Subject: Re: NIXON WORLD'S BEST KNOWN QUAKER
Nf-ID: #R:1992Nov5.201818.19860@netcom.com:848254022:cdp:1744600021:000:27
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!jsax    Nov  6 09:48:00 1992


Don't forget Hoover!

Joel
From: andyrose@netcom.com (San Francisco Fractal Factory)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Right Sharing of World Resources
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:42:18 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


As implied in previous posts, I take exception to requesting
resources from readers without due consideration for process.

Consider the differences between asking someone for something
here or in non-electric life.

If I am panhandled, I know WHO is asking,
I do NOT know WHAT the money is going for (food or drugs,etc)
I KNOW if I give or not (obvious) and I
do NOT know if I 'helped'.

If a friend asks me for several hundreds of dollars to
bail him out of jail.  I know who is asking, I know the money
is going to get him out of jail and I'm getting the money
back if he doesn't skip, and I know I've helped, etc.

If I read in a pamphlet that so-and-so needs $$$ for
such-and-such, I know how much they need, what it is for,
NOT how much they got already, NOT whether the money
went to the right place, etc.

When I give of myself (time, money, care) perhaps
I have made some contractual arrangement which will
reward me for my effort, perhaps not.  Perhaps my
rewards are to be found elsewheres in ways I cannot
fathom.

People, we have been given a great gift.  A gift of
communication.  We can know at great distances.  If
we can use this gift harmoniously we can have great
joy.  Let us discuss how to insure a right sharing
of world resources.

-

For your comment:
.  When requesting a resource (money, equipment, etc) on
soc.religion.quaker preface subject line REQUEST:

.  Followup to the posting in question when the request
is filled.   Limit discussion regarding the request
to the thread.

.  If the request requires more than one provider or
takes along time to happen, keep all informed.  Especially
if you are doing something like rasing a large sum of money.

.  Requesters are encouraged (i.e. must) contact 
providers when gift is received.  

If you are forwarding someone else's request you are 
responsible for updating givers.

I realize that Please and Thank You are archaic 
social conventions and merit discussion as to their
enslaving tendencies,etc. but they are cool, especially
when you give.

-
Please consider this proposal in light of 
adding it to FAQ.
-


-- 
Andrew Rose andyrose@netcom.com FAX   end killing
From: ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Re: Nixon
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:40:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.BxBAs4.4uw
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


From what I've heard, Nixon was Episcopalian during his entire political career,
though he had been reared Quaker.  Of course, this does not mean that all
Episcopalians should be seen as like to Nixon.


              Merry meet, merry part, merry meet again,
                               Br'anArthur

Queer, Peculiar, and Wyrd! :-)

******************************************************************************
Newage is hypoallergenic spirituality--
it's for people who are allergic to the word religion.
                                   --Jon Jay Obermark
From: wisdom@picasso.ocis.temple.edu (Robert Wisdom)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Re: Is this true?
Date: 6 Nov 92 05:27:22 GMT
Organization: Temple University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5


	Would you care to elaborate?  The Pope's name?  The year?  Was there any
"names" in the delegation?

		Robert
From: n7949188@henson.cc.wwu.edu (John Hatten)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Re: Quakers and homosexuality
Date: 8 Nov 92 09:12:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: henson.1992Nov8.091256.16357
Organization: Western Washington University

ELLEN@PURCCVM.BITNET wrote in soc.religion.quaker:
>I have been pondering the formalities of same-sex social bonds, and
>have been trying to come up with some other word than 'marriage' to
>describe the loving lifelong committment of two people who are of the
>same sex.  'Marriage' has always implied procreation, and I think it
>should be reserved for heterosexual ceremonies.
  In a previous posing I read:
>A historical point which Friends should consider when discussing marriage.
>The first Quaker marriage was that of George Fox and Margaret Fell Fox.
>Margaret was a widow with grown children.  (The oldest wasn't all that far
>in age from George.)  George sent out an epistle making it clear to anyone
>who'd listen that George and Margaret had no intention of having children
>and every intention of sharing one bed.  This was rather a radical idea in a
>culture which still was convinced that the purpose of marriage was
procreation.
  When you write: "'Marriage' has always implied procreation...", I
understand you to mean that _you_ imply procreation from marriage.  There
are many of us (including George Fox) who use the term much more inclusivly.
But more importantly, it is not for you or I to insist on the term two
people choose for their ceremony of commitment. The term marriage carries
with it the weight of centuries of acceptance. That is understandably
important to those who are so often violently rejected. What is lost
by the inclusive use of marriage? What is gained (i.e. historical weight,
acceptance, legal status) is far greater as I'm able to see it.
  Finally, regarding different ways of labeling lovers:
I kind of like S.O., but as above, I defer to the people so labeled for
their desires. (A friend of mine changed his name from Mark - a good,
respectible name - to Rowen. What kind of name is THAT! But I happily call
him by his chosen name, as often as I can remember...)!
  In peace.
John Hatten
From: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Henry Thompson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Re: Orkney Families Vindicated (Not)
Date: 11 Nov 92 09:52:21 GMT
Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh

With respect to all concerned, and in particular my fellow Central
Edinburgh Friend Alastair McIntosh, it is misleading to headline his
article "Orkney Families Vindicated".  The judicial enquiry did NOT
address the underlying issue of whether or not child abuse occured.
It did NOT reach any conclusions as to the guilt or innocence of the
families involved.  It was restricted in its remit to the conduct of
the various public and semi-public bodies concerned.  At last report
the families involved were considering a civil suit which would, inter
alia, formally clear their names if successful.

Henry Thompson

--
  Henry Thompson, Human Communication Research Centre, University of Edinburgh
       2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 31 650-4440
    Fax: (44) 31 650-4587 ARPA: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk  JANET: ht@uk.ac.ed.cogsci
                  UUCP: ...!uunet!mcsun!uknet!cogsci!ht
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
From: lms@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Max Stern 310-524-6152)
Subject: One last word about the Shakers
Keywords: Shakers communities
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not necessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 18:46:26 GMT

One more note on the Shakers:

National Geographic Magazine for September, 1989 had a fine article
about the Shakers, including both their history and a profile of life
in the remaining communities.  An interesting map sidebar lists a total
of 24 Shaker communities in nine states, plus scattered Shaker
presences in a handful of towns and cities.  Six communities are
preserved as restorations or museums, and two -- Sabbathday Lake, Maine
and Canterbury, New Hampshire -- are listed as still functioning.

The article is 24 pages long, and full of fine examples of National
Geographic's outstanding photography.
-- 

 |\/|  /_\  \/
 |  | /   \ /\                      Max.Stern@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com