Quaker view on Heaven/Hell
Brett Carr
Bill Samuel
>Could someone please post some information on the Quaker concept of Heaven and
>Hell?
Generally, Friends wouldn't spend a lot of energy considering exactly what
either heaven or hell are like. Friends tend to focus more on how to be
faithful while in our mortal lives than on what will happen afterwards.
Orthodox Friends traditionally believe in a judgment, with eternal results
from that. Friends from the Orthodox stream wouldn't be particularly likely
to have any distinctive view of heaven and hell distinguishing them from other
Christians.
Bill Samuel, Landover Hills, MD, USA wsa...@cpcug.org
Also at: wsa...@capaccess.org, samue...@epamail.epa.gov
Member, Adelphi MM, Baltimore YM; Affiliate, Rockingham MM, Ohio YM
Quaker links + more at homepage: http://cpcug.org/user/wsamuel/
"There is one, even Christ Jesus, who can speak to thy condition."
DAVID ROSEN
>Could someone please post some information on the
Quaker concept of Heaven and Hell?
Heaven and hell are simply not Quaker concepts.
We do believe in the domain of the spirit, or
kingdom of god, or whatever else you want to
call it, but it is not reserved for some sort
of "afterlife" if that is what you mean by hell
or heaven. Hell, I guess, is not being a Quaker.
I suppose in heaven it's *real* quiet ....
:-)(-::-)(-::-)(-::-)(-::-)(-::-)(-::-)(-::-)(-:
There is a branch of Quakerism that had spun off
along 19th century american protestant revivalist
lines. Perhaps they will have a different answer
for you.
Regards, David Rosen Old Chatham MM NYYM
DR8...@cnsvax.albAny.edu
Let your millstones become your milestones.
Chrys Main Talbot
> Heaven and hell are simply not Quaker concepts.
> We do believe in the domain of the spirit, or
> kingdom of god, or whatever else you want to
> call it, but it is not reserved for some sort
> of "afterlife" if that is what you mean by hell
> There is a branch of Quakerism that had spun off
> along 19th century american protestant revivalist
> lines. Perhaps they will have a different answer
> for you.
While Quakers do believe in attempting to establish
the Kingdom of Heaven on this earth in fulfillment
of Revelation, historical Quakerism was comfortable
with the concept of a reward and punishment in the
afterlife (see letter of Fox to the Governor of Barbados).
There is a branch of Friends who have attempted to
remove Friends' orthodox Christian roots.
Friends have regretfully experienced at least 3 and
some would say 4 *splits* in their history. Some revisionists
have attempted to place socio-economic issues at the
core of most of these splits. However, I believe as one
looks at the documents written during these controversial
times, theological issues were the underlying causes.
I look at Quakerism as my theology and faith practice,
as does the vast majority of Quakers world-wide.
There are those who view it as more of what I call
a *philosophy* of living. The tree trunk of Quakerism
resembles, but is not exactly the same as, protestant
Christianity, and I believe this is the consistent
outgrowth of historical Quakerism.
I believe Bill Samuel has posted several times in s.r.q about
the major splits in our history, their causes and effects.
He has also posted about the 4 main organizational branches
of Friends world-wide today (EFI, FUM, FGC, Conservative/
independent) in the past as well, although I don't recall
seeing any statistical information regarding
size/membership/demographics of these groups.
I think that would be interesting to see.
jtnichol
> There is a branch of Friends who have attempted to
> remove Friends' orthodox Christian roots.
I think I know what you mean here, but this is a little misleading as
stated. The implication is that one of the four main branches of US
Quakerism has acted with the purpose and intention of severing Quakers
from their Christian roots. However, (1)the one organized branch that
might harbor the most non-Christians also lacks organizational capacity
to act in this way as a branch, and (2)no yearly meeting of any branch
has acted to sever their Christian roots, however weakened the roots may
seem.
David L. Johnson
> There is a branch of Friends who have attempted to
> remove Friends' orthodox Christian roots.
I disagree that any `branch' of Friends has tried to do that. You
refer, I surmise, to the unprogrammed Friends of FGC. You can interpret
the words of some of us as ignoring Friends' orthodox Christian roots,
but I would like to suggest another interpretation.
We all seek the same Light, which is the one true God. Many who come to
my Meeting have had painful experiences from other religions, whether
that of their childhood or other points on their spiritual journey.
They are in a world of hurt, and they cannot hear the Truth if it is
spoken out of the words of the Gospel.
Rather than turn these people away, either directly or through use of
language that they cannot hear rightly, is it not better to accept their
words for what they are, their struggle to understand the Truth which
you can see in the Gospels, but they cannot?
I too have trouble with Friends who proclaim themselves as, say, Wiccan.
I believe that we do not honor God by worshipping idols. But, can we
not be gentle with those who can only express their faith through these
means? Fox and Wollman could see the Light in the Indians' religion.
They saw that the Indians were using the words they could find to
express their faith in God, the same God you and I worship.
The roots of Quakerism are what they are, and no one I know tries to
remove that. But many need help, and time, to see the Truth in those
roots.
--
David L. Johnson dl...@lehigh.edu
Department of Mathematics http://www.lehigh.edu/~dlj0/dlj0.html
Lehigh University
14 E. Packer Avenue (610) 758-3759
Bethlehem, PA 18015-3174 (610) 828-3708
CGreenland
>... Fox and Wollman could see the Light in the Indians' religion.
>They saw that the Indians were using the words they could find to
>express their faith in God, the same God you and I worship.
The religious life of the Six Nations was documented by Joseph Brant
(Brant was a Native American Loyalist who was rewarded after 1820 with a
sizeable tract of land near Brantford, Ontario, and was educated in
England).
Apparently, there were many similarities of the religious observances
of the longhouses and meetinghouses, culminating in the *Code of Handsome
Lake* which reads much like the journals and disciplines of Friends of
this period. Reading the *Code of Handsome Lake* side by side with Fox's
Journal and Book of Mirakles provides some insight into possible
interchanges between Friends and Native Americans.
Thomas Chalkley's Journal (ca. 1690-1734) documents a woman, possibly a
*faith-keeper* of the Lenape tradition being asked by the elders of her
tribe about Friends. She spoke warmly of George Fox's visit and ministry,
and of George Fox and William Penn as brothers. This prepared the way for
Chalkley's varied ministry in Philadelphia and Chester Counties. Among the
Six Nations, the traditional *ministers* or *faith-keepers* are women. The
*pipe-bearers* and elders are men. I rather think that there may have been
more similarities than differences, at least early on.
Christine Manville Greenland
Horsham MM PA
*Know each other in the things that are eternal.*
Elizabeth Dalton
> Could someone please post some information on the Quaker concept of Heaven and Hell?
There's a Hell?
Actually, I don't believe in Heaven either. But I don't think there's really
any general consensus on this.
Dunno-- Bill, do evangelical (forgive me if I've picked the wrong word)
Friends believe in Hell?
Peace,
Elizabeth Dalton
Dover Friends Meeting, Dover, NH
eda...@gaea.east.sun.com
@=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
"I hold that skepticism is a religious duty; men [and women] should
question their theology, and doubt more in order that they might
believe more."
-- Lucretia Mott, from a speech at the Free Religious Association on
June 2, 1871. (_Lucretia Mott: Her Complete Speeches and Sermons_.
Dana Greene, Edwin Mellon Press, 1980, p360).
Keith L. Macgowan
On Mon, 12 Feb 1996, Chrys Main Talbot wrote:
> I believe Bill Samuel has posted several times in s.r.q about
> the major splits in our history, their causes and effects.
> He has also posted about the 4 main organizational branches
> of Friends world-wide today (EFI, FUM, FGC, Conservative/
> independent) in the past as well, although I don't recall
> seeing any statistical information regarding
> size/membership/demographics of these groups.
> I think that would be interesting to see.
>
From the 1994 World Almanac:
BRANCH no. of congregations no.of members
EFI 246 26,322
FGC 520 30,902
FUM 526 50,803
Conservative 28 1,744
This is just the U.S. of course, and I have no idea where the independent
YM's come in. Elsewhere in the world, I've heard the figures of aprox.
40,000 quakers in Africa (almost all evangelical) and about 20,000 in
Britain and Ireland (mostly unprogrammed). I haven't heard numbers for
anywhere else (not even Canada). Anyone else have any other info?
Keith Macgowan
PGLar
Friends to be understood by the Scriptures as realities and not any more a
patented Quaker concept than the peace testimony, which was originally
understood by Friends as set forth by the Lord in Scripture.
Peter Larson
Westfield MM
Philadelphia YM
Cinnaminson, NJ
Anne Anderson
(grades 2-6), the topic was "Paradise". Many of us came out of that
having experienced Paradise (or Heaven) as something we create, here
and now, rather than something one finds or is awarded.
Elise Boulding talks of the Quaker family as attempting to create a
bit of Heaven or Kingdom of God (I probably have the words wrong,
but I think the basic idea is correct)
Anne Anderson
Framingham Friends Meeting
Framingham, MA
Jean P Nance
In regard to similarities between Native Americans and Friends
customs, it appears to me that it wasn't just the "Six Nations"
whose customs appeared to be similar to those of Friends. Once
I had some contact with a social worker on the Yakima reservation.
I found myself uncomfortable and confused, because I kept
wandering on, and she just sat there. Finally I realized that
when I said something, she waited a few seconds before replying.
Taking silence as an indication that she had nothing to say, i
just went on. Finally, I caught on, and waited for her replies.
After that, we had productive conversations.
Years later when I first went to Quaker business meetings and
committee meetings, I read, and experienced, that it is the custom
to wait for a time after a person has spoken, before replying. Did
the early Friends develop this habit themselves, or could they have
learned it from the Native American contacts they had? It is
certainly a respectful custom, and one which means that nobody feels
they have been ignored, or not allowed to say everything they need
to say.
--
p
DENS...@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu
last judgement, we exhort them to come out of that hellish
condition they are in, and come down to the judgement of Christ
in their own hearts, and believe in the light, and follow it, so
that they may come to sit in the heavenly places that are in
Christ Jesus... - Robert Barclay, APOLOGY, 1676.
My sense from reading older Quaker journals and books is that
earlier Quakers did not spend a lot of time thinking about heaven
and still less time about hell. The above quotation is from
the Quaker apologist Robert Barclay who only gets into the subject
of heaven and hell at the very end of his treatise, and then only
for a few lines. This is not to say that Barclay and other
early Quakers did not have an "orthodox" conception of heaven
and hell, but it is to say, I feel, that the afterlife was of
far less concern to them than the immediacy of the Spirit, and
necessity of following the light now.
The focus on heaven and hell seems to be generally linked to the
idea of future rewards and punishments, which gets into a moral
problem. Is one supposed to behave in this life religiously and
morally because one is going to be rewarded in the next? My
sense is that the early Quaker sense that lives could be led
"in the light" immediately rather blurred the distinction between
there "here and now" and the afterlife.
The graphic example of this is the Edward Hicks' painting of the
Peaceable Kingdom which almost a Quaker icon. The image is not
in inception specifically Quaker-- it illustrates a verse from
Isaiah and even in the design, Hicks was following an illustration
from a Bible. However, I think it illustrates a Quaker sensibility
about the afterlife and/or millennial hopes that the peaceable
kingdom is, in some senses at least, achievable through a life
led "in the light" and not solely something to be achieved only
after death.
Christopher Densmore
iain forsythe
The human world. Everyone experiences both.
What do other Friends think?
Laurie H. Anderson
>From: iain forsythe <im...@st-and.ac.uk>
>Subject: Re: Quaker view on Heaven/Hell
>Date: 15 Feb 1996 15:33:48 GMT
>I believe that heaven and hell are metaphors describing states in this life.
>The human world. Everyone experiences both.
>What do other Friends think?
They can be effective metaphors for states in this life, but to many people
they mean much more than that.
I believe that if I try to live my life according to the teachings of Christ
then I needn't concern myself with what happens to my soul when I die.
Besides, there are so many truly rotten things here on Earth that we *can*
change - shouldn't that be the focus of our attention?
Laurie Halse Anderson
Gwynedd Monthly Meeting
Dave Moorman
H. Anderson) wrote:
> I believe that if I try to live my life according to the teachings of Christ
> then I needn't concern myself with what happens to my soul when I die.
Howard Brinton in "Quaker Journals" compares them with Puritan
journalists. Quaker journalists lived in the Light and seldom mentioned
the afterlife. Puritan journalists, he points out, believed that God had
pre-determined their life after death, and were always on the lookout for
signs that they were among the chosen and would be going to heaven. This
caused them to feel great anxiety, he noted, as opposed to the feelings of
peace and love that are so common in Quaker journals. Some Puritans who
became Quakers wrote of the great relief they felt when they left the
anxiety and fear of eternal damnation behind.
Dave
Downers Grove Friends Meeting
--
Dave Moorman Downers Grove Illinois USA
Jean P Nance
I am reminded of a story about John Murray, one of the founders of
the Universalist church in this country. He was a traveling
minister, and arrived at a frontier cabin to find a mother rocking
her tiny baby on the porch, and crying bitterly. He asked her
what was wrong, and she said that she had been considering the fact
that since the saved were to be very few, that probably her
beloved baby would be doomed to hell. John Murray comforted her and
tried to convince her of the Universalist doctrine that a good
God would not condemn any of his children to eternal torment. Like
the Puritans who became Quakers, the woman had a terrible burden
lifted from her sould.
--
p
jrmye...@gmail.com
> Could someone please post some information on the Quaker concept of Heaven and Hell?
Whiskers
be unkind to any Quaker individual or group. I think that as far as
your question goes, you'll get almost as many different answers as you get
Quakers who respond. The focus of our attention should be on what we do
here and now, not speculating about what might or might not happen in
whatever existence there is, if any, after this life.
That could explain why no firm answer has appeared here in the 22 years
since the thread was started.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~