Today was our first week of moving the time children are in worship to the end rather than the beginning of 11:00 worship.
Based on today's very gathered worship, RantWoman approves.
RantWoman is also COMPLETELY down with the last message. The last message was about the Beatitudes, all about the Beatitudes, all about the Beatitudes for a long time, like wandering in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights.
How, you may ask can one use a phrase like "wandering in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights" with reference to the Beatitudes? Remember, this is RantWoman we are talking about here.
And what exactly was the Promised Land? Friend Moses proclaimed that he is not at all sure he has a handle on that "Love one another" stuff. Friend SO speaks my mind.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Quaker surprises
RantWoman is seasoning a whole jumble of posts partly about needs to talk more explicitly of the presence of God / Christ ... in one's life and some key points of cultural and technological shift in Christianity / Quakerism. RantWoman is seasoning these posts. and they are still pretty much a squirming mass of muddle. In the meantime RantWoman wants to speak of one of the things that keeps her coming back to Friends, what she calls Quaker surprises.
RantWoman has a lot of life history and recent community work intersecting with people of many different faiths, so last year one of the roles RantWoman felt a leading to consider is denominational representative to the local church council. RantWoman supposes she should write / read more of what this means and RantWoman's experiences walking boundaries among faith traditions, among faith / social action. at some point. RantWoman is going to concentrate here on a few short moments with strong leadings.
RantWoman spoke with both our Clerk and with the Friend from another Meeting who had been filling this role. Both of them are clear that for the time being, it is fine for Friends not to interact with this specific body. One reason was a proposal to picket another faith's houses of worship in connection with that faith's opposition to same-sex marriage and support for ballot measures enshrining that view in law.
When RantWoman heard of this specific issue, she immediately had two ferocious and contradictory leadings.
First, our Meeting has been taking same-sex marriages under our care for probably as long as almost any congregation in Seattle, BUT there is NO WAY RantWoman would even bring that proposal back to her Meeting for feedback. RantWoman so ferociously respects freedom of religion that there is no way she would be signing up to picket another faith's house of worship.
2. RantWoman knows from observing her Meeting and other Quakers engage this way that the obvious thing to do would be to engage in dialogue. Read up at least a bit on that faith's teachings and practices about family life. Set up dialogue that includes families from that faith and families of different characteristics from other faiths. RantWoman has even heard in the news of something like this and better dialogue specifically in Salt Lake city with greatly admirable legal results.
RantWoman alas at the moment of the conversation about picketing the houses of worship also felt neither leading nor capacity to take up this approach herself so for the time being, she just gets to wonder whether her points above would have landed with others if she had been in the room. RantWoman does not have to wonder too long, but will add paying attention to faith community mentions to her list of things applicable to her other community-building work.
RantWoman has a lot of life history and recent community work intersecting with people of many different faiths, so last year one of the roles RantWoman felt a leading to consider is denominational representative to the local church council. RantWoman supposes she should write / read more of what this means and RantWoman's experiences walking boundaries among faith traditions, among faith / social action. at some point. RantWoman is going to concentrate here on a few short moments with strong leadings.
RantWoman spoke with both our Clerk and with the Friend from another Meeting who had been filling this role. Both of them are clear that for the time being, it is fine for Friends not to interact with this specific body. One reason was a proposal to picket another faith's houses of worship in connection with that faith's opposition to same-sex marriage and support for ballot measures enshrining that view in law.
When RantWoman heard of this specific issue, she immediately had two ferocious and contradictory leadings.
First, our Meeting has been taking same-sex marriages under our care for probably as long as almost any congregation in Seattle, BUT there is NO WAY RantWoman would even bring that proposal back to her Meeting for feedback. RantWoman so ferociously respects freedom of religion that there is no way she would be signing up to picket another faith's house of worship.
2. RantWoman knows from observing her Meeting and other Quakers engage this way that the obvious thing to do would be to engage in dialogue. Read up at least a bit on that faith's teachings and practices about family life. Set up dialogue that includes families from that faith and families of different characteristics from other faiths. RantWoman has even heard in the news of something like this and better dialogue specifically in Salt Lake city with greatly admirable legal results.
RantWoman alas at the moment of the conversation about picketing the houses of worship also felt neither leading nor capacity to take up this approach herself so for the time being, she just gets to wonder whether her points above would have landed with others if she had been in the room. RantWoman does not have to wonder too long, but will add paying attention to faith community mentions to her list of things applicable to her other community-building work.
Silence?
RantWoman is clear that she would very much like to go to this year's Silent Retreat. RantWoman really could use a whole weekend of fresh air and silent communion, and the Silent Retreat is what she can afford to boot.
So what is the problem? What is the problem now?
RantWoman needs, basically to request reasonable accommodations. Dear Friend is wearing a hat that means it's his job at the very least to help season this request. Dear Friend has a history of some problematic points already, and RantWoman can predict that he will have strong personal opinions based on partial misapprehension and experience in an inapplicable context. RantWoman currently has two phone calls in to start community discussion.
RantWoman's basic needs:
--RantWoman wants to bring her laptop and headphones so she can read as everyone else does at silent retreat. Dear Friend has a time or two used RantWoman's computer at home to check email. He always finds Mr. JAWS annoying, especially at the speed RantWoman makes Mr. JAWS work. RantWoman has plenty of experience using her headphones at the library and out various other places in public. RantWoman loves the community that evolves at Silent Retreat and wants to disrupt that as little as possible. And RantWoman has no alternative to this request.
Well, if Friends want to designate a place where RantWoman can read and there is an open invitation to share in low voices of reading not on RantWoman's computer, RantWoman might consider that a gift. The point is just that not talking about it is not an option.
Despite Dear Friend's last terse email about being out of the dialogue for awhile, RantWoman is clear to try about shifting this view. RantWoman is clear she goes there at her own risk, and RantWoman is clear to try. Either that or here is another reason RantWoman is a raving lunatic.
RantWoman frequently appears to be coping really well with her midlife DNA lotto vision meltdown.
RantWoman does not walk into walls--much.
RantWoman so far has managed to work with Thwack the Cane well enough to notice the difference between using Thwack and not using Thwack. One time RantWoman was at an event involving our former mayor. RantWoman is tall. The mayor is taller. Neither is exactly a petite person. Yet Thwack was not on the job and RantWoman nearly body-slammed the mayor twice in about 10 minutes. That is one problem. Another problem is the number of people including Friends who, upon hearing this story, chuckle. Some know of RantWoman's protestor past; some don't. RantWoman just finds it a little disconcerting to hear, numbers of times, "Well...."
Now Seattle has a somewhat shorter mayor. Come to think of it, based on when he interacted with RantWoman without Thwack, he may also get confusing signals about what RantWoman can and cannot do.
RantWoman has pretty solid mobility skills and goes about very independently. RantWoman has glasses on her face and if RantWoman is in a familiar environment, a casual observer will think everything is fine.
RantWoman has been functioning tolerably well since a topical care committee laid itself down a year or so after some key medical events.
A lot of people in RantWoman's meeting seem not even to have grasped RantWoman's vision loss, and this despite the fact that Thwack the badly-behaved and thoroughly unQuakerly white cane nearly always comes along.
--3. RantWoman needs to lay down the law, uniformly, at the beginning of the weekend: ASK first before trying to help or guide. If I ask for something, the default response should be "Do not argue about the form of help I ask for." And don't take it personally if I decline.
RantWoman supposes she is supposed to thank Dear Friend for embodying some of the issues behind these points. Dear Friend has a lot of company; it's just that the company does not go to Meeting and RantWoman has higher expectations about Friends at least being able to listen.
(RantWoman thinks she will make a couple other low-key requests in private but she wants to keep that as discrete as possible. Basically, RantWoman would be open to leading of Spirit about communications opportunities, but definitely does not want to overdo that.)
RantWoman knows her way around the site of the Silent Retreat pretty well. This is one reason RantWoman feels comfortable without making even more requests. RantWoman supposes she is supposed also to be grateful not to have to ask more. That would be a lot to ask of RantWoman right now.
So what is the problem? What is the problem now?
RantWoman needs, basically to request reasonable accommodations. Dear Friend is wearing a hat that means it's his job at the very least to help season this request. Dear Friend has a history of some problematic points already, and RantWoman can predict that he will have strong personal opinions based on partial misapprehension and experience in an inapplicable context. RantWoman currently has two phone calls in to start community discussion.
RantWoman's basic needs:
--RantWoman wants to bring her laptop and headphones so she can read as everyone else does at silent retreat. Dear Friend has a time or two used RantWoman's computer at home to check email. He always finds Mr. JAWS annoying, especially at the speed RantWoman makes Mr. JAWS work. RantWoman has plenty of experience using her headphones at the library and out various other places in public. RantWoman loves the community that evolves at Silent Retreat and wants to disrupt that as little as possible. And RantWoman has no alternative to this request.
Well, if Friends want to designate a place where RantWoman can read and there is an open invitation to share in low voices of reading not on RantWoman's computer, RantWoman might consider that a gift. The point is just that not talking about it is not an option.
Despite Dear Friend's last terse email about being out of the dialogue for awhile, RantWoman is clear to try about shifting this view. RantWoman is clear she goes there at her own risk, and RantWoman is clear to try. Either that or here is another reason RantWoman is a raving lunatic.
RantWoman frequently appears to be coping really well with her midlife DNA lotto vision meltdown.
RantWoman does not walk into walls--much.
RantWoman so far has managed to work with Thwack the Cane well enough to notice the difference between using Thwack and not using Thwack. One time RantWoman was at an event involving our former mayor. RantWoman is tall. The mayor is taller. Neither is exactly a petite person. Yet Thwack was not on the job and RantWoman nearly body-slammed the mayor twice in about 10 minutes. That is one problem. Another problem is the number of people including Friends who, upon hearing this story, chuckle. Some know of RantWoman's protestor past; some don't. RantWoman just finds it a little disconcerting to hear, numbers of times, "Well...."
Now Seattle has a somewhat shorter mayor. Come to think of it, based on when he interacted with RantWoman without Thwack, he may also get confusing signals about what RantWoman can and cannot do.
RantWoman has pretty solid mobility skills and goes about very independently. RantWoman has glasses on her face and if RantWoman is in a familiar environment, a casual observer will think everything is fine.
RantWoman has been functioning tolerably well since a topical care committee laid itself down a year or so after some key medical events.
A lot of people in RantWoman's meeting seem not even to have grasped RantWoman's vision loss, and this despite the fact that Thwack the badly-behaved and thoroughly unQuakerly white cane nearly always comes along.
--2. Please tell RantWoman who you are. Shecan recognize faces about two feet away but needs reminders of names, sometimes several times for people she has just met.
--3. RantWoman needs to lay down the law, uniformly, at the beginning of the weekend: ASK first before trying to help or guide. If I ask for something, the default response should be "Do not argue about the form of help I ask for." And don't take it personally if I decline.
RantWoman supposes she is supposed to thank Dear Friend for embodying some of the issues behind these points. Dear Friend has a lot of company; it's just that the company does not go to Meeting and RantWoman has higher expectations about Friends at least being able to listen.
(RantWoman thinks she will make a couple other low-key requests in private but she wants to keep that as discrete as possible. Basically, RantWoman would be open to leading of Spirit about communications opportunities, but definitely does not want to overdo that.)
RantWoman knows her way around the site of the Silent Retreat pretty well. This is one reason RantWoman feels comfortable without making even more requests. RantWoman supposes she is supposed also to be grateful not to have to ask more. That would be a lot to ask of RantWoman right now.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Faith and Finance Committee/ Powerpoint without a Prayer
RantWoman was out last Friday night with RantMom at a form of interfaith dialogue. RantWoman went with RantMom and almost the entire Session of RantMom's Presbyterian church to a speech by Anthony Robinson, nationally known congregational life consultant and former pastor of Plymouth Congregational UCC church. RantWoman is grateful for a ride to exotic Bellevue and especially for a ride up windy roads RantWoman suspects would have been a pain to deal with from any nearby bus stop.
RantWoman maintained a stunning Quaker silence in the car going, which is a good thing because the Presbyterians were plenty chattery and all full of earthquake opinions. Upon arrival, RantWoman took note of Impending Powerpoint! Powerpoint gone awry is one of RantWoman's pet peeves; an early glance indicated that the evening's Powerpoint would feature:
--lots of slides with plenty of good whitespace
RantWoman maintained a stunning Quaker silence in the car going, which is a good thing because the Presbyterians were plenty chattery and all full of earthquake opinions. Upon arrival, RantWoman took note of Impending Powerpoint! Powerpoint gone awry is one of RantWoman's pet peeves; an early glance indicated that the evening's Powerpoint would feature:
--lots of slides with plenty of good whitespace
--few enough words to tempt RantWoman to the thought that if the words were bigger and in bolder type, there could still be good white space and RantWoman might actually be able to read them. Okay, RantWoman detected the screen and the likely presence of Powerpoint RantWoman is sometimes easily deluded in realms of vision, but she has to wonder.
--a more problematic point considering one of RantWoman's takeaways from the evening to be named below: Rev. Robinson plunged right into his Powerpoint without a whisper of spoken prayer, either before or after the speech. In Quaker land, an opening of silence would be highly topical. RantWoman does not think she has ever visited, say, an African American congregation that would not open such an event, even a neighborhood forum or an evening of volunteer tax preparation help without a prayer of some kind. RantWoman would point out that the event with Rev. Robinson opened with fumbling about technology and not a word of prayer. Christ showed up in passing twice. which RantWoman finds, um, curious.
RantWoman was surprised at herself early in the speech. Rev. Robinson had been going through a lot of Then and Now Powerpoint slides (Arrrrrrgggh). The slides all mentioned some sort of certainty and clear social constructs for the Then and all kinds of things for the Now. Rev. Robinson was asking those assembled for reactions. RantWoman took note of how everyone mentioned a loss while RantWoman felt herself strangely energized, like this is IMPORTANT and an opportunity. RantWoman was on her most diplomatic behavior and simply held her silence until the speaker eventually got around to this very point. Quakers seem not to be the only ones who, instead of talking about faith, just want to recruit people for committees.
One thread of message during the speech and also during homebound car ride conversation was congregations that are glad to say what they think about gay marriage and the war in Iraq but do not know how to talk about Jesus or faith, no matter how dynamic the pastor.
RantWoman further notes that although for instance RantMom's church includes faces of various hues, tonight's event tended (surprise to whom?) toward the tall, northern European, and pasty-faced.Before the event there was chatter about chairs, ganged but possibly stackable on chair dollies, RantMom pointed out some wonderful laminated sheets of recurring weekly info.
There was a smattering actually of quite Quaker vocabulary about discernment, testimony, hospitality, and spiritual formation, and a church presence in moral, institutional, and spiritual terms,
Rev. Robinson also talked about, upon his arrival at his job at Plymouth. starting a series called Faith Journeys in the time between two Sunday morning services. He thought he would have trouble finding people from the congregation to fill the Sundays of his first summer. The series is still going on 20+ years later. The effect is a little like something RantWoman's Meeting used to do, Life Story Potlucks. Dang it: the committee that formerly organized is in need of....
Friday, January 15, 2010
Morning at the desk with RantWoman
(RantWoman is again messing with history in this post and is completely unsure what datestamp will appear to other readers. This post is also a thematic potpourri)
The scripture of the day off Our Daily Bread
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Lamentations%203:22-33&version=NLT
RantWoman suspects she should click through the link to see what topical Quakerly messages motivated her to put the link here. That would require more intent and focus that RantWoman wants to offer in hindsight, but she will think about how to address the point of underscoring how her thinking relates to reading for future posts.
RantWoman was messing with the combo box to select Bible versions and found not only a whole bunch of versions in English but also multiple versions in Spanish and the option at least for the New Testament of Russian.
(RantWoman is unclear what deficiencies in page technical characteristics failed to send Mr. JAWS into Spanish for the Spanish; she wishes that anyone even expected Mr. JAWS to autodetect the language for Russian. RantWoman further wishes she did not have to keep demoing a different screen reader over this language change detection issue on her to-do list. RantWoman realizes she is supposed to shut up and be glad she has such technology to have such problems in the first place, but that is way too much to expect of RantWoman without a LOT of help.
RantWoman is cleaning up old posts deciding whether to post. In the interim since starting this post, RantWoman has learned that a new version of Mr. JAWS just MAY solve the problem she is grumbling about.)
RantWoman is TRYING not to spend every free second on her Compost matter, but again this is RantWoman we are talking about here.
RantWoman has two emails from Dear Friend she is still seasoning response / further response to.
Both say what RantWoman already knew and TRIED to tell Dear Friend in April: DearFriend's messages were/are not getting through to RantWoman. Perhaps RantWoman is simply supposed to be grateful that exact thought has now also penetrated Dear Friend's head. RantWoman however is a demanding bitch: she would also like Dear Friend, or failing that, others in the conversation to get her other points about what needs conversation bigger than Dear Friend and RantWoman and to help figure out how to do it.
(Again, from a perspective months out, RantWoman is fussing with old stuff exactly BECAUSE other threads of this conversation have wound their way further into community discussion. To say RantWoman has mixed feelings at this point would be a total understatement.)
One of the messages refers to a topic RantWoman did in fact pointedly refer to in private conversation. RantWoman has plenty of experience of the Divine involving love and flowers and birds and mountains and fresh air and music and...; RantWoman experiences the Divine also in context of dealing with, um, abusive jerks. In the general shared email case, RantWoman feels perfectly fine saying "I'm just reporting data; others get to apply labels (including any equation with a certain Friend.)"
Dear Friend was predictably offended by that entire line of thinking and wants RantWoman to apologize. RantWoman perfectly well understands the difference between intentional and unintended effects; RantWoman can AT LEAST reserve judgment. RantWoman also expects at some point to need to listen more than she can right now and to set aside anger. Mainly RantWoman does not have time to stay angry.
To be honest, RantWoman would also really, really like it if Dear Friend could figure out that there might be something he could apologize for and even apologize for without doing any harm to his whole line of thinking about a leading and speaking for God. Even if one is certain one is speaking for God, RantWoman would like evidence of care not to mangle the message RantWoman has no expectation that will happen in anything but Quaker time.
Before any of that can happen though, RantWoman and Dear Friend need HELP from our community:
Bad process is unsafe.
This morning's particular Light: given that Dear Friend has been walking on RantWoman's emotional landmines, given that RantWoman suspects that the reverse may be a factor in more of the dynamics than Dear Friend can acknowledge, RantWoman in fact thinks it was REALLY STUPID of others involved to send us off to a clearness committee between ourselves WITHOUT ALSO BEING READY TO ADDRESS THE PROCESS ISSUES. Dear Friend, the very person clanging on RantWoman's landmines, is the LAST person anyone should expect to be able to solve RantWoman's landmine issues, and it is totally, totally unfair and ridiculous for anyone to expect that. Okay, so we made a game effort, well after detecting that here too, we would have to write our own script more than one might expect.
Dear Friend has a lot of perfectly understandable legitimate questions about what our Meeting expects of elders. RantWoman completely unites with Dear Friend about the questions; RantWoman is just completely clear that seasoning the question is a matter for more of the community than herself and Dear Friend.
RantWoman still means to read her own Yearly Meeting's Faith and Practice on this score. Recently RantWoman was reading the NWYM Handbook for elders. RantWoman was struck by the accountability that book recommends for elders and also by how the whole process provides support for people in different roles. RantWoman is going to continue reading but on account of something else not on account of Dear Friend.
The scripture of the day off Our Daily Bread
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Lamentations%203:22-33&version=NLT
RantWoman suspects she should click through the link to see what topical Quakerly messages motivated her to put the link here. That would require more intent and focus that RantWoman wants to offer in hindsight, but she will think about how to address the point of underscoring how her thinking relates to reading for future posts.
RantWoman was messing with the combo box to select Bible versions and found not only a whole bunch of versions in English but also multiple versions in Spanish and the option at least for the New Testament of Russian.
(RantWoman is unclear what deficiencies in page technical characteristics failed to send Mr. JAWS into Spanish for the Spanish; she wishes that anyone even expected Mr. JAWS to autodetect the language for Russian. RantWoman further wishes she did not have to keep demoing a different screen reader over this language change detection issue on her to-do list. RantWoman realizes she is supposed to shut up and be glad she has such technology to have such problems in the first place, but that is way too much to expect of RantWoman without a LOT of help.
RantWoman is cleaning up old posts deciding whether to post. In the interim since starting this post, RantWoman has learned that a new version of Mr. JAWS just MAY solve the problem she is grumbling about.)
RantWoman is TRYING not to spend every free second on her Compost matter, but again this is RantWoman we are talking about here.
RantWoman has two emails from Dear Friend she is still seasoning response / further response to.
Both say what RantWoman already knew and TRIED to tell Dear Friend in April: DearFriend's messages were/are not getting through to RantWoman. Perhaps RantWoman is simply supposed to be grateful that exact thought has now also penetrated Dear Friend's head. RantWoman however is a demanding bitch: she would also like Dear Friend, or failing that, others in the conversation to get her other points about what needs conversation bigger than Dear Friend and RantWoman and to help figure out how to do it.
(Again, from a perspective months out, RantWoman is fussing with old stuff exactly BECAUSE other threads of this conversation have wound their way further into community discussion. To say RantWoman has mixed feelings at this point would be a total understatement.)
One of the messages refers to a topic RantWoman did in fact pointedly refer to in private conversation. RantWoman has plenty of experience of the Divine involving love and flowers and birds and mountains and fresh air and music and...; RantWoman experiences the Divine also in context of dealing with, um, abusive jerks. In the general shared email case, RantWoman feels perfectly fine saying "I'm just reporting data; others get to apply labels (including any equation with a certain Friend.)"
Dear Friend was predictably offended by that entire line of thinking and wants RantWoman to apologize. RantWoman perfectly well understands the difference between intentional and unintended effects; RantWoman can AT LEAST reserve judgment. RantWoman also expects at some point to need to listen more than she can right now and to set aside anger. Mainly RantWoman does not have time to stay angry.
To be honest, RantWoman would also really, really like it if Dear Friend could figure out that there might be something he could apologize for and even apologize for without doing any harm to his whole line of thinking about a leading and speaking for God. Even if one is certain one is speaking for God, RantWoman would like evidence of care not to mangle the message RantWoman has no expectation that will happen in anything but Quaker time.
Before any of that can happen though, RantWoman and Dear Friend need HELP from our community:
Bad process is unsafe.
This morning's particular Light: given that Dear Friend has been walking on RantWoman's emotional landmines, given that RantWoman suspects that the reverse may be a factor in more of the dynamics than Dear Friend can acknowledge, RantWoman in fact thinks it was REALLY STUPID of others involved to send us off to a clearness committee between ourselves WITHOUT ALSO BEING READY TO ADDRESS THE PROCESS ISSUES. Dear Friend, the very person clanging on RantWoman's landmines, is the LAST person anyone should expect to be able to solve RantWoman's landmine issues, and it is totally, totally unfair and ridiculous for anyone to expect that. Okay, so we made a game effort, well after detecting that here too, we would have to write our own script more than one might expect.
Dear Friend has a lot of perfectly understandable legitimate questions about what our Meeting expects of elders. RantWoman completely unites with Dear Friend about the questions; RantWoman is just completely clear that seasoning the question is a matter for more of the community than herself and Dear Friend.
RantWoman still means to read her own Yearly Meeting's Faith and Practice on this score. Recently RantWoman was reading the NWYM Handbook for elders. RantWoman was struck by the accountability that book recommends for elders and also by how the whole process provides support for people in different roles. RantWoman is going to continue reading but on account of something else not on account of Dear Friend.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
What the heck do we mean by elders
One of many points of departure for RantWoman's Compost melodrama is the question of what the heck we mean by elders.
RantWoman is HIGHLY amused. RantWoman has been reading the NPYM Faith and Practice, looking for concise statements of what we, this Yearly Meeting mean by elders. This would not be the only area where RantWoman thinks our Faith and Practice could use some more careful grounding, but solving that is, um, a matter for the horizon.
RantWoman notes a couple fast references in passing and then the following from the glossary:
Eldering - Encouraging diffident or timid Friends to share their gifts with a Meeting, or discouraging and/or questioning an individual’s inappropriate behavior and expression of concerns. Historically--and in some Yearly Meetings still—"Elders" have been appointed to constitute the Committee on Ministry and Counsel or Ministry and Oversight.
Below RantWoman is simply going to collect some links she has looked at recently. She means to go back, sooooon....
The following post speaks to my condition and makes me want to read more.
http://thegoodraisedup.blogspot.com/2010/01/marty-grundys-pamphlet-early-friends.html
Check here for links / search results about elders
http://sheffieldquakers.blogspot.com/2010/01/threshing-our-meeting.html
http://sheffieldquakers.blogspot.com/search?q=elder
Here RantWoman must say clearly, this topic is very important. RantWoman has no objection to and even great interest in further dialogue about the topic. RantWoman thinks for both persoanl and Quaker reasons that it is completely inappropriate and unreasonable to try to dialogue only with Dear Friend and only on Dear Friend's terms about this, and RantWoman remains quite peeved, even increasingly so about the difficulties of bringing about such community dialogue RantWoman is pretty sure, if she does not understand key concepts very well, there are a lot of other people who probably do not either.
RantWoman would characterize Dear Friend's remark as clueless based on the fact that Dear Friend took over 9 months to get a point RantWoman has been very polite but firm, possibly just too polite, about almost from the beginning. The fact that this point was so completely lost on Dear Friend most assuredly causes RantWoman to question his capacity even to detect points in the area of his clueless comment.
Of course, the fact that Dear Friend was not detecting this point does not mean a surprising number of other people were terribly articulate about the matter either, and RantWoman has now had months to explore the breadth and depth of cluelessness in multiple directions.
RantWoman supposes the first thing she must do is purge her language and reframe the concept of cluelessness in proper Quakerese, perhaps "in need of serious discernment" or "seeking yet to be done" or more "laboring in a spirit of love and truth."
If RantWoman does not stay reformed very long, PLEASE bear with her!
RantWoman is HIGHLY amused. RantWoman has been reading the NPYM Faith and Practice, looking for concise statements of what we, this Yearly Meeting mean by elders. This would not be the only area where RantWoman thinks our Faith and Practice could use some more careful grounding, but solving that is, um, a matter for the horizon.
RantWoman notes a couple fast references in passing and then the following from the glossary:
Eldering - Encouraging diffident or timid Friends to share their gifts with a Meeting, or discouraging and/or questioning an individual’s inappropriate behavior and expression of concerns. Historically--and in some Yearly Meetings still—"Elders" have been appointed to constitute the Committee on Ministry and Counsel or Ministry and Oversight.
That's it. All. RantWoman has been poking around at other Yearly Meetings' Faith and Practice. She has not done an exhaustive study of what is said, but every single one she looks at has at least a little more about elders. When RantWoman wants to get carried away she can go poke around at www.fgcquaker.org or repair to her Meeting's library for sneezing and severe squinting with dusty pamphlets.
By contrast RantWoman happened on an item over at http://gatheringinlight.com/ pointing to the NWYM handbook for elders. http://gatheringinlight.com/2010/01/12/2419/ There is a whole book! It's in PDF so RantWoman and Mr. JAWS can go to town! There is actual support and accountability!
RantWoman has since asked another Weighty Friend about what is meant in our Yearly Meeting by elders in the context of another activity. For once, it was not Dear Friend saying, "well it's self-evident and there are a whole bunch of articles in Friends Journal!" RantWoman inwardly repeated her thoughts about sneezing and severe squinting in the Meeting's library.
Friends' Journal is a darn fine publication. RantWoman used to enjoy reading it quite a lot. Friends' Journal has severely constrained internet presence and very limited electronic edition that RantWoman is aware of. In other words, even if RantWoman WANTS to read this stuff, preferably to read it on her own without the traumas of scraping her eyeballs over a lot of print, she has no practical way of doing so. Then RantWoman went back to exhorting Weighty Friend to speak of her knowledge in another context.
Below RantWoman is simply going to collect some links she has looked at recently. She means to go back, sooooon....
The following post speaks to my condition and makes me want to read more.
http://thegoodraisedup.blogspot.com/2010/01/marty-grundys-pamphlet-early-friends.html
Check here for links / search results about elders
http://sheffieldquakers.blogspot.com/2010/01/threshing-our-meeting.html
http://sheffieldquakers.blogspot.com/search?q=elder
Today, while RantWoman was braiding her hair, Mr. JAWS was screaming past some stuff RantWoman has not previously looked at
http://thegoodraisedup.blogspot.com/search/label/elders%20and%20eldering
RantWoman read those entries and noted a whole cascade of other links she will now at least put on her go back to list.
Finally, RantWoman hereby offers another tirade related to elders, possibly to the question of who is eldering whom, and general ferment on the Compost thread.
Here RantWoman must say clearly, this topic is very important. RantWoman has no objection to and even great interest in further dialogue about the topic. RantWoman thinks for both persoanl and Quaker reasons that it is completely inappropriate and unreasonable to try to dialogue only with Dear Friend and only on Dear Friend's terms about this, and RantWoman remains quite peeved, even increasingly so about the difficulties of bringing about such community dialogue RantWoman is pretty sure, if she does not understand key concepts very well, there are a lot of other people who probably do not either.
RantWoman would characterize Dear Friend's remark as clueless based on the fact that Dear Friend took over 9 months to get a point RantWoman has been very polite but firm, possibly just too polite, about almost from the beginning. The fact that this point was so completely lost on Dear Friend most assuredly causes RantWoman to question his capacity even to detect points in the area of his clueless comment.
Of course, the fact that Dear Friend was not detecting this point does not mean a surprising number of other people were terribly articulate about the matter either, and RantWoman has now had months to explore the breadth and depth of cluelessness in multiple directions.
RantWoman supposes the first thing she must do is purge her language and reframe the concept of cluelessness in proper Quakerese, perhaps "in need of serious discernment" or "seeking yet to be done" or more "laboring in a spirit of love and truth."
If RantWoman does not stay reformed very long, PLEASE bear with her!
Digital Inclusion for....
WARNING: this post mentions pedophilia and public consumption of pornography. If either topic will put you off for days, PLEASE click away immediately or hold RantWoman and all her neighbors in the Light and then click away.
RantWoman is goaded to write by her morning blog reading, link shown at the bottom.
RantWoman is seasoning an email to staff at her housing community about the presence, horrors, of an admitted pedophile in our midst. Bear in mind, members of our communities are mostly not Quakers used to waiting in silence together under care of the purifying power of the Divine. The percentage of Highly Challenging Personalities and Very Difficult Life Issues is off the charts, even compared to the average Friends' Meeting. RantWoman notes a further correction: we have one known, acknowledged pedophile among us. How many more unacknowledged ones we have NO CLUE.
RantWoman has known of this individual for some time. He volunteers at one of the computer lab projects RantWoman has been involved with. He is actually one of the calmer of the volunteers, though RantWoman finds herself wondering whether appropriate medication may have something to do with this. Information about this person came to light about the same time RantWoman was having other conversations that started out more pedestrianly about simpler safety concepts. RantWoman first learned of this person's interests in context of discussing something else and the suggestion that RantWoman put this person's name into the search engine of her choice. Little did she know...
RantWoman cannot decide whether this person is brave, crazy or some of both to be speaking so openly of this fact of his life. RantWoman lacks the proper letters behind her name to opine, but that has never stopped her before: it seems possible, if one is beset by constant urges, that talking about said urges offers at least tangential ways of addressing them especially if other options are definitely inappropriate.
RantWoman is goaded to write by her morning blog reading, link shown at the bottom.
RantWoman is seasoning an email to staff at her housing community about the presence, horrors, of an admitted pedophile in our midst. Bear in mind, members of our communities are mostly not Quakers used to waiting in silence together under care of the purifying power of the Divine. The percentage of Highly Challenging Personalities and Very Difficult Life Issues is off the charts, even compared to the average Friends' Meeting. RantWoman notes a further correction: we have one known, acknowledged pedophile among us. How many more unacknowledged ones we have NO CLUE.
RantWoman has known of this individual for some time. He volunteers at one of the computer lab projects RantWoman has been involved with. He is actually one of the calmer of the volunteers, though RantWoman finds herself wondering whether appropriate medication may have something to do with this. Information about this person came to light about the same time RantWoman was having other conversations that started out more pedestrianly about simpler safety concepts. RantWoman first learned of this person's interests in context of discussing something else and the suggestion that RantWoman put this person's name into the search engine of her choice. Little did she know...
RantWoman cannot decide whether this person is brave, crazy or some of both to be speaking so openly of this fact of his life. RantWoman lacks the proper letters behind her name to opine, but that has never stopped her before: it seems possible, if one is beset by constant urges, that talking about said urges offers at least tangential ways of addressing them especially if other options are definitely inappropriate.
This person has never been convicted of anything and he at least smiled when RantWoman said she will have to cross him off her childcare list. He and RantWoman also had a good general conversation about different issues and perspectives that came up in Friends' Meeting. RantWoman did have a conversation with someone else in a position to know about one of those sad issues of digital inclusion that happens sometimes when one must consume one's porn in a semi-public place regardless of who might find indications left behind. Unfortunately, given the topic, the traces left behind are a big problem.
RantWoman knows lots of people who use computers in the library or in other public settings such as underfunded computer labs. RantWoman can tell sometimes just from accompanying sound effects that some of the people using the computers in such places are using them to consume porn. RantWoman generally thinks that consuming porn involving consenting adults is totally permissible and she can even sometimes be tender about the circumstances that cause people to do this. RantWoman definitely is less than charmed about sharing public space with people doing so. Still, RantWoman supposes that she needs to note the digital inclusion issue here and possibly ship the item off to someone who might put data points together differently than RantWoman alone has.
RantWoman thinks that this person being public likely will cause many sensibly to avoid him but will not necessarily help protect them from all the other people out there who might have similar problems. RantWoman is grateful at least that this person listened well to RantWoman's account of how talking about such topics can affect people with victimization experiences and how such folk find help they need and to the thought of empowering children.
RantWoman thinks she must tell this person he must never, ever, under any circumstances be alone with a child; this point dovetails with other safety issues RantWoman was already working about her computer lab projects. This person also understood RantWoman's perspective that sometimes excluding a problem person from part of a conversation helps other people be clearer.
RantWoman so wishes her daily problem list were a little simpler.
With an eye to keeping RantWoman grounded if she does send said email...
http://rantwomanrsof.blogspot.com/2009/06/safest-sex-offender-on-planet.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
