Friends have used the word "testimony" in several ways, with special reference to our corporate experience and teachings regarding the ethical implications of our faith, both for individuals and for our Quaker communities. Among those testimonies are nonviolence and peace; simplicity; equality; community decisionmaking based on prayer and the "sense of the meeting"; truthfulness at all times.

To this list some would also add a spiritual and nonceremonial understanding of baptism, communion and other sacraments; fidelity and monogamy (a testimony that cuts different ways in the affluent West and in Kenya); temperance or abstinence with respect to alcohol; rejection of secret societies.

For many (perhaps most) Friends worldwide, evangelism is the activity that relates to the crowning testimony: the proclamation of the Good News. It is our relationship with Jesus Christ, "the author and finisher of our faith," and our relationship with each other as we maintain that primary relationship with Christ, that orders our lives in ways that cluster into those patterns of discipleship that we Friends often refer to as the Quaker testimonies.

Taken together, these testimonies that flow from our relationship with Christ shape our identity as Friends. Stories of our Quaker ancestors and their faithfulness to the testimonies give us concrete models of discipleship and a sense of continuity. Our continuing allegiance to the testimonies helps us know why we are Friends rather than another sort of believer or "just a Christian."

On the other hand, in some sectors of the contemporary Quaker world, those who highly value the testimonies as the hallmark of Friends are criticized as liberals or as promoters of "ethnic Quakerism" and accused of putting unnecessary barriers in the way of potential new believers who might come to a saving faith in Christ through the Friends' doorway. These evangelical critics say that, at best, the promoters of the testimonies are obscuring the primacy of evangelism, conversion and salvation and the role of the Bible in shaping discipleship. At worst, they are perilously close to setting up a counterfeit religion that illegitimately draws on a historical connection with Friends to gain an undeserved credibility.

Those who assert the high value of the testimonies can point to a long history of Friends emphasizing ethical action over concern about theological categories or our destination in the afterlife. They can also point to the early Friends' appeal to the Westmoreland Seekers and others who found themselves outside the mainstream Christianity of their time. In this day when triumphalist, formula-based Christianity, sometimes severely compromised by an unholy alliance with affluence and political power, has lost its appeal for many people, there is an argument to be made that Friends, with our special combination of mystical sensitivity, ethical consistency and a gracious approach to human imperfections, can provide a congenial faith community. If this is true, the testimonies are precisely those markers that might attract the sincere seeker who will not be reached by the more standard expressions of Christianity.

Some Friends believe that the Quaker movement stands for a purification and intensification of Christianity, returning to the life and power of the apostolic church; others believe that Friends are a relativization of Christianity, well-suited to a pluralistic world. (Albert Fowler described this division with unrivalled clarity in his excellent 1961 Pendle Hill Pamphlet, Two Trends in Modern Quaker Thought: A Statement of Belief.) For those in the latter camp, the central concern of this "Quaker Evangelism Project" is mostly irrelevant. There is no spiritual urgency in attracting new people to the Quaker community, since it is all the same to God, or the gods. Of course it is always nice to enjoy the company of like-minded people, and they will come to us because they will find our activities congenial.

However, even for those who agree on the importance of evangelism, that is the importance of presenting the Christian faith attractively and providing universal access to the community of believers formed by that faith, there are at least two directions we tend to go. For some, the invitation to become a "friend of Jesus," as Friends Church Southwest puts it, is primary. The testimonies are important, but secondary, a matter for Christian education after the threshhold of conversion and salvation has been dealt with; and not only are they secondary, they are perhaps negotiable, depending on their awkwardness in the specific context of the new believer.

Others who are equally convinced of the importance of evangelism are convinced that the testimonies are in fact the very material that our evangelism should be made of. The testimonies display the "provocative innocency" (R.W. Tucker's phrase) that draws attention to the faith underlying them; they distinguish radical Christian faith from the churchianity that has accommodated itself to the world; they constitute the "signs and wonders" that validate our attempts to be faithful to Christ.

These two camps (to risk oversimplification) within the small-e evangelical Quaker movement both want Friends to thrive as Christian communities. They differ in emphasis and methodology, but not in loyalty to the Prince of Peace. How can we support and exhort each other to greater effectiveness and greater faithfulness? What resources of thought and experience can we give each other? What can we learn from the successes and failures of Quaker evangelists and prophets worldwide? These are some of the questions that led me to set up this forum.

Well there are at least three audiences for Quaker outreach:

1. People already committed Christians.
   
2. People in a Christian culture (I mean growing up around Christians and where there are Christian references in the culture) who are not committed Christians
   
3. People in a non-Christian culture

Outreach to the first group is not really evangelism, at least in the generic Christian sense, but if one views Quakerism as a purification movement within Christianity, would seem to be a logical major audience. Also, there are many such who have come to many of the Quaker understandings through their faith, and are frustrated in churches which don't share many of their understandings.

Different audiences need different approaches. We need to speak to the condition of our audience, and speak in a manner that is understandable given their cultural reference points.

It is the third group for which the approach of emphasizing the somewhat generic basics of Christianity rather than Quaker distinctives would appear to make the most sense. But even here, that might not always be appropriate. Some audiences in this group might be best approached through concentrating on a testimony, and then proceeding to broaden that to the full faith understanding out of which it grew for Friends. For example, in areas racked by violent conflict, some audiences might be reached through the peace testimony. They may be responsive to such a different way and then, intrigued by it, we can share the spiritual basis of it.

Much of the second group resists the Gospel because of experiences and perceptions of institutional Christianity. In other words, they may have rejected a very distorted picture of the Gospel rather than the true one. The may, for example, think that being Christian means harsh judgmentalism and legalism, oppression of women, and an American foreign policy of oppressive triumphalism. For them, we first may need to show that we are very different from that, and then show them that our different understanding comes from Christ convicting us of the true Gospel.

Bill Samuel, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
Internet Ministries Coordinator, Friends in Christ, http://www.friendsinchrist.net/
Webservant, QuakerInfo.com, http://www.quakerinfo.com/
Member, Adelphi MM, Baltimore YM
Affiliate Member, Rockingham MM, Ohio YM

It is good to see that you are alive and well over there, Johan.

As we've discussed in person, my belief is that the best form of evangelism (your definition of which I find much to my liking) is a demonstration of the value of Quaker testimonies and distinctives in our everyday lives.

Of course, one must interest people in the Quaker faith long enough for them to experience that demonstration, so it becomes necessary to point out and explain those testimonies and distinctives first. I find that people's curiosity is piqued when they find out that an ordinary and pragmatic person such as I appear to be is somehow a Quaker. When I start explaining that apparent inconsistency and the myths surrounding Quakers I find that people quickly begin to understand that the real Quaker beliefs are almost intuitively held by many people.

Many times I speak to new Quakers and those who are merely curious about Quakers and I hear the same observations: "I am so glad I finally found the Quaker church because Quakers seem to believe what I have believed all my life." This leads me to the conclusion that although many Quaker groups are declining in numbers there is a strong need for Quaker theology in the general community. It would appear that we are one of the world's best kept secrets.

The toughest question in my mind is how to balance evangelism with inherent Quaker silence. I have heard people say that we need to change to attract more members. I think that is missing the point of being Quakers. Our aim should be to follow the leadings of God, not simply to increase the number of occupied seats in our meetings, especially if we have to compromise our values to do so.

In any event I am thoroughly convinced that as Quakers we need more outreach. What form that outreach should take is not something I have settled in my own heart. Surely it should not be what I see on TV on Sunday mornings.
_________________
John Price

The most common form of evangelism uses the name of Jesus is a point of division, separating "the saved" from the "not saved."
Part of the message of Jesus divides people along a different axis: those who do "my Father's will" versus those who continue to "sin"--that is to say, to "miss the mark."
A more central element of Jesus' message--that his (our) Father is infinitely loving, that we should (and can best!)emulate him by forgiving all who harm us, doing only good in response to evil--implies that the chief premise of "save-your-soul" evangelism is mistaken. Jesus was not "sacrificed" to appease a vengeful God, but willingly let himself be used to show us that divine force and violence is not God's way.
I like this passage I've just found in _Christian Foundations_, by Kathleen Fischer & Thomas Hart: "Jesus neither praises suffering nor affirms that it is good. It is part of the reign of sin and death which he comes to heal. Therefore Jesus does not romanticize suffering as some streams of Christian spirituality have done; there is in the gospels no cult of pain and suffering for their own sake. Jesus' disciples are not instructed to seek suffering. They are told that if they remain disciples they will meet suffering and pain in carrying out their committment, and they are not to let the risk of suffering divert them from this committment. Jesus gives his life as an example, choosing toil and self-sacrifice, finally even accepting an unjust death, rather than turn from his mission."
We want people to know and understand Jesus, so they will know that (as Jacques Ellul pointed out) we are already forgiven, have always been forgiven, that God means us only good, and ultimately will not fail in it.
I see no profit in getting people to call the Spirit of Christ in them "Jesus"--or not. Part of Fox's message was that the Spirit of Christ "enlightens everyone who comes into the world", whether or not they'd even heard the name "Jesus." But it's vitally important, to spare them unnecessary suffering, that they come to know and follow that spirit.
The name "Jesus" divides us falsely, when "Christians" try to claim it as their personal distinction. It divides us also from the other side, when people reject the many urgent truths available in Jesus' message, having come to mistake "Christianity" for "moralism," even for "condemnation." "The wicked flee when no man pursueth"--even more so when someone is chasing them with a Bible.
What, then, can we do? Ask God to remove the logs from our own eyes, so we can see how best to help other people with their blind spots.

Welcome!! I was so glad to see your comments.

Here are some responses - not intended in the spirit of division, but to keep the conversation going....

You said, "The most common form of evangelism uses the name of Jesus is a point of division, separating 'the saved' from the 'not saved.'" I wonder if this is literally true, since most of the evangelism I witness is either relationship evangelism or the witness of service offered in the name of Jesus. At Reedwood, for example, you'd rarely hear of an emphasis on the danger of not being saved.

Maybe I am saying this because here in England I keep hearing evangelical people being caricaturized. It seems as if there is an assumption that an evangelical Christian is either intellectually inadequate or a jerk. It gets old after a while, especially when it comes from other Quakers. I realize that this isn't what you're saying, but my point is that maybe there is more sensitive evangelism going on that ought to get some credit.

On the other hand, I do agree with you that there is a major flaw in some of the philosophies behind traditional evangelism. When religions are treated as analogous to nation-states with firm boundaries, and Jesus is treated as a flag over "our" camp, the dynamics you suggest really can happen. I see Quaker Christianity as the community that forms around Jesus, the community that is shaped by the message, "Christ has come to teach his people himself." Without trying to set Friends up as superior to other Christians, somehow this way of envisioning the church seems different from the religion industry of institutional Christianity, which does have a vested interest in putting forth a monopolistic us-and-them model of religion. Nobody owns Christ!!!

The substitutionary atonement doctrine you mention also is beyond rescue in my opinion. I speak cautiously, because this doctrine beloved of so many is so easy to ridicule that we can forget that it had its use as a metaphor to correct an equally dangerous doctrine that we get what we deserve, and that ultra-piety gets us ahead in God's eyes. The central importance of grace was supposed to be guarded by that metaphor, but ultimately the metaphor demeans grace. However, orthodox Christian theology, whatever that means, does not stand or fall with substitutionary atonement.

A little further, you say, "The name 'Jesus' divides us falsely, when 'Christians' try to claim it as their personal distinction. It divides us also from the other side, when people reject the many urgent truths available in Jesus' message, having come to mistake 'Christianity' for 'moralism,' even for 'condemnation." This is a complicated issue: Jesus doesn't divide in one sense, but does call us out. He does ask people sometimes to say "yes" to him by saying "no" to something else. There are false moralities, as Paul points out more than once in his letters, but there is also a calling-out from the way the world treats people and objectifies them, and then excuses this crap with marvelous rationalizations. (American air-to-ground missiles have killed women and children today in Iraq.) Not everything can be blessed.

Finally, you say, "What, then, can we do? Ask God to remove the logs from our own eyes, so we can see how best to help other people with their blind spots." I'm in complete agreement.

Lisa Kuenning has been kind enough to let the quaker-theology list know that Albert Fowler's pamphlet, mentioned in my "Welcome" message above, is available online in .pdf form at this link:
http://www.pendlehill.org/pdf%20files/php112.pdf

She also reminds people who don't want the .pdf format (which requires Adobe Acrobat software to read) that they can use a search engine that allows viewing of .pdf files in html format to locate and read the document. (Examples: Google, Yahoo.)

You are STILL welcome to post in this forum, but as you can see from the topic dates, it is not very active. Its main purpose for me is to maintain access to the research and exchanges that we as a community generated during my Ferguson Fellowship year at Woodbrooke, 2003-04.

One follow-up that occurred in fall 2004, after my return from England, was a half-year series on evangelism in the Reedwood Friends Church adult forum. It was a rich and searching series of presentations and discussions--a really valuable exercise. Even for a church within the Evangelical Friends orbit, actual evangelism is a complicated topic! If your meeting or church would benefit from such a forum series and you'd like some reflections on Reedwood's experience, contact me.

Johan