Forum, October 2024

Non-monogamy and the Friends community

This article is so beautiful and important (“True to Your Word” by “A Friend,” FJ Sept.). I’m so grateful to the writer, and honored to be mentioned in it. My spouse and I married this past spring, also outdoors on a beautiful day, surrounded by loved ones, using those traditional Quaker vows. We had many rich conversations about what those words mean to us, and what we were promising to one another. Living up to those vows every day is the most joyous challenge I have ever undertaken. And as this Friend describes, non-monogamy feels very harmonious with our vows. Non-monogamy honors who each of us are at the deepest level and the relationship commitments we have discerned together in a tender and loving spirit. Taking out the garbage without needing to be reminded is the part that really feels challenging.

Kody Hersh
Albuquerque, N.M.

Perhaps non-monogamy works for this writer, though I think his argument would have more weight if he had felt able to sign his name [Editor’s note: the author never indicated a gender]. I also would like to hear the perspective of his two wives on the relationship. For me, a marriage in the Quaker tradition is a committed relationship between two equal individuals. Adding one or more additional people to the equation would seem to open up the possibility of misunderstandings, side-taking, and other bad feelings. My understanding is that in most cultures where multiple marriages are more common, the relationships are not between equals, but the man (and there is usually only one) has the power and authority and the wives are in a secondary position. I also wonder if this “triplex” went through Quaker clearness process before adding the third member and if the marriage performed under the care of their meeting?

Ken Lawrence
Bluffton, Ohio

A Quaker marriage vow is not a private matter between two individuals. It’s a public declaration made “In the presence of God and these our friends . . .” In defense of non-monogamous marriages, “A Friend” goes to great lengths to reinterpret the term “faithful” but ignores the context in which traditional Quaker vows are given. Our anonymous Friend construes “faithful” to be “true to your word,” such as “taking out the trash without reminders.” The real issue, however, is what others witnessing a marriage ceremony understand the term “faithful” to imply. It would be duplicitous for him to have had his [see Editor’s note above about gender] own personal interpretation of the term while everyone else understood what most English speakers think the term “faithful” means in this setting. An analogy would be for a witness in court to swear to “tell the whole truth, nothing but the truth . . .” yet have his own private definition of “truth” that would give himself permission to prevaricate.

Robert Levering
Ben Lomond, Calif.

In my long life together with many years in Africa, I have encountered many non-monogamous marriages; some legal and some not; some successful and some not. In principle I can imagine personally supporting such a set of relationships. This article, however, by implicitly confining what is being planned to only the couple to be wed is off to an inauspicious start. A Quaker wedding takes place under the care of a meeting. When, in the vow, the spouses say, “In the presence of God and these our friends,” they are calling on the meeting to help make the marriage successful and to assist in putting the pieces back together if it fails. The marriage clearness committee and the meeting of Friends can’t fulfill these functions if they don’t know all of what they are dealing with. The clearness committee will need to help the couple see the implications of a whole set of challenges and questions beyond those that are raised by a covenantal marriage. There are no set correct answers to these questions, but the marriage is off to a bad start if they aren’t thought through.

David Leonard
Kennett Square, Pa.

In response to other comments, why assume that the community doesn’t know about the openness of the marriage, just because the author doesn’t want to be identified in a google search by potential employers? As Quakers we are, for the most part, so committed to truth that we don’t swear, as that would imply that we are not truthful at other times. Strange to assume duplicitousness here.

August Howard
Nova Scotia

I wonder: If this option was more common, could it contribute to a lower divorce rate? Imagine expanding your capacity to love rather than having to choose which “love” is more compelling.

Catherine Vaughan
Evansville, Ind.

More reaction to article on clerking and White supremacy

Thank you for Michael Levi’s “White Supremacy Culture in My Clerking” (FJ Aug.). It reminded me why I almost did not become a Quaker. I was riding in a car with people I did not know. The fellow in the front seat was telling the story of his recent clerking of a meeting. He told about how one person started a racial attack on another person in the meeting.

That clerk said, “What could I do? I called for silence.”

I thought how pitiful and weak. Could you not just stop him and apologize for the racist attack? In Re-evaluation counseling the thinking is, interrupt the attack: do not worry whether or not the interruption is inelegant; the safety of each person and the shared endeavor is on the line at that moment.

Judith Amundson
Toronto, Ontario

Dismantling racism and lasting peace require full equality, but clerks represent our human instinct to look to hierarchy for short-term efficiency.

Given our equality testimony, why not at least have co-clerks focused on very different skill sets? One clerk could focus on agenda and time; the other clerk could focus on equal inclusion and respect of all, particularly the marginalized.

Finding spiritual unity among diverse individuals seems slow, but careful listening results in far faster deep understanding for long-term solutions, which is why Quakers were the only religion to condemn slavery before the Civil War.

George Gore
Chicago, Ill. vicinity

As Friends, it is best to avoid “silence” or calls to “have some silence” and to instead use other terms and describe and explain what is happening and hoped for.

There are so many alternative words and ways to use that convey the revelations given to Quakers: “Let us take a moment to let God speak to us” or “Let us take a moment to listen and feel Spirit rising.”

Sarah Kehoe
Talkeetna, Alaska

White privilege is a real and all-pervasive thing in American life, including forms of religious discourse. Recognizing that cultural baggage is the first step in addressing this form of inequality. That something as simple and “natural” in Quaker culture as calling for silence for reflection can have a near opposite meaning is a revelation. We can not assume that our values of equality and inclusion are understood, but must find ways to be proactive in their expression.

John P. McCarthy
Frederica, Del.

Friends Journal articles making a difference

My late mother was inspired by the articles on reparations that Friends Journal has published, especially Zona Douthit’s in September 2020 (“Okay, Boomer, It’s Time to Fund Reparations”). That was about the same time our family discovered that an ancestor in New York had enslaved four persons. My mother spoke with her children about sharing part of our inheritance, as a way to somehow atone for this, and we agreed to do so. This desire did not make it into her will, but just recently, when her estate was settled, we donated a sizable amount to a scholarship fund to be “awarded with a preference for students of African American descent.”

She wanted her gift to be anonymous, but she also hoped to share the story of it to encourage others to find ways to begin to repair the system that has for so long disadvantaged those who are Black and unfairly privileged White Americans.

Kathryn
North Carolina

Our Quaker prayer lives

I find Patricia McBee’s review of Jennifer Kavanagh’s Do Quakers Pray? (FJ Sept.) to be incredibly profound. I am deeply moved by the oneness where one can express their own relationship with God. Speaking as a Zen practitioner, I find it comforting to practice meditation and yet allow space before me and the Oneness as I experience the connection within and touch the divine presence. This article was deeply right and personal. I appreciate it!

David Cortes
Gettysburg, Pa.

I sometimes pray for guidance, calmness, or clarity of thought. This has not always been so. People often pray for things to be given to them or for problems to be solved. I do not pray at a specific time or in a specific way, and it works for me. Does anyone hear my prayer? I doubt it, but God is not a “someone”. In my agnostic way, we never know with absolute certainty. The Quaker Way suits me just fine.

William (Bill) Ewing
Colorado Springs, Colo.

People are often turned off by spirituality. In some way this is understandable but their fear can harden into skepticism and ridicule. The still small power of prayer when we acknowledge the inner power within all is not pushy.

Eve F. Gutwirth
Philadelphia, Pa. vicinity

Appreciating emotions

Thanks to Andy Tix for writing “How the ‘Inside Out’ Movies and Quaker Advice Converge” (FJ July online)! I agree that allowing and paying attention to both our uncomfortable emotions and positive emotions allows us to open to different dimensions of Spirit. It opens us to the wholeness of our being which is connected with and part of the larger sacred wholeness we call God.

Marcellle Martin
Chester, Pa.

This is a beautiful, inspirational article. I appreciate the interweaving of emotional life with spiritual life, thus “in-spiration.” Thank you for these insights and for your work, Andy, combining wellness, religion, and spirituality.

Irene McHenry
Philadelphia, Pa.