Friends Bulletin PACIFIC AND NORTH PACIFIC YEARLY MEETINGS OF THE RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS Volume 45, Number 4 December, 1976 TRUTH AND SOCIAL CHANGE After considerable hard and painful considera- tion I see that I do not understand at all how best to effect social change. This leads me to wonder whether the question may be itself flawed. It may be too general. Perhaps only narrow specific forms of this question can expect sound answers, ques- tions like: “How can we stop new prisons from being built while better ways of dealing with con- victed offenders are found?” “How best to retard and bring about reversal of the arms race?” “How to speed the growth of economic and social parity for minority citizens of the United States?” Such questions as these are hard enough. If we find answers for them, then maybe it will be time to see what common features those answers have. Some popularly regarded ways of effecting social change are manifestly unreliable, though not always ineffectual: pass a law, throw the rascals out, trans- fer power to the Good Guys, face the opponents down with a credible threat of violence. Friends perhaps have less confidence in most of these de- vices (maybe all of them) than do many of our fellow citizens. In what practices can we put more trust? The response depends largely on what one perceives as the obstacles to growth (or reform, or justice). If the perceived obstacles are some set of villains, then that poses quite a different problem to be solved than if those obstacles are lack of a design, or lack of will, or fear of failure, or blindness to central facts, or the like. I have no message to offer where the problem is Villains. That situation can arise, but I believe it arises uncommonly, and then most likely as a result of mishandling an earlier phase of the same situ- ation in which the obstacles were of the more or- dinary kinds we all experience in ourselves at times. I think that the social order, at least in this country, cannot be lastingly arranged in a way much different from what the people think they want. (The 18th amendment did not fit with people’s desires and it didn’t work.) If this thesis is true, then lasting social change will follow only from change in the attitudes of the people of the country — lasting change in their attitudes. It is not surprising then that I feel that the natural objective for Friends dissatisfied with pres- ent social order is to seek and share truth. Truth before advocacy, before “action,” before coalition- forming. I do not mean that the whole truth has to be seen clearly before doing anything (!) but that our actions and our voice should not reach beyond what we see clearly and have tested and found true. On the one hand this is quite a restraint on the scope and variety and enthusiasm of our social- change efforts. But on the other hand it is a pro- posal to use only our most powerful tool. The pro- found changes in English law wrought by early Quakers stemmed directly from their insistence, at enormous sacrifice, on what they had tested and found true. In this day truth is suspected of being dead — slain by advertising, political gobbledygook, and the rest. But, in fact, people prize truth most highly — and they look for it. “Effectiveness” can be expected as a by-product of the persistent pursuit of and obedience to truth. For one thing it must sooner or later entail the great power of example. Truths of various sorts can bear heavily on events in the world of affairs. One kind of truth relates to change in people’s conception of what is possible. It has been suggested that the mingling of Blacks and Whites in the same living quarters (and eating facil- ities) during military service in World War II pro- foundly changed Southerners’ notions about possi- bilities in race relations. Sometimes important facts are suppressed and their release can have great effect. The Pentagon Papers were a dramatic example, though Friends had no hand in that. A quite different way of using information for social good is the explaining of legal rights to the downtrodden as is done in many AFSC programs. But truth can be hard to come by! There is no question that economic organization of the USA and the wider world entails many problems of social justice and human welfare. It is also abundantly clear that not all is well in the economic sphere. But where our dissatisfaction outreaches our under- (' Continued on page 46) PAGE 46 — DECEMBER, 1976 FRIENDS BULLETIN FRIENDS BULLETIN 2241 Hanover St., Palo Alto, CA 94306 Telephone: (415) 326-8516 Robert R. Schutz, Editor Myra Keen, Assistant to the Editor Barbara Janoe, Corresponding Editor for NPYM The official organ of news and opinion of Pacific Yearly Meeting and North Pacific Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends. Second Class postage paid at Palo Alto, California. PUBLISHED monthly except February and August at 2241 Hanover St., Palo Alto, California 94306. All correspon- dence, editorial and subscription, should be directed to mailing address above. Deadline for copy is fifth of the month preceding month of issue. SUBSCRIPTION RATES: $5.00 per year. First class post- age $8.00. Single copies $1.00 postpaid. Monthly Meet- ings are encouraged to collect and subscribe for all of their members. Contributions beyond subscriptions are welcomed to help meet actual costs and reduce Yearly Meeting subsidies. All contributions are tax deductible; receipts sent on request. ADVERTISEMENTS: $0.50 donation per line, subject to approval of content. (Continued from page 45) standing, advocacy is (in my view) likely to be pre- mature. I pose a small example. A person inherits shares in corporation X, and after six months finds that it makes weapons, has doubled in value, and does not pay dividends. Should he sell it (reaping a profit from the capital gain)? Should he keep it, hoping for a loss? Does it hurt the firm if he sells the stock? Should he keep it in order to write the firm as a stockholder? The firm also makes domes- tic solar heaters. Should he refrain from buying one because of the weapons? Or should he prefer to buy one from that firm to reduce its dependence on weapon manufacture? I would think that public ad- vocacy on investments would wisely await clarity on the answers to such questions. And I think address- ing questions in the area of conscientious economic behavior has a high priority on our truth-seeking agenda. Very high! Finally, when it comes to sharing the truth with the world I see two virtues; they are: restraint and persistence. In a way both of these are opposites to impatience. By restraint I mean not reaching be- yond one’s light and preferring to try reconciliation, and try again, before opposing wills. And by per- sistence I mean staying with the task as long as the truth leads. Lincoln Moses Palo Alto Meeting To Effect Social Change This month we evaluate our various efforts at social change. I knew that opinions among Friends range all the way from “think nothing and let God guide your spontaneity,” through rational efforts to see beyond the ends of our noses to violent revolu- tionary action because things are so bad. And I believe we have all of these views represented in the articles and letters of this issue. It seems to me that few of us recognize the technological vises in the grip of which we struggle. Change occurs, but not that of which the revolutionary and do-gooder dream. We may choose, of course, to rest on our oars and watch the sunsets, or to bang our heads against brick walls, but we do have intelligence (don't we?) in our equipment, as opposed to the dinosaur and the dodo. Were they not God's creatures, too? RS Writers Please Note The Bulletin presently follows the format of a theme for each issue, but we are not rigid in this pursuit. We welcome your contributions, articles, letters, poems, artistic creations, on whatever sub- ject you think may be of interest to Friends. Themes for next months (subject to change as you may con- vince us) are: January/February: What I Believe March: Membership and the Testimonies April: Friends’ Education May: “The System” June: Ministry, Oversight, and Clerking July/ August: Community. Nota Bene Thee may be able to help us save as much as $130.00 a year for the Bulletin. Just send us a change of address notice before you move! Every time your Bulletin goes to where you were — but aren’t now — we get a notice of the change (if the Post-office knows your new address), with a “Postage-due” for 25 cents. There may be as many as ten or twelve of these a week. 10 x 25 = $2.50 52 x $2.50 = $130.00 We thank each one of you who helps us save a portion of that! Subscription Department FRIENDS BULLETIN DECEMBER, 1976 — PAGE 47 Letter In Defense of AFSC Dear Sam Tyson, You will not be surprised to find that I disagree with the major thrust of your September Friends Bulletin article that the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) and the Friends Committee on Legislation (FCL) are “now detrimental to the spirit basic to the tradition of the Religious Society of Friends.” It appears to me that you are using these organ- izations as scapegoats for a much more fundamen- tal malaise in the spiritual life of some meetings and individuals which does not prompt to action. You know that the AFSC does not claim to speak or act for all Friends. There was and is close consultation among various bodies within the Re- ligious Society of Friends before action is taken. Such was the case when AFSC joined the Brethren and Mennonites to administer the C.O. alternative thru Civilian Public Service in World War 2. Given the brutal treatment of C.O.’s in World War 1, Friends generally believed that CPS could witness to the "second mile" teachings of Jesus and to William James’ moral equivalent for war. You fail to men- tion, Sam, that after the disillusion of administering Civilian Public Service, the AFSC Board minuted that it would never again administer the Draft. You cite the renewal of the Draft Law of 1967 as another instance of failure of AFSC to consult draftees and other segments of the Society. Based on the facts of that situation which James Bristol of AFSC sent me, your conclusions are erroneous. Here is what I found: On May 19, 1967 the House Armed Services Committee reported out its version of the Draft Bill which would have inducted all C.O.’s into the Armed Forces with the provision that they be furloughed to civilian jobs, subject to military discipline. Between then and May 25th, when the House version was passed, there were but five days for consultation. How, Sam, could all potential draftees affected by this law be consulted? The Chairman of the House Armed Services Com- mittee, Mendel Rivers, introduced the amendment deleting this provision, after strong efforts had been made by the Army, by Lewis Hershey, head of Selective Service, by Mennonites, the ACLU, and by representatives of religious groups, including AFSC’s James Bristol and FCL’s Ed Snyder who were in Washington at that time. The AFSC participated in and followed the re- commendations of the Second All Friends Con- ference on the Draft and Conscription in October 1968. The Conference statement gave clear support to draft resistance and called on all Friends to work for draft repeal. The record shows that the AFSC followed those leadings. The AFSC as a taxgatherer through withholding is admittedly a tough one. Friends, both in and out of the AFSC, have witnessed against this form of conscription in many ways. The AFSC sponsored a test case, won in the lower courts, but was reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court. This concern is very much alive, and ways are being explored to mount another court test. What would help all of us is some deep searching for guidance in this matter. Since few Quakers are tax refusers, like yourself, Sam, how do you expect Quaker organizations to take action that most Quakers refuse to take? It may be significant to note that the AFSC and Pacific Yearly Meeting grew up together in Cali- fornia; and many PYM members first became ac- quainted with Friends through the AFSC. Because Friends were spread very thinly, it was easier to work through AFSC and FCL than the Yearly Meeting. So, for example, if there was a concern to assist the victims of war in Indochina, it was easier to work through the AFSC than to create another organization. And yet, it should be noted that Friends did create AQAG (A Quaker Action Group) to sponsor the voyage of the Phoenix to Vietnam. You say that AFSC has been a major block "in the experimentation for direct action for peace . . . and civil disobedience." AFSC has not always been in the vanguard. But I find no reluctance among Friends to create their own projects and progams without waiting for AFSC. Remember the voyages of Golden Rule, Everyman I, II, and III, the San Francisco to Moscow Peace March, the Fort Diet- rick Vigil against germ warfare, the All-Friends sponsored vigils at the Pentagon and White House, and AQAG (A Quaker Action Group), already mentioned? No, Sam, the spirit is not dead as long as there are Friends to witness as individuals or through corporate channels, like AFSC. We need both. I completely agree with you that Friends should not defer to or lean on AFSC or FCL unless they merit support. I personally would like to see Meetings taking initiative for action, releasing Friends to undertake concerns in which the Meeting is united. If Friends feel that our Quaker organizations are blocks, drains to the spirit, then they should create the kind of organs — individual and collective — that reflect concern. As you know, Sam, I have spent the last thirty years with one foot planted firmly in the Religious Society of Friends and the other in the American {Continued on page 48) PAGE 48 — DECEMBER, 1976 FRIENDS BULLETIN Earthquakers/Monan’s Rill Where are we now? As of November 1976, it is six years since a group of us gathered in Berkeley to begin a discussion of a caring community. We have come a long way. Those of us in EQ that gravitated toward a far-out but close-in rural setting are relocated in Sonoma County, some on the Monan's Rill land, more in “halfway houses” in Santa Rosa, with plans to build on the land. It is difficult to write of the two organizations, because there is a lot of overlap, and it has some- times seemed unclear how to keep both groups going. The Sharing Fund has been a central theme of Earthquakers, since the beginning. It is one expres- sion of our desire to care for each other, to provide for emergencies, to pool some of our resources. We have had ups and downs with the methods of con- tribution and with the goals of our common funds (beyond a reserve kept for crises and emergencies) but the concept has held, and contribution to the Sharing Fund is one of the things that distinguishes EQ members from EQ visitors and fellow travelers. We have spent a great deal of time and energy on incorporation and application for tax-exemption. Inspired by the successful achievement of this goal by another east-coast group with similar purposes, one EQ member took on the major responsibility of wading into the IRS jungle, and hacking through the bureaucratic red tape. After three years of great effort, with EQ meetings and committees almost bogged down under the weight of answering IRS inquiries and challenges, we were denied. Those that worked hardest on this project were discour- (Continued from page 47) Friends Service Committee. For me, my Meeting is the power house where I find inspiration and guid- ance; the AFSC and FCL provide channels for ex- pression of social concern. But, like you, when these channels do not suffice, I can and do take indi- vidual action. It is vitally important for Friends to ask if they want AFSC and FCL to continue to be Friends organizations. If they do, then we need greater Friends participation in staff and committees. And we should encourage Friends Meetings to minute their concerns to these Friends Organizations and to call them to account if they appear to be depart- ing from Friends principles or endangering the spirit basic to Friends tradition. Robert S. Vogel Orange Grove Meeting aged by the fruitless result, after pouring much energy into that bottomless sink. Those that had never been sure that the way “to be about our Father's business" (pardon, feminists) is to try for tax exemption first, were relieved that duelling with IRS could be laid aside, so that we could get on with what we really were about. And what are we really about? Someone once said that if the purpose of Earthquakers was to help members make meaningful changes in their lives, we have succeeded beyond our dreams. That is no small thing. Change is scary, and a support group who can listen, share, argue, laugh and cry and yell with you, examine your investments, discuss your income and its rationale, store your junk, move your possessions, borrow your tools and vehicles, tolerate your quirks, and eat your casseroles — is a support group like no other, and one that need not feel defensive about its worth or purpose. EQ mem- bers may be no more stable, sane, creative, or com- mitted than the rest of you, but we have weathered a lot together, are open to new members and new ideas, and have found through sometimes bitter ex- perience that the bonds of caring and concern are durable, and can strengthen, even though these bonds sometimes fray, and are dropped by some. Members have traveled across the world, settled in other states, marriages have occurred, marriages have dissolved, most of us hang in there, some of us counsel a lot with each other. Earthquakers has functioned for some people as a way station, where they talk out their dreams and goals with others, sample our "style," and move on. We recognize that this has meaning, but we also need to refine our procedures, so that long term “visitors" are encouraged to join up or ship out, so that they don't drain more of the group’s energy than they contribute. We are sometimes reluctant to sever ties with people we like, and we probably should limit our membership to those who live close enough to participate fully, and are involved enough to want to make EQ participation a high priority. We are not a therapy group, although there is aid of many kinds within the group. Collectives oriented to “new life styles," communal living, or open relationships flourish on the West Coast, but how many of them turn in their IRS 1040 forms to a committee within the group every year? Perhaps money, how we make it and what we do with it, is a tougher area to expose than sex. This may be the area where EQ is the most radical. We are not just an alternative energy support group, although this is a major concern for many of us. Some of us lead quite conventional middle class lives, but we have backed financially a member who has started a solar hardware company, and some members of EQ FRIENDS BULLETIN DECEMBER, 1976 — PAGE 49 have shared housing, grown much of their own food, taught organic gardening and environmental education, and we push each other to consume less and recycle more. We do have a Quaker approach, expressed in our meeting format, our methods of doing group business, and our values. We are not exclusively Quaker, though our meetings and methods are puzzling to those visitors that come to us with no previous Friend’s experience. Our group ranges in age from the 20’s to the 70’s, with the majority over over 50. Why? We aren’t sure. How many Friends Meetings have a majority of committed, active, par- ticipating members under age 30, who attend all the Business Meetings, and do the work in com- mittees? Younger adults are mobile, searching, busy with schools, careers, and young children, and are often not willing to take on the commitment of time and energy that Earthquakers demands. Our group tends to attract older adults, ready for changes, perhaps grizzled and scarred by years of “achieve- ment,” and perhaps more aware of the necessity of sharing, commitment and interdependence. It may be that most of us have “been around” a good deal, and have come to believe that the only greener pas- tures are the ones we make ourselves. We are in no way smug, or self satisfied, but we are determined to support each other as we figuratively and literally dig up the dirt, throw out our seeds, weed and prune our lives, turn our compost, and stick around until the harvest. We want to grow and we want new members. EQ has as a primary goal the fostering of community. This can take many forms. We’ve hoped urban collectives would develop among us, and we have the germs of several business ventures. We aren’t offering to do it for you though. If, after a period as an EQ “visitor,” you like what you find, and join us, you can expect to put out large amounts of energy, time, and thought on this undertaking, serve on committees, visit new “visitors,” have your assumptions challenged and your pocketbook scru- tinized. We give, and we take, and there is no free lunch. We have a lot of enthusiasm and support, and may take up your hobbies, and support you in your wildest dreams, but we expect that you can and will make major changes in your life, and “put your money where your mouth is.” We can say “Why don’t you sell that house and live simpler?” and “Why don’t you quit that job and do what you really want?” and “Why don’t you stop talking about that, and go do it?” because a number of us have done just that. You could too, with a little help from your friends. And what about Monan’s Rill? We started as a sub-group of Earthquakers, and sometimes it’s not clear which is the tail, and which is the dog. Early in EQ history, some of us started looking for land on which to build a community from scratch. Those of us in Monan’s Rill are deeply involved in the physical tasks involved in that — shoveling, fencing, hammering, and hauling rocks. We have all the problems that developing raw land incurs, and that’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but who said it should be? We initially organized as a housing cooperative, and found to our sorrow and cost, that that would force us into subdivision. We have reorganized as a partnership, so that we can maintain our goal of holding the land and buildings in common owner- ship. The legal red tape had kept us from being able to bring in new members, and it required a great deal of faith, hope and capital from the initial members, to keep up our spirits, and our roads, and our planning during the long and costly effort to find the legal model for what we intend to do. And are doing. It is an exciting thing to build something new. It is also difficult and demanding, and stretches our minds and our muscles. One family lives in a trailer, and is building a stone and pole house that is awe- inspiring in its adherence to “labor intensive” phi- losophy. Another house was finished last winter, and its residents put long hours into gardens, fences, and maintainance. A third house is half done, and a community building is getting along. Some of us are determined to get away from the single family residence idea. We recognize a need to build hous- ing for “temporary workers.” We push for an aware- ness of houses as “shelter,” and not as “my own personal dream house in the country.” We get good counsel, &nd bruising criticism from a firm of inno- vative planning consultants in San Francisco. We make haste slowly. We are aware of criticism that we are middle- class, middle-aged or elitist. We say it isn’t so. So a group of us have put together a chunk of money, and have taken some big risks together, to follow a crazy dream. Shared ownership of land and build- ings, held together by consensus and faith, blisters and backaches, is not a prevalent middle-class, middle-aged phenomenon. We are working out ways to bring in younger people with less capital and lower expectations of long term commitment, and we’ll solve that problem, as we’ve solved others. Through threshing meetings, committee effort, argument, tears, parties, physical labor, and soli- tary walks in the hills. We have liaisons with alter- nate energy groups, and environmental studies classes at the nearby college. We are getting to know our neighbors, and our county bureaucrats. Members have developed deep roots in the larger ( Continued on page 50) PAGE 50 — DECEMBER, 1976 FRIENDS BULLETIN IN SEARCH OF AN EXISTENTIAL BASIS . . . We Quakers seem often to confuse our lives with “should” questions. Should we sit in at the County Supervisors meeting? Should we contribute to AFSC? Should we work for an “Establishment” political candidate? Should we own a Meeting House? While such questions as these are important at many levels of consciousness, I believe that we ask them all too frequently and insistently. They can become almost a preoccupation, standing in the way of the insights that otherwise would guide our behavior. One debate that trips us up has to do with scale. In my experience as a teacher in professional school, I have been inclined to press upon my stu- dents the possibilities for social change that are available at various levels: policy, planning, pro- gram, project. The alliteration could go on forever (ideology, imagery, institution, individual. . . ), and it makes for exciting education. But there is no real meaning in these discussions without taking into account a particular person, with particular traits, a given state of readiness and a particular set of cir- cumstances and opportunities. A related dilemma revolves around the question of role. Shall we bore to the core of the system? Shall we activate the margin? Shall we subvert? Shall we overthrow? Shall we withdraw? Much of our time is spent judging, second-guessing, and ex- perimenting with the supposed “answers” to these questions. The reality, again, is that no single pre- scription for the activity of each participant can be counted upon to fit a given random occasion or even a general phase of social development. And we delude ourselves utterly if we believe that we could all contribute in the same fashion or with the same ( Continued from page 49) community of Santa Rosa, in group work, in housing, in the woman’s movement, in work with ex-offend- ers, in ecology action, in politics, and in the Friends Meeting. Monan’s Rill might grow faster if we did less “outreach,” but most of us are committed to social action as well as rural living, and we will certainly find innovative ways to combine these themes. We welcome inquiry, but have no fast answers. Write first, get to know us better through your own efforts, and bring your sleeping bag (and work gloves). We think it’s the best show in town. Susanna Calderon Redwood Forest Meeting understanding. Perhaps more fundamental is the fact that we are stuck on a rational model of deliberate social change. Implied in a reliance on rationality are the assumptions that we are able to identify the relevant variables, predict their patterns of autonomous change, select the most effective course of action, and control the general environment sufficiently to allow our actions to produce the desired conse- quences. In a generalized sense, the rational ap- proach may have something to say for itself, but its pitfalls are deep and frightening. Complexity, spon- taneity and surprise must be given room. Otherwise, we risk the results of our efforts being (at best) ir- relevant and ignored, or (at worst) stultifying and accepted. In my own life, I have made more than a few attempts to explicate the meaning of deliberate so- cial change and its implications for individual and group activity. So have we all; it is unavoidable in a culture so dominated by verbal expression, linear thought patterns and notions of progress. The re- sults are all around us: “Make no little plans!” cried David Burnham; and everyone ran out to build city forms of an inhuman scale. “We can have butter as well as guns,” argued the social optimists; and the war machine breathed new life. “Bus the children,” advised the social planners; and residential segregation became intensified. Quaker bandwagons move more slowly and our fashions are more subtle, but the same tendencies are there, and the same self-deception. My experience tells me that the finest social changes that occur are matters of “accident.” The marriage of Eleanor and Franklin happened to result in social progress. The anti-war movement grew in a largely unplanned manner. George Fox’s encounter on Pendle Hill was not a calculated event. To remark on the many direct experiences with unplanned social change with which I have been associated would require considerably more space than the present article is permitted. One example will have to suffice. About two years ago, I partici- pated in the development of a strikingly humane housing program, one involving substantial outright grants of public money to impoverished elderly homeowners for the purpose of bringing their houses up to code standard. The lay committee that initi- ated the program had no idea, at the outset of its activity, that such a program would emerge. Nor had I, as one participant, any idea that my long dormant research interests in residential rehabilita- FRIENDS BULLETIN DECEMBER, 1976 — PAGE 51 FOR SOCIAL CHANGE tion, elderly life styles and patterns of income dis- tribution, would, in combination, prove to be the conceptual “glue” that would make the program stick. The program was, objectively speaking, an accident of fate. As a social innovation, it may through time have effects upon social attitudes, norms and relationships, but at its outset, these “social change” considerations were far from our minds. We were simply doing what we could, at a point of political receptivity, drawing upon our happenstance assemblage of committee members for motivation and support. Had Eleanor not married Franklin, she wouldn’t have been Eleanor. Had the peaceniks considered the risks, or Fox, the penalties, they wouldn’t have been themselves either, and we would now be short a few moral and spiritual anchors. Intellectually- driven attempts to change society are, I am con- vinced, by their nature usually of negative benefit. Moreover, they are susceptible to the worst sorts of capture and redirection. Unplanned efforts, on the other hand, bom in the depths of the human psyche and fully alert to the occasion at hand, are in their nature positive and beyond manipulation. The Monthly Meeting of which I am a member contains as many “accidentally” effective agents of social change as there are participants. One wit- nesses, with his body, to the futility and idiocy of nuclear diplomacy. Another expresses his love for humankind through his music, — and through his patience with the Meeting’s artistic mediocrity! Still another spends much of her time counseling young adults on career possibilities that are expressive of their innermost needs and spiritual understandings. Yet another is an inspiration as a mother, reminding us again and again of the social leadership em- bodied in childhood. One operates an alternative library. Another marches for peace. Still another works to prevent the construction of a new jail. Yet another tends a garden, knowingly and with loving care. We are, together, an agent of social change not in the usual prescriptive and deliberate sense, but in terms of our spiritual grounding and the human support that we provide each other. Both are inade- quate, by our own standards, but it is better for us to expend our energy on improving them than on questioning each other’s style of worldly engagement. Our hope and our interest are expressed in Kenneth Boulding’s fifteenth Nayler sonnet as well as any- where: Caught in a mirrored maze of self-deceit, Peopled with images, that but reflect The groping movements of the intellect, Till bounds are smudged where feats and shadow meet, The mind is lost, until with quickened beat Love scents a wind, blowing from God, unchecked, And senses, deeper laid than sight, direct To the free air our once-bewildered feet. But love must be made pure to be our guide; Not trader’s love, that seeks more in return, But love that with clear, slender flame will burn, Though it be spent for nought, spurned, crucified, Until to one vast song our spirit lifts To love for love alone, not for His gifts. What do we know of the social ends that should be achieved? Or of the basic flows of history and human possibility? Or of what forces can be mounted, over what periods of time, to reach what levels of goal-attainment? Or of the unanticipated conse- quences of our actions, that may overwhelm our intended gains? What do we know of the controls that would have to be exercised to secure our dreams, or of the human losses that would attend those same controls? Who would know a “social change” when he/she saw one? Paul Niebanck Santa Cruz Meeting Have Slides — Will Travel Any Monthly Meeting wishing to hear more about the FWCC Triennial Meeting held in Hamil- ton, Ontario, last July 18-24, is welcome to request a visit from PYM’s representatives to that Meeting. Please contact Bob Vogel from Southern California Quarterly Meeting, or Akie Reynolds or Van Ernst from College Park Quarterly Meeting. We will be happy to reserve a date to bring the World Family of Friends closer to all of us by way of our own memorable experiences and slides of many who were there with us. Van Ernst Redwood Forest Meeting PAGE 52 — DECEMBER, 1976 FRIENDS BULLETIN Keep with the Life John William’s delightful epigram, “begin with, keep with, and quit with the life,’’ has become terribly important to me of late. From my experi- ences over the past eight years of fairly intense activism, I feel called to reflect that if there is anything that can be done to save our planet, it will need to come from a depth of faith that I am sure lies potentially in our Society, but which I have often failed to find testified to in our social con- cerns and service work. We look around us and see our communities torn by economic injustice and greed, the very earth and sky ravaged, the governments of the world mo- tivated by fear, and our personal lives caught in a mire of culturally inculcated sexism, insecurity and that deadening sense of ineffectiveness. How great is our longing for justice. Lord, and peace! How desperate our need for the beloved community! Sitting in our social concerns meetings and our AFSC sessions, we devise strategies and we ponder the historic trends to divine which issue will offer the key for public pressure. We rack our brains to uncover the most persuasive arguments to convince the powerful. But Friends, none of our strategies, none of our “isms’’ can bring about the kind of transformation for which we ultimately hope. In fact, history seems to prove that no political solu- tion will actually bring either true peace or true justice. We are not good politicians. I hope we never shall be. For “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty.’’ (I Cor. 1:27) Thank God we are both foolish and weak! The kingdom of heaven is promised not to the wise or the powerful, but to the poor in spirit. So, if we pray for the kingdom of heaven on earth, we must confound our own wisdom, and turn the attention of our weighty committees from all those well-thought-out strategies. We must seek first the King to be the head of our Kingdom. I hope that this does not sound too glib, tor it is a matter to be taken seriously, and it is also a matter that is gravely difficult. When I say that we need to find a King, I mean that we need to give God, the spirit, absolute power in our lives. God tolerates no sharing of power. If we would have God, we must give up our own will. In a sense we must remove ourselves from the center of our sub- jective universe. I know no way to escape from self-will, to make room in my soul for God (and he is a jealous God) other than by exposing myself to the devastating examination of the inward light. That light has revealed to me my failures, my pridefulness, yes — no other word will do — my sinfulness, even in the midst of my greatest efforts to do good. And for this I am extremely grateful. For it is only from this acknowledgment of weakness, of hopelessness, of poverty of spirit that I have found a willingness to let go. Then, praise the Lord, the promise holds true: God is there, ready. I have seen myself caught up and used in ways that were amazing to me; to be present for other people; to be present and able to love. This is the power of Christ. I am convinced that this is the way to the King- dom of Heaven and should be the beginning and end of all Quaker social action. The Presence in our lives strips us of all abstractions. Political and theo- logical gamesmanship is gone. We are brought into direct relationship with suffering, with the earth, and with each other. We are given the power of love. From that center we — no, it is God acting through us — can change the world. But, “begin with, keep with, and quit with the life.’’ Life in God is a life of discipline. I know that I am just taking the first steps on a long road, and I am constantly faltering. Although I have experi- enced the joy and peace of God, and it seems that I should know better, yet I turn away, and more often than not you will find me out of that life. And then, I pray that I will have the God-wisdom to quit, no matter how good the cause, for without the life, I, and we, are nothing. Ben Richmond Multnomah Meeting Young Friends at New Year’s The first gathering of Pacific Yearly Meeting, Canadian Yearly Meeting, and North Pacific Yearly Meeting Young Friends will meet after lunch on December 29 for four days of worship, workshops and fellowship at Camp Myrtlewood, Oregon. Please bring no pot or alcohol, but instead bring frisbees, song sheets, musical instruments, things all can share in. Also bring sleeping bags, raingear, warm clothing and anything you need to live on for four days. There will be food! For more information and regis- tration write Loree Alexander, 415 Maple St., Santa Cruz, CA 95060. FRIENDS BULLETIN DECEMBER, 1976 — PAGE 53 A New Foreign Poliey for the Bieentennial La Jolla Monthly Meeting of the Religious So- ciety of Friends has taken the occasion of the bi- centennial to rethink American foreign policy. We are reminded that: — this nation was formed on the basis of self- determination, and — this nation was begun on the principles of liberty and equality. We want to reinforce these principles in our policy toward other nations today by refuting eco- nomic and military domination of other nations, and by refusing to support those regimes which do not work toward liberty and equality for their own population. First, we feel that our strength is not in arma- ments, and that we only weaken our international position by reliance on a high defense budget, mili- tary aid, and arms sales. We advocate reduction of all of these, and allocation of the resulting funds and jobs to such projects as development of clean energy sources, agriculture, environmental pro- tection, eradication of disease and poverty, and the like. We also call on the United States to take the lead in calling for a worldwide disarmament confer- ence, and in reducing nuclear stockpiles and de- velopment of nuclear armaments. We urge the pas- sage of the World Peace Tax Fund bill to provide a constructive alternative for those of us who cannot in good conscience support military projects, but are anxious to support the many other much needed international projects. Secondly, we feel that it is essential to restruc- ture the international economic order, to promote a more equitable sharing of world resources, and narrow the poverty gap both within and between nations. This calls for several steps. 1. A fair pricing system for primary and indus- trial products, based particularly on the knowledge that our non-renewable resources are in shorter supply and must be priced higher to reflect this and prevent misuse. 2. Development of a code of ethics for multi- national corporations. 3. Immediate reduction of debts of underdevel- oped nations, under the knowledge that un- der-pricing of their products for years has been the cause of this debt. 4. Assistance in birth control at home and abroad. 5. Assistance in food production through self- help projects and support of the proposed International Fund for Agricultural Develop- ment. 6. Improvement in world energy usage by assist- ance, both at home and abroad, in conserva- tion and low-technology energy sources — such as solar, bio-matter, wind — and agree- ment not to initiate high-technology energy usage in those nations which cannot afford and do not need it. 7. A law-of-the-sea agreement based on concern for the world community and environment as well as the needs of individual nations. Thirdly, we urge support of those regimes where human rights are recognized, and immediate reduc- tion of support of those regimes where human rights are violated — such as Chile, South Africa and Korea. We urge the strengthening of world institu- tions which can coordinate action on this and other points, and the promotion of those international programs which are based on tension reduction throughout the world, and on mutual accommoda- tion so that basic world needs can be met. La Jolla Monthly Meeting Approved 4th Day, 7th Month, 1976 Memorial Minute Evelyn Phillips Burcham, former Clerk of Grass Valley Friends Meeting, died July 16, 1976, at her home following a year’s illness. Her husband, George Burcham, four daughters, other family members, and friends joined with Grass Valley Meeting in a memorial meeting July 30th which was held at John Woolman School. Evelyn had taught school in Grass Valley for many years, and had also, with her husband, di- rected summer Adventure Mountain Camps. She and George were active earlier with others in found- ing the Tuolumne Cooperative Farms. She was a community leader in 4-H Clubs and in cultural affairs in this area. She was a member of and sup- ported the United Nations Association, the Ameri- can Friends Service Committee, and World Vision. She was active politically in the California Demo- cratic Club and had worked in a number of poli- tical campaigns. Evelyn found joy in singing and dancing and was a fine pianist. Her home was a place of accept- ance and cheer for many friends, and her faith and love, the undergirding of many lives. PAGE 54 — DECEMBER, 1976 FRIENDS BULLETIN What Should a Quaker Do? A recent issue of New York Review of Books brings into focus current comment on “the nar- cissism of our day.” It leads us into self-absorption, far-out religions, magical access to knowledge, faith- healing, hypochondria, perhaps to the border of paranoia. It leads us away from collective social action. It tells us that, in any case, social action is hopeless. What can one man do? Better you should make your peace with God. Quakers, too, often prefer to mumble sacred words. Always have. Needless to say, neither the Bulletin nor its editor is a party to this counsel of despair. And I lay it on the table only for discussion. My own position is that social action is all we’ve got. It is, and of right should be, our modus vivendi with the society around us. Thoughtful discussion, from the Socratic dialogs to the latest Quaker meeting, is woven of the solid stuff of social problems and social solutions. This bears upon the question of “what should a Quaker do?” and that, in turn, relates to “what can a Quaker do?” much as Sunday’s hopes always relate to the cold clear light of Monday’s reality. We know what we should do but we are not such fools as to attempt it if it has no chance. Yet, the truth of the matter lies elsewhere. We are, in fact, always more sure of what we should do than of what we can do. The “one man’’ always can do more than he thinks he can. Cesar Chavez at the start of his campaign, not so many years ago, could not possibly have believed he would accomplish what he already has. Ruth Thompson of Orange County Meeting at the start of her present tax pro- test, does not know what she will accomplish. But the doing is the thing. Perhaps the risk is the thing. We swim in this society or we drift. We struggle and we live or we cease to struggle and we die. And if the struggle is an essential element of the human condition so are the dislocations in society that demand struggle. Power corrupts — and it is our duty to resist or remove corrupted officials. The processes known as Parkinson’s Law often convert the small agency serving a good purpose into a large one serving an evil purpose. The end justifies the means, nearly every politician insists, but the citizen-voter must know when the means have be- come the end — and call a halt. Being a citizen (or Quaker as citizen) is a near- fulltime job. David A. Munro Orange County Meeting Change A poster on the dividing wall outside my office reminded me “ ... to change is to grow To grow much is to change very often.’’ Social change has come ever more rapidly as communications and travel have increased people’s awareness of their world. Change in 1976 is inevi- table just as the seasons are inevitable. In the spring of 1975 I stood on the banks of the frozen Yukon River, north of Fairbanks. It was still and cold, but the days were getting longer. The pale Arctic sun would soon melt the ice, which would go crashing towards the sea. When break-up would come, and the ice would go out, the river would be open for the barges and the motor boats; the fish wheels would turn, and the long summer days would be filled with activities in preparation for the winter months. Men adapt their lives to survive in the changing seasons. In carving out the means for their own livelihood, they have blended their lives with the environment, or used their energies to develop mining, farming, hunting, fishing, building of roads, dams and cities. Along with the environmental changes have come people concerned with social change — education, health, social organization, religion. Many well-meaning people felt called to share their insights and prejudices with others “less fortunate.” Dramatic changes came in health care. In the far north nomadic people grouped in villages around schools. Along with teaching the customs of the white man, teachers, missionaries, miners and builders affected village life in many unforeseen ways. Going away to high school meant not learning the old ways of survival and not maintaining ties with the older people. Roads and television brought the bright lights and baubles of the city, and easy access to liquor. Goods and services, oil heat, running water meant the need for much more cash for utilities, just to exist. A washing machine at home meant less socializing. Better medicine meant more child- ren to bring up, more stress and problems. Why mention these changes? Because they are so glaring in this impacted area and demand in- sight, resources and vision to deal with the pres- sures for change. Recognition of need, allocation of money and hiring more bodies is only a beginning, and there is no blueprint to any promised land. How should Friends participate in social change? First, by recognizing the complexity of our society and being aware of the unplanned consequences of the program espoused, second, by gaining skills and FRIENDS BULLETIN DECEMBER, 1976 — PAGE 55 sharing something that others know they want, and third, by realizing that your choice of living prob- ably does more for you than for anyone else. There are as many ways to effect change as there are individuals. We need the dreamers, the wanderers, the workers, the lone activists — and we are all seekers. If we walk in the light, there will be times when a decision, a confrontation, a strong and open stand will make a real difference to our particular world. These teachable moments, these cross-roads, these crises of conviction may not come often. Most living demands daily commitment to a simple, open, joy- ous way of life, giving trust in hopes that trust may be returned; failing at times because we are human, but continuing because we love and are loved. Another poster from the AFSC reads, “In the eternal dwell that as the plants of the Lord you may grow. If ye dwell in the Light which was before the earth was, with it ye will preserve the tender plants.” George Fox. Jennivieve Westwick Fairbanks Worship Group Letter Change Will Come Dear Bob: Here are a few quotes from a chapter I wrote: “Political Perspectives,” Educational Reconstruc- tion: Promise and Challenge, ed. by Nobuo Shima- hara. Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis 1973: “Economic inequality exists within American society. But two- thirds of mankind in Asia, Africa, and Latin Amer- ica experience inequalities immeasurably greater — first, within their own societies, and second, be- tween themselves as underdeveloped nations and the already industrialized countries. And the gap between the rich nations and the poor nations is an ever wider one. We must try to appreciate what underdevel- opment means for the two billion human beings who suffer under it, for only an aware- ness of their condition will make us realize that radical revolutionary social change alone will better those conditions . . . There will be radical change; the status quo is doomed. The world moves toward greater justice. ( Anatomy of Anti-Communism, A Report pre- pared for the Peace Education Division of the AFSC, 1969, p. 130.) “Radical change is necessary and inevitable . . . in order to carry out far-reaching redistribution of News of the Meetings Two aspects of the problem of food were pointed up in successive First-days at La Jolla Meeting: On Nov. 14 a hunger meal of tea and rice was to be followed by a showing of a film on causes of and solutions to world hunger. On November 21, a cele- bration of harvest was planned, in which members and attenders would bring surplus produce to share with their neighbors. Santa Monica Meeting's newsletter has excerpts from a New York Times article by Yale professor Irving Janis that might well be pondered by Friends who are troubled by dissent in Meetings for Busi- ness. Professor Janis points out that flaws in de- cision-making that led to some recent fiascos like the Vietnam war develop in group thinking when 1) Self-censorship of deviations from the apparent group consensus reflects each member’s inclination to minimize to himself the importance of his own doubts and counter-arguments; and 2) there is a shared illusion of unanimity concerning the majority view (resulting from self-censorship and the false assumption that silence means assent). What Janis calls “groupthink” — and attendant deterioration in decision-making — may stem from the psychological pressures of a group working closely together who share the same values and face a crisis situation. In the manner of Parkinson’s Law, he formulates The Janis Law: The more amiability and esprit de corps among the members of a policy-making group, the greater 0 Continued on page 56) social, economic, and political power, including land reform and displacement from control of tradi- tion-bound elites; the leaders resort to authoritarian measures, and when resistance to radical reform is entrenched, one side or the other frequently resorts to violence . . . the revolutionary movements sweep- ing the third world are not patterned on a model made in the United States . . . the U.S. has placed itself in total opposition to the tide of revolution sweeping the world.” Thomas C. Hunt Guatemala Worship Group University Friends Meeting is seeking a secretary. Besides the requisite secretarial skills it is helpful to know Friends’ ways. Send application to the Meeting at 4001 - 9th N.E., Seattle, Wash. 98105 Louise Ann Runnings, Clerk PAGE 56 — DECEMBER, 1976 FRIENDS BULLETIN A Challenge to all Friends The study booklet, “New Call to Peacemaking” is now available at A.F.S.C. book centers in San Francisco and Pasadena. ($1.00 per copy, less 10% on 10 copies and over.) • It proposes a two year period of study, discussion and regional workshops culminating in a Peace Church Conference October 5 - 9, 1978. • It suggests that we use as a basis of study the articles in the booklet, including: 1. “Current International Peace Structures” — Barry Hollister, Quaker United Nations Rep., N.Y.C. 2. “History of International Quaker Peacemaking Efforts” — Duncan Wood, Quaker United Nations Office, Geneva, Switzerland 3. “Just International Distribution of Food and Resources” — Franklin Wallin, President, Earlham College 4. “Biblical Basis of Peacemaking” — T. Canby Jones, Professor of Religion, Wilmington College 5. “Christ and Caesar” — Mark Hatfield, U.S. Senator, Oregon 6. “The Quaker Witness and the March Toward Global Nuclear Oblivion” — Charles Wells, editor “Between the Lines” Philadelphia Y.M. • A workshop is already being planned to bring West Coast Friends together in September, 1977, from Pacific Yearly Meeting (Independent), Cali- fornia YM (Friends United Meeting), North Pacific YM (Independent), and Northwest YM (Evangelical Friends Alliance). • “New Call to Peacemaking” originated in the Annual Conference of Superintendents and Secre- taries of Pastoral Yearly Meetings as an outgrowth of the Faith and Life Movement (dialogue between programmed and unprogrammed Friends). It is being implemented by Friends involved in that movement and has as its facilitator the Friends World Committee for Consultation. We are grateful for the expressed cooperation and support of Gladys Innerst and Coleen Wells, Co-Clerks of PYM’s Peace Committee, and we hope that all Friends in our Monthly Meetings will want to participate in this long-term study. We Friends — all of us — come from the same root, incorpor- ate the same Peace Testimony into our varying Dis- ciplines, and say God is Love. With trust in the integrity of one another’s experience of the One Light and dependence on that Light, we can find a way together to speak Peace to power. Van Ernst Co-Rep with David Tappan New Call to Peacemaking, planning, PYM POSTMASTERS: SEND FORM 3579 FRIENDS BULLETIN 2241 Hanover St., Palo Alto, CA 94306 Second-Class Postage Paid at Palo Alto. California {Continued from page 55) is the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational action. Trudie and Tom Hunt report for Guatemala Friends Worship Group on the disbursement of the $21,620 received to aid victims of the February earthquake. Over half the money was used for di- rect relief (food, tools, and materials for building shelters). Because no new rental housing is being built, a tract of land will be purchased and sub- divided for construction of shelters for those who hitherto were renters and now are completely home- less. More funds are needed to continue the scholar- ship and grant-in-aid program that has enabled many Indian children to get some education. Con- tributions may be sent direct to Thomas Hunt, Apartado Postal 29-C, Guatemala, C.A. Or, for assured income-tax deduction, funds may be sent via Orange Grove Friends Meeting (Marjorie Neis- wanger. Treasurer), 1340 New York Dr., Altadena, Calif. 91001. Vital Statistics Deaths Ted Freedman, Berkeley Meeting, died Nov. 2. Eva Otsuka, Orange Grove Meeting, died Nov. 6. Desiree (“Kit”) Brinton, La Jolla Meeting, died Oct. 21. A memorial service was scheduled for Nov. 2.