From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Tue Mar 16 2004 - 14:24:29 GMT
Dear Platt,
You wrote 15 Mar 2004 16:20:42 -0500:
'What I had in mind [with "always admired Quaker aesthetics" 14 Mar 2004
09:14:16 -0500] were the artifacts of Quaker-Shaker life here in the U.S.
such as chairs, chests, baskets, barns, buildings etc. which exhibit a
distinctive aesthetic style marked by harmony, elegance and simplicity.'
I'm afraid that you are confusing Quakers with Shakers. You can read more
about Shakers on
http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/Shakers.html . They were a
18th century split-off from an English Quaker community in Manchester,
England. Unlike Quakers they required celibacy (even from married couples).
So by now -after quitting proselityzing in the 20th century- they are almost
extinct... (My brand of Quakers and European Quakers in general stopped
proselytizing in the 20th century, too, by the way. People have to find us
themselves to become a Quaker.) They also had -from a Quaker perspective-
quite strange theological ideas (God not being tri-une, but dual:
male/female), which they needed to rationalize the claim of the founder that
she was Christ-come-again-in-female-form as well as this membership
requirement of celibacy. Quakers are averse to theology, at least to
subscription to a particular theology as a requirement for membership.
With friendly greetings,
Wim
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Mar 16 2004 - 14:24:23 GMT