Are Quakers Amish?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ต.ค. 2024
- This week's Quaker video: "You're a Quaker? You mean, like, Amish?" It's something all Quakers have heard. Max Carter, professor of Quaker religion studies at Guilford College, tells us about the differences between Quakers and the Amish.
QuakerSpeak is a weekly video series. Subscribe so you never miss a video!
QuakerSpeak.com...
Filmed and edited by Jon Watts: jonwatts.com
Music from this episode: jonwattsmusic.com
Quakers aren't Amish, but they are open to learning from the Amish, as suggested in the Friends Journal article, "Forgiveness: An Amish Lesson for the Rest of Us?"
www.friendsjour...
Many thanks to Margaret Freed for allowing use of her illustration:
wonderfulgoodbo...
Visit Quaker Voluntary Service to learn more about opportunities for young people interested in social and personal transformation through service work and living in Quaker community.
quakervoluntary...
Explore the Quaker Way:
www.fgcquaker.o...
Read Friends Journal to see how other Friends describe the substance of Quaker spirituality
www.FriendsJour...
Come worship with Friends! Find Quakers near you on QuakerFinder and Friends Journal's meeting listings
www.fgcquaker.o...
www.friendsjour...
Transcript:
Are Quakers Amish? That's a question that almost everyone who goes to Guilford College (where we're filming this today) gets. A number of my students will say when they find out they're going to a Quaker College, "Will we have to ride a horse? Will we have to give up electricity? Will we have to wear gray?"
What I often tell my students is the main difference between the Quakers and the Amish is that the Amish drive their own buggy; Quakers drive others buggy.
Are Quakers Amish?
The real answer is that there's a spiritual connection between the Quakers and the Amish. There's no organic connection between the Quakers and the Amish.
The Amish grew out of the radical reformation, the anabaptist movements of the 1500's and 1600's, out of southern Germany, the Alsace area of France and Switzerland in response to the protestant reformation, and a desire to take those reforms further, to create the "true church" of adult, voluntary believers who accept the discipline of the church and associated themselves around the gospels especially and lived out the meaning of the gospels in plainness, in simplicity, in adult baptism, and pacifism, or what they would call "biblical nonresistance."
The Quakers emerged out of the English Civil War period a century later. Similar desires to restore original Christianity-it was a restorationist movement too-but there's no organic connection with what was happening on the continent.
How Quaker Used to Dress
The reason so many people make the mistake of equating the Quakers with the Amish is the Amish dress the way that Quakers used to. The Amish came into the American colonies in the early 1700's on the invitation of William Penn and other Quakers to Pennsylvania for religious freedom. They came as German Peasant stock, dressing like German Bauern would dress, and they looked at their Quaker neighbors and saw them dressing in their broad brim hats and bonnets and plain clothes and said, "works for us."
The Differences Between Quakers and Amish
But there are very significant differences between the Amish and the Quakers. The Amish, for example, believe in separation from a fallen world. A fundamental theological understanding is to be separate. "Come out from among them and be ye separate."
Quakers have followed William Penn's dictate of "loving the world with weaned affections," to be "in the world but not of it," so Quakers have not been as separate from the world.
The Amish have a theology that is still fairly Calvinist without the pre-destination. Quakers have a theology that is more open to the possibility of understanding one's salvation in this life. The Amish will not talk about eternal assurance or the ability to know in this life whether one is in reconciliation with God.
And quite importantly, the Amish do not allow women to speak or have authority in church. Quakers from the very beginning have always seen the spiritual equality of men and women. So if you go to an Amish worship service, which is 3 and a half hours in German, women will not speak a word, unless they're singing a hymn. There are no women in authority, no women in leadership, and that just isn't the case among Quakers.
There are also a variety of differences in terms of form. Quakers do not use the outward forms of baptism and communion typically, and those are very central to Anabaptist and Amish understanding. The importance of baptism as a sign of entering into the church as an adult, and the importance twice a year of the Lord's supper, foot washing as well.
My father was Quaker. His family lived out the principals beautifully. They were the first in their community to have electricity, the first to have a car etc. They were very big on education, both men and women. My grandmother had a college degree in 1902.
One of my great-great-great-great grandmothers’ was a Quaker.
An interesting fact:~
When the Declaration of Independence was being drawn up (before it was issued) a group of 12 Quakers approached the Second Continental Congress,they pointed out to them that the statement~
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"
was flawed,as it did not cover either the Slaves,nor the Native Americans.
Sadly their views were ignored.Imagine if Slaves and the Native Americans had been franchised.There might have been no Civil War,or any Native American wars.
freedom might of lasted . leave them more territory . articles of confederation and free people might if lasted for ever in a volunteer society ... be wealthy nation full of nice estates .
Ya and there wouldnt have been an America if that didnt happen. Its the laws that nature work in, you cant make an omelet without breaking some eggs, you cant have peace without war, you cant have life without death. Its just the way the universe works. Were the ones that make it seem like tragedy, but in the aspect of things its just the way it works and theres nothing we can do about it. If human life was this peaceful bliss of a utopia there would be no progression, no innovative thoughts, no evolution.
LMAO! Reading this as someone who was once in a relationship with a Quaker lass and is now a member of a Mennonite church, I understand the mixup!
The modern answer might that some Quakers are nearly Luddite, but most are not. There is a universal desire to "live simply, so that others can simply live." Protecting the environment and living simply (personal definition) are desired for multiple reasons. I just bought a manual typewriter and use my computer rarely - I would say that's unusual in most circles, but not Quaker ones.
❤
Which subgroup of quakers is nearly Luddite? I think you’re confusing them with a different religion.
I think that if General Mills updated the package design of Quaker Oats, a lot of the confusion could be avoided. I'd suggest that James Dean's image could sell as much cereal as William Penn's
Judi Dench, maybe?
Jay Parr What?! The image of someone who is actually still alive to promote the image of a healthy food product?
It'll neverk work. lol
Richard Nixon? :-P Ben Kingsley as Ghandi? lol OOOOH I know (I'm serious) Bayard Rustin. Oh, a gay man of color on Quaker Oats box! I should tweet them.
@@kevin-douglasolive3616 Ben Kingsley for sure 😆 #KingTut
Also misses out that a Quaker invented KitKats (among many other things), built a modern transport network, social housing and was one half of the inspiration to Willy Wonka.
See Joseph Rowntree.
I bought a dog from a Mennonite farm .... $35 , healthy and strong - well behaved .
My grandparents were Lutheran on my father's side, Unitarian on my mother's side, though my mum's dad was raised a spiritual (non-Orthodox) Christian from southern Russia. Mennonites, Amish, Doukhobours, and Quakers seem like good people to me, and thank you for explaining the similarities and differences. "In the world but not of it" -- that is a tricky thought to navigate. I'm going to take a deeper look.
Fascinating, this would be such an interesting class to take!
Why just not study on your own?🤔
Terrance McCray I do and did, which is how I found this video. It was a compliment to his narrative style.
Did I spot a moustache in that drawing of an Amish family meal? If so, quite a slip on the part of the artist.
One thing that Amish and Quakers do have in common is the Quaker Peace Testimony and Amish Non-resistance. In connection with this, Amish men do not wear moustaches because moustaches were worn by millitary officers back in the day in their countries of origin.
Very interesting 😐 thanks for making this video to inform those who do not know 😀
Most Quaker Meetings have added hierarchy, leadership, singular authority, layers and systems to gain permission, letters, protocols, and procedures. I encourage seeing the story of Quaker Benjamin Lay to see how these practices evolved in the biography by Marcus Rediker. I invite Quakers to reconsider the system of rules and live in the full free spirit of our Guiding Light.
I'm interested in the Quaker faith as what I understood was that it's non-hierarchical, but what you shared here is certainly off-putting. Can you elaborate? Do you have personal experiences? Thank you. .
Clear explanations- thank You
Fascinating stuff!
I've been asked if I'm Amish because I made cloth diapers for my kids. Meanwhile, I'm standing there in my PANTS, next to my CAR...
Some folks just don't think things through.
Did William Pen believe that the trinity doctrine was a false doctrine? Was he a Modalistic Monarchian or Sabellianist?
"The main difference between the Quakers and the Amish is the Amish drive their own buggy and the Quakers drive others buggy." Yup. That's the Max we all know and love.
I don't get it...
Amish typically travel in a horse and buggy. Quakers typically drive cars, but are often very active in social-justice causes, making them something of a nuisance to certain people. That and Max has a silly sense of humor.
Oh, okay, thanks!
To begin with ,in the 17th Century, the Quakers were rather like modern Pentecostals and Charismatics.but have evolved into something very different.They wear normal clothes and believe in education and learning. Their meetings are very quiet . they are like the Amish in their pacifist views , but otherwise they are very different. My husbands relatives belong to the Quakers in Pickering , Yorkshire and used to attend the Bournville meeting . They do not drink alcohol WE went to a quaker wedding in Bournville, when cousin Alison got married.
What you didn’t mention is that there are 3 different forms of Quakers: evangelicals, conservative and liberal. Today here in Germany most are liberal. The Bible is not really important, as a liberal Quaker you might see yourself as Christian but you could also be an atheist.
A lot of people firget tou can be of various ethnicities and be of a particular religion such as Catholic or Protestant. Usually Amish/ Mennonite are German by ethnicity from places like Germany, Switzerland,. You can be of various ethnic groups and be Jewish , Muslim, or Christian.
"In the world but not of the word".
very inetersting, as I've encountered this statement before, when readong about Herbert Hoover's (who was a Quaker) foreign policy. He believed that America should be in the world but not of the world.
Too bad his policies for America resulted in a Depression era of the worst kind. And thank goodness it was Franklin Delano Roosevelt who brought the country out of that Depression!
@@alexisvalere4095
Except no. The Depression cam just months after he took offie, so not his fault.
And it was primarily the war that ended the Depression, not any specific policies, especially since no one understood it's cause at the time.
What is the song that plays at the end, please? Very pretty
Professor I would disagree with your statement that the Amish adopted their dress style from the Quakers. I present the following four facts for your consideration as to why not.
1st- The Strasbourg Discipline drawn up in 1568 has the following two points:
20. Tailors and seamstresses shall hold to the plain and simple style and shall make nothing at all for pride's sake.
21. Brethren and sisters shall stay by the present form of our regulation concerning apparel and make nothing for pride's sake.
So we see that already by 1568 the Mennonites had adopted a regulation dress code.
2nd - In 1693 the Amish became a break away Mennonite group with whom they have no fellowship with, both having excommunicated the other one.
Both the Amish and Mennonites wear the same style of dress, as per the Strasbourg discipline one would assume. Only difference is that the Mennonites allow small prints, the Amish no prints.
If The Amish had adopted a Quaker style of dress, the Mennonites would never have followed suit and today both groups would be dressed in different styles.
Their dress style similarity indicates that it was established before the 1693 split and long before they met the Quakers.
3rd - The Old Colony Russian Mennonite arrived in Canada fairly recently wearing a dress style similar to both the Amish and traditional Mennonites. A dress style that could never have been influenced by the Quakers as they arrived in Canada after the Quakers had stopped dressing plain.
4th - The original dress style of the Schwarzenau Brethren, a style still used by the four traditional German Baptist Brethren churches, is that of the Mennonites and Amish.
The Brethren were pietist who in 1708 in Germany under Alexander Mack became Anabaptists adopting many Anabaptist teachings, obviously one of which was their dress code.
Whilst one can claim that the Amish adopted their dress style form the Quakers, how does one explain how four other non-fellowshipping Anabaptist groups did the same thing?
Groups that are renowned for not easily accepting changes, would all collectively decide to copy the Quakers?
The only traditional Anabaptist group that doesn't dress in the Mennonite dress style are the Hutterites. But then again, they became an independent separate group in 1528 long before the 1568 Strasbourg Discipline set Mennonite, Amish, Brethren, etc. dress style in stone.
The only logical conclusion based on occam's razor, is that the Quakers adopted the Mennonite dress style and not the Mennonites et al. the Quaker dress style.
+Daryl A Max responded when I posted about it on FB. You can read the full thread here: (facebook.com/jon.watts.personal/posts/801609207112)
Max says: “Being the hirsute Friend that I am, I haven't seen a razor of any type for some time, let alone Occam's! Nor am I adept at navigating TH-cam, so I'll reply to Daryl A. here and trust that Jon can get my comments to him, if not by carrier pigeon, then by QuakEx buggy! I certainly admit that "Die Stille im Lande" had adopted simple dress in the 1500s, long before Quaker plain dress. But I would still argue that it was the simple dress of German peasants and not a "uniform" yet. Culture works its ways on even those who seek to "come out from among them and be ye separate," and the Amish, Mennonites, and Brethren landed in America in Pennsylvania - albeit in their simple clothing, but not in "uniform." The culture around them was quite Quaker when the first Mennonites arrived in the 1680s and the first Amish in the 1710s. Quakers, who were already in the beginning of Quietism by then were adopting a fairly uniform style of plain dress, and my guess is that the Anabaptists were influenced by that. I never argued that they had the exact same dress, but that the style was influenced - and then the Amish continued to dress in a way that Quakers largely gave up in the latter 1800s.”
+Jon Watts thanks Jon for posting this here for my benefit, much appreciated.
I would refer Max back to the wording of the Strasbourg Discipline which reads "Brethren and sisters shall stay by the present form of our regulation concerning apparel" , where the 'shall stay' wording raises this to a level of a commandment, meaning that those that don't stay within the acceptable regulation will be excommunicated. 'Present form of our regulation' certainly speaks of an established dress code.
Max further on states that around the time the Quakers met the Mennonites and Amish, they the Quakers "were already in the beginning of Quietism by then were adopting a fairly uniform style of plain dress", this should suggest that it was the Quakers encounter with the Mennonites in 1680 that had been the catalyst for the Quakers adoption of a uniform dress code.
Max's argument against this hinges on his assumption that the Mennonite dress code was "the simple dress of German peasants and not a "uniform" yet." and that "Quakers, ........were adopting a fairly uniform style of plain dress, and my guess is that the Anabaptists were influenced by that".
However, there was no standardized simple dress common to all German peasants, each German linguistic region had its own distinct style of dress.
The Mennonites were found across western Europe from Holland to Prussia and from Denmark to southern Austria and France. A multi-linguistic and cultural area that would have contained multiple different dress styles.
This dress variation can still be seen today when the different regions wear their traditional costumes.
When the Mennonites and Amish came to America, they came on non-speaking terms, each side having excommunicated the other side in 1693. Based on Max's assumption that they came in their traditional peasant outfit without a dress code, there would have been numerous different traditional styles available that could have been declared the official style.
The odds that two non-fellowshipping hostile groups would both settle on the same style is unlikely. Rather they would have chosen different styles to more fully express their disagreement they held with each other.
When one throws into the equation that the same style is worn by the Old Colony Mennonite (Alt-Kolonie) who only came to Canada in the late 1800's from Russia, one is forced to conclude that the Mennonite/Amish/Alt-Kolonie, dress code was established prior to the arrival of Mennonites in North America and their encounter with Quakers.
The earliest evidence we have of a dress code regulation is the Strasbourg Discipline of 1568 and the proof that it did standardize the Mennonite dress code lies in the various non-fellowshipping Mennonite groups and Brethren groups all having the same style of dress.
The truth appears that it was the Mennonites who influenced the Quaker dress code and not the Quakers who influenced the Mennonite/Amish/Alt-Kolonie/Brethren dress code.
+Daryl A German clothing in the 16th century bears no resemblance to what Mennonite and Amish communities today wear, though. For that matter, neither does 16th or 17th century English clothing! Unless by "resemblance" you mean "there are sleeves, and something covers the torso, and women's dresses have skirts (as all dresses do) and men wear broadfall trousers." If anything, I'd say it's all a variation on 19th century American clothing (all of them being rather "Little House on the Prairie").
From what I've seen there is a difference in how Amish and Mennonite dress, though. Amish women usually have their cape as a separate garment that attaches to the apron (the "Ohio 3-piece" pattern from Friends Pattern Company is this style). Mennonite women usually have a two-layer bodice on their dress for the cape ("contemporary plain dress" from Friends Pattern Company).
I have seen ex-Amish people note how there are trends among the Amish that mirror society's--when "the world's" hems become more voluminous, so do the Amish hems, and when the skirts are narrower, so are the Amish skirts. It seems most likely to me that the Amish and Mennonites, like Quakers, wore plain versions (plain fastenings, plain fabric, no trim) of what was generally available, and when "the world" went to women's trousers and to folks wearing t-shirts as an outer layer, they simply stopped where they were.
Mackenzie Morgan You're right, I googled traditional German clothing and it seems that it does not. The general style is called dirndl and approximates more Hutterite clothing than Amish or Mennonite.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirndl
However I did google Dutch, French and Swiss traditional clothing and there I did find examples that would definitely resemble Amish and Mennonite dress. Scrolling through the pictures you will easily spot the ones I saw, they even look religious.
1- www.pinterest.com/pin/31877109832589743/
2- rubell.wordpress.com/tag/dutch/
3-themarvelousthingsaboutfrance.blogspot.co.za/2012/03/france-traditional-clothes.html
4- folkcostume.blogspot.co.za/2013/12/overview-of-swiss-costume.html - especially the last Canton, Grischun/Graubünden Canton.
Whilst it is possible that some Amish groups may slightly adjust the length or tightness of their dresses with the changing of fashions, for most however the dress pattern is strictly regulated with the length, material, pattern and even the number of pleats a dress may have strictly prescribed.
Pictures in these links below will show that Amish and Mennonite dresses are identical except for fine prints on the Mennonites.
1- flickrhivemind.net/blackmagic.cgi?id=2682399639&url=http%3A%2F%2Fflickrhivemind.net%2FTags%2Fdress%252Cmennonite%3Fsearch_type%3DTags%3Btextinput%3Ddress%252Cmennonite%3Bphoto_type%3D250%3Bmethod%3DGET%3Bnoform%3Dt%3Bsort%3DInterestingness%23pic2682399639&user=&flickrurl=www.flickr.com/photos/63315390@N00/2682399639
2- flickrhivemind.net/blackmagic.cgi?id=14600811299&url=http%3A%2F%2Fflickrhivemind.net%2Fflickr_hvmnd.cgi%3Fmethod%3DGET%26page%3D8%26photo_number%3D50%26tag_mode%3Dall%26originput%3Damish%2520women%26search_type%3DTags%26sorting%3DInterestingness%26photo_type%3D250%26noform%3Dt%26search_domain%3DTags%26quicksearch%3D1%26sort%3DInterestingness%26textinput%3Damish%2520women%23pic14600811299&user=&flickrurl=www.flickr.com/photos/53599366@N04/14600811299
3- flickrhivemind.net/blackmagic.cgi?id=263240076&url=http%3A%2F%2Fflickrhivemind.net%2Fflickr_hvmnd.cgi%3Fmethod%3DGET%26page%3D8%26photo_number%3D50%26tag_mode%3Dall%26originput%3Damish%2520women%26search_type%3DTags%26sorting%3DInterestingness%26photo_type%3D250%26noform%3Dt%26search_domain%3DTags%26quicksearch%3D1%26sort%3DInterestingness%26textinput%3Damish%2520women%23pic263240076&user=&flickrurl=www.flickr.com/photos/63315390@N00/263240076
4- flickrhivemind.net/blackmagic.cgi?id=7575804378&url=http%3A%2F%2Fflickrhivemind.net%2Fflickr_hvmnd.cgi%3Fmethod%3DGET%3Bpage%3D7%3Bphoto_number%3D50%3Btag_mode%3Dall%3Bsearch_type%3DTags%3Boriginput%3Damish%2520women%3Bsorting%3DInterestingness%3Bphoto_type%3D250%3Bnoform%3Dt%3Bsearch_domain%3DTags%3Bsort%3DInterestingness%3Bquicksearch%3D1%3Btextinput%3Damish%2520women%23pic7575804378&user=&flickrurl=www.flickr.com/photos/34022817@N00/7575804378
My main argument remains. Four non-fellowshipping independent Anabaptist groups that came to America at different times in history sharing identical clothing patterns, i.e. Amish, Mennonite, Old Colony and Baptist Brethren + Dunkard Brethren.
There is one non-Anabaptist group that shares a similar clothing pattern, the Friends. A group that does not baptize, does not believe in the Trinity and does not speak German, a group in other words that the Anabaptist's would not have socialized with nor shared fellowship with.
Yet for some reason people claim that four non-fellowshipping independent Anabaptist groups copied the Friends dress style?
4 - 1, seems to me as if the Friends copied the Anabaptist dress style if any coping occurred.
+Daryl A Those aren't identical, though. Look, the Mennonite women's dresses have rectangular shaped cape layers that are sewn as part of the dress and go from hip-to-hip across the back. The Amish women in photo 2 have a triangular cape piece _as a separate article of clothing_ very clearly tucked into the back of their apron's waist band (you can see the point sticking out on the women in blue!). It's easier to see here, where the Amish women are wearing aprons that contrast with their dresses: lcdesignsintravel.com/wps/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/amish-families-walking-900x450.jpg Of course, there are also several styles of apron in use among different Amish communities, especially since every single church makes its own rules.
As far as I'm aware, the dirndl is a considerably later style than the 16th century. "Traditional" has a tendency to mean "what my great grandparents wore when they moved to the US in the 19th century." And seeing as Germany didn't exist as its own country at that point, Swiss versus German versus Austrian, etc. is kind of...eh. They're the areas where German was spoken, so they tend to just get lumped together, like Italian city states being lumped together.
16th century costuming is my hobby :-) I tend toward Italy, but I have a book reproducing Austrian tailors' manuals sitting in front of me and a couple other books of archaeological examples. I could *definitely* see 16th and 17th century buttons as an explanation for why Amish women don't wear buttons. Wowza! Those things are fancy! Silk and gold thread wrapped around a wooden form... talk about conspicuous consumption, eh?
Here are portraits from that region mostly within 10 years of the date you're giving:
www.pinterest.com/centuriessewing/1560s-pink-neufchatel-gown-inspirations/
That low, square neck was the style all across Europe for the whole 16th, 17th, and into the 18th century, with a doublet (or "waistcoat") worn over top in the later 16th century and early 17th. The height and shape of the waist and the style of the sleeves varied by year and location, but the techniques to make the torso...not so much. It's a matter of technology, really. They had to support the bust somehow (15h century bras were worn with a particular style of dress that had separate pockets for each breast, so those weren't in use anymore, and 20th century bras were quite a ways off), so they did it by stiffening the bodices (the same way a suit jacket's lapel is still stiffened today) and tailoring them so they were so tight they'd smash the bust as close to flat as they could manage. (In case you're curious, the black shrug-jackets they're wearing over their dresses in the portraits and white high-neck things under the dresses are called partlets and were a modesty measure protecting against ren faire boob! ...also sunburn and cold)
The loose dresses Anabaptist women wear today would present a serious problem with neither corset (only for the ultra-wealthy in the 16th century) nor bra available to provide support.
Now, I haven't paid anywhere near as much attention to 17th, 18th, and 19th century clothing as I have to 16th, but I have a hunch that the capes sewn into Mennonite dresses and worn over Amish dresses are evolved from the kerchiefs worn either tucked in or over the bodice in the 18th century (think Martha Washington) and that the kerchiefs came from the partlet. Quaker women definitely did do the kerchief thing.
Excellent
Very interesting - thank you.
Not just men and women being equal but everyone us equal to the point of not having a leader of the church group.. no one preacher, everyone sits together in silence until you want to speak and then you can, saying whatever comes to you
They have almost nothing in common except being pacifists, and having settled a lot in Pennsylvania.
This is good to know. ❤ I view the original authentic Quakers as people who had found and honored, the most important part of the natural spirituality that ALL human beings are born with - the Heart - the Love - the Light - the God that exists within us all. And they aimed to show the rest of humanity this natural human capability, which is why they were targeted.
As I learn more about the original Quakers, I am finding validation for my own experiences and beliefs, as well as for my work. The core Quaker belief was that God is Love and we can directly connect to Love/Light/God through our own Hearts. And I realize the truth in this, because I've had experiences with it, since going through a grieving/healing process in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Since then I have felt that when we release the suppressed pain that blocks our Hearts, we automatically connect more deeply with Love/Light/God. This is why my work has focused on embracing our feelings and healing our Hearts, in order to bring more Love and compassion into our world. Many people have put me down and thought I was crazy. So, I am glad to be able to back up my realization with a stand for people who had also found the same reality many centuries ago - the original Quakers. I feel much less alone now, even though I do not know if any of the Quakers had realized how people can deepen their direct connection to God, through focusing on healing their own Hearts - through focusing on releasing the suppressed emotional pain that blocks Hearts. So, I am adding this part to the table here.
It is so sad that the Heart of humanity has been being severely blocked through the suppression of feelings of sadness, through mass distribution of various types of feeling numbing pharmaceuticals and other substances...etc. All that blocks people's Hearts prevents people from feeling and being more Loving. Many people must learn that we can not get rid of the bad in humanity through blocking the good - the Heart - the Love - the compassion. A lot of damage has been done to the Heart of humanity, but it can be set free and healed. Please help set the Heart of humanity free, so that we can ALL bringing more Love and peace into our world. Below are a few of the messages that I've been sharing in my writings since the 1990s...
GOD'S HANDS WORK THROUGH OUR HEARTS - WE MUST DO OUR PART.
WHEN WE BLOCK OUR FEELS OF SADNESS WE BLOCK OUR HEARTS. DEEP GENUINE GRIEVING RELEASES THE EMOTIONAL PAINS THAT BLOCK OUR HEARTS FROM LOVE.
ITS OK TO CRY. CRYING IS LIKE GIVING THE HEART A SHOWER TO WASH AWAY ACCUMLATED DIRT.
HEALING THE WORLD BEGINS AND FINISHES WITH THE HEALING OF OUR OWN HEARTS.
Since my own spiritual experiences, in the early 1990s, I do not believe in joining and following any one religion. During my years of spiritual searching I learned from many religions, but joined none. This is what felt right for me. However, if I had to join one religion, I'd join the old original Quaker religion, if any of it still exists and is free of microwave targeting, because their beliefs and ways are akin to my own. But I intend to remain free of the confines of religion and to keep honoring my own direct connection to God/Love/Light. When I make that connection, to a deep enough degree, is the only time I feel whole. And I've always felt this connection best when I'm alone in a peaceful and private place out in nature. Nature is my church.
P.S. As I watched videos about Quakers, and heard some Quakers talk about their connection to God being a voice they can hear. I found myself hoping that the targeting of them has not included the V2K - the voice to skull radio wave transmission of voices, because this could easily be mistaken for God's voice, by unaware people, and it could seriously mess up their lives. Those who use these types of technologies on targeted people seem to enjoy playing god and controlling peoples lives. Its a horribly intrusive and criminal thing. I hope ALL Quakers become aware of the V2K capabilities of microwave and laser weapons, in case it has been used on them.
The voice of the real God/Love/Light is not something I hear in my head. It is what I feel in my heart and experience in my inner visions. It is felt more than heard. Its like a deep inner knowing that can translate into thought, but is not a separate voice in my head. And there is a deep feeling of Love connected to it, the type of pure Love that brings me to tears, because it is so strong and so comforting and so beautiful. But this is just my experience. Perhaps the inner connection to God is different for different people. Or perhaps some people just describe it as something they "heard" because it is so hard to describe - because nothing compares to it and you have to feel it to understand it. But no matter how it is experienced or described; real Love/God speaks to us through our Hearts, not our heads. God is Love.
Quaker theology is similar to some sects of Buddism....interesting, also in accord with psycho-spiritual understanding. Amish seems more like an oppressive puritanical metaphysic theology.
I was reading David Crystal's amazing history (and future) of the English language "Stories of English". In the book, David very interestingly said that one of the last bastions of the use of the second person SINGULAR pronoun thou (and thee) were the Quakers. Now, being singular its use with someone else is personal (a Father would use it with his Son, but not the Son with the Father. It was also used when praying to Diety, when addressing supernatural beings (like ghosts as done in Shakespeare), when talking with people of your own age and station and when talking down to your social inferior), and the English, being very class-conscious, as they still are to a lesser degree, took great exception to being thoued thus, especially by a stranger of unknown station: "Thou thouest me, knave"?. The class factor and being seen to be a part of "polite" society may be part of the reason why sadly the use of thou has become an archaism in our many (increasing) Standard Englishes that we have around the world. 🌐🐇
True but you can still find it used in parts of England :)
@@tobyluke1 Up North I'd say as well as in the West Country too I'd hazard a guess. 👍
Quakers drive others buggy. hahahahah Max I miss thee.
interesting point of view
Quakers make great oatmeal.
At least both of them live in Pennsylvania
My grandparents were Quakers, and practiced equality in daily life. I cannot see a better way to enjoy relationships. But I know that water baptism in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins is a command of the gospel which must be obeyed, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost , speaking in tongues , is also necessary in order to be born again as a child of God.
The Pre-Christian Origins of Baptism
th-cam.com/video/D8ycXJMGlLQ/w-d-xo.html
Lol so you know nothing
@@pseudonymous9153 I know the truth about the gospel. If nothing I said means anything to you, you believe a false gospel.
Whittier has many street names after famous Quakers.
There is a chance that my ancestor was Amish. He was there with William Penn in Lancaster County, PA because he landed there in 1740 coming on a ship from Germany. I have a feeling he was amish. I found out through research and also my aunt doing our family tree. Also just sent of my ancestry dna kit and waiting on the results and one day going to Lancaster County to see where my ancestor landed and find out more through the Amish if I can and also through the library or records there. I hope I can find out more. I have spent my entire life wondering who I am. It has been my goal to find out and I am finally so close and I am not stopping.
Early German immigrants were more likely to be Lutheran or Reformed than Amish. As late as the early 20th century non-Amish Pennsylvania Germans outnumbered the Amish by something like 40 to 1. So unless you have specific reasons to think your ancestor was Amish, it's best to keep an open mind.
Have you found out more since you commented here?
So do Quakers believe in Christ, and the old and new Testaments?
That is easy to answer: some do (in the sense you mean), some don't.
In relation to the use of Modern Technology, Is there a difference in the approach of the two groups? Would appreciate a clarification
Absolutely. The Amish avoid much modern technology (in odd and inconsistent ways). Modern-day Quakers tend to look pretty much like anyone else. The no-makeup, never-dressed-up, peace-loving, slightly-hippie family down the block may very well be Quakers. Even if they did just buy a new Audi.
@@jayparr9719 There is a consistency to what Amish will and will not adopt in the way of technology. The main criterion is whether or not a technology will tend to undermine the cohesiveness of the community.
It is also true that different Amish groups differ in what technologies they will endorse, prohibit, or use (sometimes on a don't-ask-don't-tell basis).
I can recommend Donald Kraybill's book "The Riddle of Amish Culture" for a more complete account of the situtation. If Quakers are commonly misunderstood in the broader American culture, Amish are even more so.
jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/riddle-amish-culture
@@RolandHutchinson: Thank you for the book reference.
What do you put in your beard?
I honestly didn't know quackers were still around. Learned something new
Hhmm i have always wanted to know if African Americans can be Amish also??? Maybe someone can answer that
Possibly? But the Amish are more insular, and it might be easier to convert to Quakerism
Beachy Amish have African American members (though not many) and a significant community of Kenyan converts
You could become a Beachy Amish or amish mennonite while African american, it is significantly more difficult to become any of the PA dutch speaking types unless you are of pa Dutch descent. This includes the old order and new order amish, as well as I believe the old beachy and other groups.
Weird how the Amish came a century earlier, but stole the look of the Quakers. I think maybe he got that backwards.
It would be logical to think so, but surprisingly, it is not backwards. It is a matter of historical record that that the plain dress of American Quakers was an influence on their Plain Anabaptist neighbors (Amish and Old Order Mennonites) in southeastern Pennsylvania.
Quaker, Yes, Amish, I'll pass........... BUT Yahusha the Christ I say Yes , Yes, Yes !!!
Im Muslim and it reminds me of the time I dined with a couple of "Tabli" Muslims dressed in robes and Turbans
Thanks for the explanations, I used to think the quakers lived exactly like the amish the difference being their ancestors came from England
How do the Quakers and Amish have a spiritual connection? From what I understand, the Quakers don't believe in a Trinity theology, physical water baptism, men headship and eldership, and the other fundamentals of orthodox Christianity that identify Christians as Christians. One must question if Quakers can even be classified as a Christian religion, let alone spiritually connected to the Amish.
Some Liberal Quakers today no longer identify as Christian, and attending a Liberal Quaker meeting can feel a lot like a quieter version of a Unitarian Universalist service. But the movement's roots were completely in Christianity. You can read George Fox, John Woolman, or William Penn to get an idea of the Christ-centered theological views Quakerism is rooted in. Even today, Quakers look to ongoing revelation, as led by the Spirit. When a Quaker rises to speak in meeting, it is considered a prompting of the Spirit. Their pacifism also comes directly from their belief that Jesus taught nonviolent enemy-love. So even in the most liberal meetings, the Christian roots are still there. And Conservative Quakers, though small in number, remain staunchly Christian.
One of the things that has always set Quakers apart from other Christian groups was their belief in the equality of all people, which led to their being instrumental in the women's suffrage and abolitionist movements. They also rejected priests and sacraments, believing that all people could minister to each other, that no one needed a priest as a middleman to God, and that how you lived your life was your greatest sacrament. External rites were no guarantee of internal sincerity and thus considered empty forms.
Spiritually connected to the Amish? In their mutual embrace of nonviolence and simplicity, yes. Otherwise, not really. The Anabaptist movement was completely independent of the Quaker movement.
@@3ggshe11s: Thank you for this explanation 👍
Lol imagine being so blasphemous and ignorant of Christianity that you equate the sin of patriarchy with the essentials of faith in Christ. Lol just say you worship Andrew Tate more than God.
Quakers and Amish have identical beliefs. They arose at the same time in history but the Amish are from Germany and Quakers are from England. You will probably find more Amish living in the past and as farmers in the countryside. Quakers you will find as lawyers and college professors and living in the cities. There are a bunch of Quaker founded colleges, like Skidmore, and then of course, there is the prep school in DC for Senator's children...Sidwell Friends.
Identical beliefs except about, y'know, baptism.
Not identical. Amish come from Anabaptists, baptism is a central rite. Quakers do not practice the rite of baptism at all, not as an infant or and adult. Communion is also a major part of Amish faith, Quakers do not practice communion.Amish have many rituals and creeds, they have a standard prayer book that sets their service and has for centuries. Although Quakers do sometimes follow a faith and practice, we do not have creeds and there are no rituals. Amish have a community of elders and a leader in the church that leads a worship session, original Quaker meetings had no pastors. Some Quaker meetings still have no pastor. Original Quaker meetings had only what we call open worship which allows congregants to speak as the Spirit leads them. Women have always been allowed leadership roles in Quaker meetings, women cannot lead in the Amish community. Social activism has a long running tradition in Quaker communities from the Underground railroad, to civil rights to prison and labor reform. Amish keep themselves separate from the world outside their communities, not trying to change or alter it. They are similar in thriving for simple lifestyle, and pacifism but they are not identical.
Identical beliefs more or less start and stop with both groups being what the outside world calls pacifists.
Theology, style of worship, governance of the religious body, requirements for membership, involvement in politics and government, attitude toward education, the importance of biblical scripture... The list of differences goes on practically /ad infinitum/.
And of course the most important difference: Amish eat and sell more oatmeal than Quakers. :-)
I’m a practicing Quaker and YES I am Amish. Anyone who doesn’t agree with me will eat a knuckle sandwich!!!
Can you be Quaker and a hare Krishna
can you become a quaker from the outside and join ? mennonites and amish are closed loops ..
Lots of Quakers are (and always have been) "convinced Quakers" (i.e., converts) rather than "birthright Quakers". Anyone can attend Quaker meeting for worship. Some become "attenders" who never take the step of formally becoming a member of meeting but are nonetheless welcom participants.
It is difficult, but not completely impossible, to join the Amish or Old Order Mennonites. We are probably talking something in low single digits per year among over 300,000 Amish. It is a difficult path that involves not only adherence to strict religous beliefs and a radical change in lifestyle, but also becoming fluent in a new languge. (And the new language is the easy bit.)
At one time there wee German quakers
2 Questions:
What bible they use and why ?
Quakers use whatever bible translations (and/or Greek and Hebrew texts) they prefer.
Amish use Luther's German bible (with more modern spelling) and the King James and sometimes other English versions.
There is also a recent translation of the bible into Pennsylvania Dutch (also known as Pennsylvania German), which is the home language of the great majority of Amish. (Some speak a Swiss dialect instead). This bible, however, has a bit of an American Evangelical flavor to it, and it was basically put out there by people who are trying to convert the Amish away from their Anabaptist beliefs (especially to get them to assent to the notions that assurance of salvation is possible and indeed inevitable for the saved, that justification is by faith alone with no role for good works, and that the Amish faith is a man-made religion while American Evangelical Christianity somehow isn't.)
@@RolandHutchinson Thank you for your answer and time.
@@mohamedi.eboularas2960 why are you asking bs question? jihadi?
for your information all bibles are the same, there is only one bible, it is hard for jihadis to digest
@@okbrostartcoping5835I guess when your "Christianity" starts and ends with Islamophobia, you wouldn't actually know anything about the Bible. But it sure is entertaining to laugh at how little your racist ass knows 😂
my boyfriend said no
Thank you for providing facts on doctrinal beliefs, which prove that Amish (and Mennonites) are Neither Christian, Nor American.
What if I mean by chance when your Jesus returns he becomes a scientist or a physicist or a rocket engineer and spends most of his time in research labs would you adopt & give physics or medical science a chance ???
I mean you haven't given science a chance, given your complete total lack of research on Quakers before opening your mouth for idiocy to come out. Scientists value knowledge and education. You might want to try it sometime.
Well it seems being a Quaker is the more modern way of life. Amish are still stuck in the past but at least they both are non violent and dont blow people for not following a religion in fact the only religion that does this is Islam.
Quakers were not Amish
where's my oats
nunya business not from real quakers well maybe some but the famous company has no connections with quakers
The Jews are not their own race any more than Catholics, or Protestants are the same for Quakers and all other religions.
Not to be rude but in my opinion I do not think that people should spend their lives being Quakers because I think that it is a waste of time.
Jon Goldberg, do you think there are other religions that are not a waste of time?
It's all bs if you ask me!