This article proposes a new, explanatory metaphor — emerging from within Quaker metaphorical ecotheology — that offers a sense of the context within which Quakers develop theology: the watershed ecosystem, a method which speaks to Quaker history, theology, and context, especially the particularities of Quaker theological method in Liberal Quakerism. In the world of this metaphor, the particular life experiences of each individual Quaker (the lens through which Friends construct theology) is understood to be shaped by every aspect of their context, which is in turn shaped by their choices as they grow into the embodied practice of living a particular form of life (a testimony) shaped by the core Quaker theological doctrine of the universal presence of the Divine within the creation. Watershed is the wider ‘region’ of one’s context (the structures, environment, and relationships that impact the world in which we exist), while ecosystem is the ways that one’s decisions — both individually and in community with others — impact the form that one’s life takes, as well as the theology which emerges from that life. The metaphor of watershed ecosystem thus encapsulates the wider community of individuals all immersed in a theological ecosystem.
Quaker theology is a dizzyingly complex web of concepts,
I suggest here the framing of a model for Quaker theological construction that brings the fields of contextual theology and ecotheology in dialogue, read through the particularities of the Liberal Quaker theological tradition, and emphasising the central role in Quaker theology of naturalistic metaphors for Divine experience. I call this framework a watershed ecosystem, and I describe individual Friends as trees rooted in a particular place, expanding the metaphor by describing climate, bodies, leaves, flowers, fruit, and seeds as constituent metaphors representing the theological categories of (respectively) story (or narrative), experience, interpretation, testimony, doctrine, and hope.
The Quaker watershed ecosystem framework I develop in this article can be situated within the methodology termed contextual theology, specifically making use of the synthetic model of contextual theology. In an effort to begin the work of applying Quaker theology to the synthetic model, it is necessary to first situate Quaker theological method within the broader project of Christian theologies, with a specific focus on contextual theology.
Contextual theology exists as both an experienced reality for those who engage with theology contextually, as well as a specific field of study within the academic discipline of theology.
The approach one takes to the sources of theology, therefore, has a significant impact on the methodological approaches which one emphasises.
When one expands this idea (that human experience is inherently contextual, and is thus individually particular) to its (potentially) logical conclusion — that there are as many perspectives on theology as there are human beings — this approach has the potential to dissolve theological community into an ever-disintegrating individuation of belief.
This tension can be seen in Quaker theology in that Friends tell and enact theology more than they construct it: when asked about Light, for example, Friends are far more likely to tell the story of their experience with Light than to offer a theological statement about the nature and meaning of Light.
‘Experience’ is thus comprised of two elements: the relationship that humans have with the ‘outer’, physical environment, which is mediated through the use of the physical senses and can be termed the material experience; and the relationship that humans have with the ‘inner’ environment of emotions, thoughts, and ‘those frontiers of consciousness beyond words’, which is mediated through the mind and spirit and can be said to be the emotional and spiritual experience.
This is an approach to theological construction that necessarily demands flexibility in the individual expression of certain commonly-accepted (and communally-interpreted) ethical frameworks and theological language. In other words, Quakers seek to experience God first, unmediated, in their own inherently individual and unique selves. This individual experience occurs, however, in the context of community.
In his seminal work on contextual theology, Stephen Bevans outlines six different models, or approaches, to engaging in theologising contextually, with each model sited along a line that moves both from creation-centred to redemption-centred as well as from context-centred (present experience) to tradition-centred (past experience).
As Quaker theologian Wess Daniels’s work argues, the synthetic model of contextual theology is an effective framework for envisioning Quaker theology.
Applying the synthetic model to Quaker theology demands that one begin first in the realm of metaphor and story, specifically the recognition that Quaker theology is constructed at the point where the metaphors of Divine Presence (especially the metaphor of Light), Quaker testimony, and the practices and habits of daily life all converge, with awareness of the current context of the ecological and climate crises. Quaker theology is metaphorical and narrative, in that it is continually constructed through the narration of the experiences of individual Quakers across time, and often engages with the Divine through commonly used metaphors such as Light. Since it is so connected to personal experiences, Quaker theology chafes against systemisation and rigid definitional structures, always seeking — I would argue — to frame itself using the logics of metaphor, poetry, and narrative.
Hopefully, all one needs to do to learn about the beliefs of a Friend is to read the story told through that Friend’s life: thus, telling the story of their theology through their testimony, told across their entire life cycle. What makes that enactment a communal act, however, is the superstructure of Testimony: the way of life shaped by a core, common Quaker theological belief of the Light Within all, the continuous and universal Divine Presence throughout creation.
Ecotheology emerges out of recognition of an existential threat, and the conviction of people of faith that our traditions can offer aid toward the social transformation required for humanity to continue living comfortably on this planet. As such, the hope inherent in ecotheology is that it be lived. As Deane-Drummond states, ecotheology is ‘a particular expression of contextual theology that emerges in the particular contemporary context of environmental awareness that has characterised the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries’.
One notable resource for ecotheology to envision the relationship between creation and the Divine is the field of Christian interdependence theology, specifically the
This framework of interdependence sets the paradigm for the existence of creation, therefore, where creation is interdependent with itself. This can only occur due to the communal nature of the creation.
The consequences of interdependence do not only impact human relationships and the inevitable necessity for continuous peacemaking and reconciliation. Therefore, interdependence also demands an awareness of ecological interdependence as well as an ethic — and resultant practices — of ecological care. The emphasis on the marriage of the practices of building just and interdependent human communities with a theology of Divine/human interdependence strongly reflects the same marriage in Quaker practice and theology, and thus deserves some exploration as we note where Christian interdependence theologies can help inform a Quaker ecotheology.
A notable example of the various ways that the field of ecotheology explores the intersection of care for the creation with a focus on the impact of human activity on the ecosystems of a place is the Christian ecotheological framework of watershed discipleship, originating in the work of activist-theologians Ched Myers and Elaine Enns.
Watershed discipleship engages in the same work as the synthetic model, for it weaves together the context of present experience (the lived reality of being rooted in a specific location, with specific relationships within the multiplicity of an ecosystem), the universality of the human need for clean water and environment, the interdependence of all beings within the bounded ecosystem of watersheds, the traditions and central texts of communities currently rooted in the watershed, and finally, the perspectives of all of those communities who have ever held care for the watershed.
It should be noted at this stage that these strands, and their emphasis on the specificities of place as both physical and theological context, also intersect with numerous other themes which have been explored in the fields of urban studies and planning, religion and cities, and environmental engineering.
Scholars have recently demonstrated the viability of exploring the built environment from the perspective of Quaker testimony, through an examination of the impact of Quaker ideals, theology, ethics, and aesthetics on the construction of specific locations. These include recent work examining testimony in the planning, construction, and management of the Bournville Model Village, built by the Cadbury Chocolates Company to house their workers.
Quaker theology and ecotheology could thus be seen as natural conversation partners, especially when considered in the context of the primary place that the naturalistic metaphor of the Light plays in the Quaker theological imaginary, most especially in the creation of an anthropology of Divine-human interdependence across the creation.
After having described how the method of Quaker theology of a watershed ecosystem relates to and is situated within the broader theological milieu, I turn to exploring the metaphor of a watershed ecosystem to describe Quaker theology. I begin with explaining what makes up a watershed and then share how this can be seen as a theological metaphor.
The official definition of watershed, from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, is: ‘a land area that channels rainfall and snowmelt to creeks, streams, and rivers, and eventually to outflow points such as reservoirs, bays, and the ocean’.
Watersheds are places defined by the continuous movement of light energy and water through the life cycles of the beings living in the constituent ecosystems. Rivers join at places known as confluences, where the waters of (at least) two watercourses (rivers, creeks, and streams) meet and interact, where the soils, pollens, seeds, pollutants, chemicals, minerals — everything being carried along by the water and wind — all bang up against each other and create a new river, something hybrid that is neither wholly one tributary nor the other. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania famously began at the confluence point of the Monongahela and Allegheny Rivers; conveniently enough, the triangle spit of land at this confluence is known as the Point. These intersections are points of significant ferment, where separate streams can join, mix and remix, eventually creating a new river, mighty and powerful, that is more than the sum of its parts.
Downstream will receive whatever seeds are dropped in the river upstream. Should one seed, floating downstream, find itself along the riverbank and take root, the bank has been changed — as it is changed continuously, with each new infusion of whatever the water carries downstream: soil, minerals, organic matter, and seeds.
The life cycle begins.
The seed germinates, stretching out its roots into the soil underneath, and pushing the new shoots of the plant body above ground. Each seed that takes root along the bank is an individual plant from a specific species, with an individual body, rooted in particular soil, surrounded by whatever other plants also took root in that specific location. The roots reach out, developing symbiotic relationships with mycorrhizal networks woven throughout the surrounding soil that transfer nutrients, news (messages or signals), chemicals, and carbon between plant roots and fungus. The body stretches its leaves outwards and upwards, encountering the light energy streaming down from the sun. The process of translating the light energy into chemical energy — photosynthesis — can vary considerably, depending on the organism. Yet, all photosynthesis involves an encounter with light, to which the organism responds.
Once the plant reaches the growth required to begin to reproduce, the buds for the flower structures (blossoms) open, and — whether through symbiotic relationships with pollinators, or through the action of wind and water — begin to release pollen into the environment. As the movement of pollen grains is difficult to predict, the act of pollination is not guaranteed — introducing an element of risk and dynamic indeterminacy into the act of reproduction. Once the blossom is pollinated, the fruit begins to form, which will carry the seeds: the hope of new life. The fruit is an energy-dense product of the tree’s interactions with every aspect of its environment, reflecting in its chemical makeup the composition of the soil, water, and air of the specific location where the tree is rooted. Fruit is designed to be portable, encouraging the seeds inside the fruit to spread far and wide, ensuring genetic variance and — hopefully — flourishing, with the seeds of the tree taking root across the watershed, thus beginning the life cycle all over again.
Each of these aspects of the plant’s life cycle connects the plant body to a series of ecological communities — or ecosystems — whose reach (and size) expands in ever-widening circles. In this way, every living thing in watershed ecosystems is bound up in an inextricable web of interdependence with everything else. I am — however remotely — connected to every tree, insect, blade of grass, and bird that lives in this vast region, in ways both quantifiable and ineffable. Each individual plant is unique and connected to the broader community.
Nothing can lay claim to being representative of the watershed as a whole: no piece of land, no watercourse, no source, no creature, no human, no city. The Delaware River watershed is everything that exists within its bounds, such that the forests of the Catskills Mountains are as much the watershed as are the Cooper River, the Delaware Bay, and me — living near the banks of the Cooper River, making my own contributions to the watershed, and being affected by it in turn. The watershed is also the web of relationships that exists between and among everything within the geographic boundaries of the watershed.
The abiotic (non-living) elements are the inherited traits and pre-existing factors which constitute the climate surrounding the tree, the soil within which it is rooted, and the processes of evolution which cause the ecosystem to continue to adapt to a dynamic world. For example, there’s a vast difference between the watersheds of the Delaware River and the Nile River — you need only look at satellite pictures of both watersheds to see that one is caught up in a complex bioregion of numerous watersheds butting against each other, while the other is a long, straight, green line through a massive desert. The climate and soils of each watershed frame what species are capable of thriving there.
In a similar way, a Quaker community is an interdependent community defined by adaptation to — and dependence upon — the continuous movement of the energy of Light through the community. Each individual Quaker experiences Light in their own specific — and unique — context, yet shares the universal experience of Light. This complex interplay of individuals experiencing Light moving through the cycle of their lives is the universal reality of the Quaker theological ecosystem, embedded also within the physical ecosystem and connected to the beings who share their physical (not only metaphorical) watershed. What is that life cycle?
The fundamental truth of Quaker theology — again, especially Liberal Quaker theology
Each individual Friend is thus rooted in a watershed ecosystem: a specific location, within a specific context of stories and concepts which give meaning and structure to the overall climate (soils, water, and air), and in turn shape the experience that each individual body (with all of its particularities and uniqueness) will have in that location. Each body interacts with this watershed ecosystem in different ways that evolve over its life cycle: from seed, to root, to body, to the growth of leaves and the subsequent infusion of light energy into the body, to the direct interaction each body has with its environment through the ecosystems which depend upon the body (both micro and macro — from the microbiomes that envelop each body’s root system to the flow of water and energy across an entire landscape). When the body has reached the point in its life cycle when it’s ready to begin the process of reproduction, it opens itself to others in the intimate interaction of pollination, from which emerges the fruit which protects and provides energy to new life, seeds rooting themselves in new locations, continuing the cycle of life born anew. Even the organism’s death contributes to the ecosystem through providing fertile ground for new growth.
In this way, Friends are also rooted in a theological watershed ecosystem: individual people rooted in specific contexts shaped by the underlying stories that dominate the experience of life in these specific locations (i.e., climate). Through the process of rooting and growing their bodies, Friends experience the Light, and begin to interpret its meaning through the mechanism of continuing revelation, one of the main leaves of the Quaker life cycle. When Friends have grown in their Quaker life, they begin the process of reproducing this experience of life through the intimate interaction of living lives directly alongside others, the messy exchange of ideas and energy and life that constitutes pollination in flowers, and is known as testimony. What emerges from this cycle of experiencing the Light and passing along that energy to others in the watershed is doctrine, the fruits of a life lived, and reflected upon, in light of interconnected relationship with others. Within these doctrines lies the light energy needed to take root (i.e., seeds), and which represent the hope of the future.
For example, is God an energy to be experienced, or are they a truth to be known?
Each individual person begins as a seed, which takes root in a specific location.
This perspective plays itself out through the five other elements. Just like the complex and innumerable interactions that combine to make the unique climate of a particular location, climate is the narrative context, the sum total of all background and foundational elements that ground the experience of Spirit in a cohesive and holistic story. Akin to a tree, our bodies root us in our experience of the world and give meaning to the diverse and unique ways that our bodies are shaped as we each listen — and respond — to the experience of engaging Spirit’s wisdom. Leaves are the location where we use specific processes and methods in the interpretation — and thus transformation — of the energy of Light’s Divine Revelation into resources we can use to exist, survive, and thrive. Flowers are the physical embodiment of our interactions with the world, with the blossom being the framework of practices and stories that inform and shape Quaker testimony, and pollen being the specific forms and expressions of testimony that can fertilize both our own lives and those we encounter when living into these particular testimonies. Finally, fruit is the bodies/beliefs/doctrines that emerge after our lives are fertilized by testimony and which can serve as mobile carriers of the seeds of Quaker hope, thus completing the circle.
These elements are in an inextricable relationship, therefore, in which each part informs each other in ways both systematic and seemingly random. The Quaker watershed ecosystem is thus a unique theological language, with specific, fundamental elements that form its basic building blocks but which nonetheless also offer the potential of infinite variety: akin to the four letters of genetic code or even the universe of potential inherent within the framework of the letters used in a language. Quakers feel free to play with these fundamentals, bringing them together in often surprising, creative, and complex ways. This language is marked by flexibility, creativity, and adaptation, and is thus highly dependent on metaphor, ambiguity, and even paradox.
The stories that serve as the climate and soil of our lives, the ones that are so pervasive that they are the literal bedrock upon which our understanding of the nature of reality is built, are the stories that we address in this chapter. These stories are powerful because they define what it means to be human, at its most fundamental. These are the stories that are so pervasive that they somehow disappear, where we do not realize their impact upon everything because they have extended their influence everywhere. The answers they give about the nature of human existence, the meaning and boundaries of the term and concept of person, the relationships among the individual, the communal, and the Divine: each, in turn, impacts the climate and soil of Liberal Quaker theology, and is impacted by them. In this sense, these stories are the landscape upon which society is built.
What it means to exist at a specific location in time and space is shaped by the conditions that underlie it: the climate is the combination of the stories Friends tell about reality in general and the soils of the communities — and their cultures — in which each Friend is individually rooted. The rivers that flow through a particular region represent different streams of tradition, such as whether a group believes all human beings are equal, or that people are fundamentally stratified in hierarchical relationships.
One example of the interplay of context, place, and theology that is central to the concept of climate is the impact that my own specific watershed — the Delaware River — has had on Quaker theological construction. In many ways, the Delaware Valley is seen as a heartland for Quakers. In 1681, King Charles II extended a land grant of a massive parcel of land along the western shore of the lower Delaware River to William Penn for the purpose of repaying a debt Charles owed to Penn’s father, Admiral William Penn. The king named it Pennsylvania (‘Penn’s Woods’) in honour of the Admiral, and the colony of Pennsylvania was born.
The period of Quaker control of Pennsylvania left indelible marks, from settlement patterns defined by Penn’s treaties with the Lenni Lenape people, to the culture — and laws — of religious tolerance which eventually expanded into a generally pluralistic culture of tolerance for cultural, religious, and ethnic diversity.
This ‘middle’ approach was reflected in the combination of Philadelphia as middle place geographically for the American colonies, and middle place culturally between the slave society of the South and Puritan New England. This specific geographical and cultural place led to the choice of Philadelphia as the location for the First and Second Continental Congresses, the capital of the United States until 1785, and the location of the drafting and ratification of the Constitution in 1789. Quakers provided the political and cultural ground for the development of the peculiarly American framework of the individual, and the literal ground upon which the foundational ideas of the new republic were developed.
Bodies are the specific forms people take — with all of the particularity and uniqueness inherent in being an individual — with which people experience the world. Bodies are the foundational narratives that address the story of reality at the level of social structures, and the ways those structures impact how Friends experience hearing the voice of God.
The variety of plants that take root along a watershed is akin to the various forms and shapes our bodies can take, and the ways that these forms respond to the environmental conditions present in the particular location. For example, if I take root in clay soil, but the form of my body thrives in sandy soil, I will be forced to adapt to my environment — the structures of my environment are not designed to serve me, creating a situation of unequal flourishing between me and other beings for whom the environment is either designed, or who can more easily adapt to these conditions. This is where the narratives of society meet the glorious diversity of human life: the ways that the presentation and form of our bodies intersect with the big narratives that define existence, the grand social constructs that many people share, but which each individual person is going to express and interact with differently. These include race, gender, sexuality, shape, aesthetics — amongst others. This is the first place where systemic injustice impacts certain bodies, and the narratives we attach to them.
One example of the impact of environment and context on a Quaker understanding of bodies and justice is the proto-ecotheological thought of John Woolman, who was himself rooted in the Delaware River watershed (he lived in what is now Mt. Holly, New Jersey). The roots of Woolman’s concern for the created order lay within his experience of the Divine present in both the beauty of the natural world around him, as well as his vision of the world as a complex, harmonious web of relationships upon which humanity depended, and which human beings disturbed at their peril.
Woolman consistently acknowledged the human capacity for cruelty, particularly toward creation, and insisted that people consider the consequences that rippled out from every human action. In this way, Woolman demonstrated an awareness of the structural nature of injustice, where something as simple as riding a horse involved an entire spiral of injustice: not just the harm done to the horses, who were often mistreated and overworked, but also to the stable hands — among whose number were often enslaved people.
Quaker theology is built upon metaphor as its central pillar, with the metaphor of ‘Light’ as a main way that Friends have expressed the experience of the Divine Presence within each person, across the history and breadth of the Religious Society of Friends.
Continuing revelation — the main interpretive approach (leaf) of Quakers — is born from the intersection of an emphasis on the continuous evolution of the human experience of the Divine, and an insistence that every person has the equal potential to experience the Divine. Leaves are where people first encounter — and attempt to interpret (make sense of) — the Divine Light. Leaves are the methods, processes, and structures Friends use to make meaning of their experience of the Divine Light within. Do Friends stress the experience of encountering Divine Light in Scripture — Christian or otherwise? Do they instead stress the ways their community has responded to these experiences in the past? As Friends place experience as the primary way that they encounter the Divine Light, they are inherently prioritising immediacy and change, because experience is irrevocably individual (no one else can experience what it means for a specific person to exist besides that specific person) and also continuously shifts and changes from moment to moment.
One example of the mechanism of leaves is the impact of Quaker theological flexibility on the variety of perspectives of Quaker Christology, particularly relating to the paradox of immanence/transcendence framing the dual nature of Jesus Christ. Liberal Quakers recognise the transcendence of God beyond creation as an inherent aspect of what could be considered divinity, yet due to their emphasis on the epistemological primacy of direct religious experience of the Divine, Liberal Quakers stress the immanence of God within the creation to a much greater degree. This stress on immanency colours their view of the Christian anthropological categories, causing them to place greater emphasis on anthropological theories of interdependence, immanence within the creation, and intimate love of the creation than on theories of the transcendence of the ‘wholly other’, distance from the creation, and stern judgement of human sinfulness.
I use the ecological metaphor of flowers to refer to the foundational elements of the Quaker concept of testimony, because testimony can be the framework that Quakers use to show their way of life to the world, as well as the necessary element to ensure that the Quaker tradition remains vital, reproduces, and flourishes — the desire of all life. The practical expression of this testimony involves any number of ethical and moral norms, including behaviour and (historically) outward appearance (hence, flowers); yet, the norms are still understood to be aspects of an overall testimony of the person’s alignment with the will of God for the building up of the eschatological kin-dom of God.
Quakers express a significant concern for balancing theology and ethics, where the human interdependence with the Divine is expressed in the embodied theology of testimony. Testimony is the human acknowledgement of, and response to, the interdependent relationship between humanity and the Divine.
Continuous discernment must occur to identify specific ways of living out the wider Quaker testimony in one’s context. This ensures that Quaker embodied theology reflects the continuing revelation of God’s voice to humanity: as the Divine is continuously revealing their voice to the world, Quakers insist on remaining open to adapting all aspects of their theology — including and especially their testimony — in light of this continuous movement.
What this specifically means, in terms of Quaker testimony, is that Quakers must remain open to the emergence of new aspects of testimony — or, new flowers budding on the plant, and thus new avenues for engaging in the intimate work of living truthfully with others. This is itself a form of beauty: where beauty is that which is most true, lived in a way that is most true. This requires both individual and corporate discernment: while no
If the call to accept a new expression of testimony is borne out through this entire process of reproduction (communal discernment in worship, informed by the gathered wisdom of the broader Quaker testimony that has developed both within that community, and in the wider community of Quakers), it is then incorporated into Quaker testimony. Quaker ethical theory is thus robust, central to framing Quaker discernment about how to live, and is vital to reproducing new life that will itself channel the energy of the Light out into the watershed ecosystems within which each Quaker lives and is rooted.
Interpretation and doctrine have an interdependent relationship in theology generally, but especially in the Quaker theological tradition: how one interprets one’s experience of the Divine impacts the teachings/doctrine that will emerge. Quakers have specific teachings central to the tradition; therefore, Quakers have doctrine. As the Liberal Quaker tradition has a particularly marked scepticism of the concretising of Quaker belief into any permanent form (such as a creed or dogma), Quaker theology explores definitions of doctrine which permit Quaker belief to be definable, but to also be flexible and dynamic — like fruit, which is meant to be consumed while alive, and which helps continue the cycle of Light energy across the life cycle of the individual Friend through the Light energy present in the densely-packed fruit structure.
Doctrines (or teachings) are the portable ideas and concepts that emerge from a life cycle framed by the movement of Light energy: the seed taking root, growing a body, responding to the environment, experiencing Light energy (in worship as well as through the interactions with others in our daily lives) and interpreting its meaning through specific mechanisms, growing tall through the energy gained through continuous infusion of Light, and interacting with the world through the reproductive intimacy of flowers — where lives are ‘pollinated’ by direct engagement in the lives of others through the beautiful structures of life known as testimony. As each person gains wisdom as they grow, and learn about the Light from both the Divine and others around them, Friends produce teachings that can be shared with others, and which carry within them all that is necessary for new life to take form in new people. As these would be the ‘products’ of the theological ecosystem, and as such would be the most ‘portable’ aspects of this process, Quaker doctrine is framed using the metaphor of fruit.
The Quaker tradition centres itself within the broad theological span present between the two arguably central Quaker doctrines: 1) there is ‘that of God’, the Divine Presence, within all, and 2) Friends must ‘let their life speak’ to this truth through their actions. In other words, the Divine exists in all humans, and that presence demands a response expressed through human actions. These statements all speak to a specific understanding of God, of the purpose of humanity, and of the kind of life which inexorably emerges from these foundational theological statements. Akin to the Peace Testimony, which has weight due to its consistency throughout Quaker history, the doctrine of ‘that of God’ has weight due to the consistency with which Quakers have confirmed their experience of this doctrine since the beginning of the movement.
For one, as that of God is understood to be present within us, it involves an intensely intimate interdependence between creation and the Divine, demanding a vision of the Divine that transcends boundaries, while also being immanently present and alive. Take the implication to its logical conclusion, and you have the Divine fully present in every atom, and every subatomic particle, down to the electrons that carry the energy of life, and the particles that are the foundation of matter.
The other implication of ‘that of God’ is the incarnation of the Divine in actual people, and the ways that those people respond to that presence. This includes the Christian doctrine of Jesus as Incarnation, and the implications of the historical witness of Jesus the human on our understanding of the Divine as
Seeds are the vessels which carry the hope of a future — new life — so seeds are also the ways that Quakers carry the central aspects of the Friends tradition into the future. The metaphor of seeds is essential because communities must recognise that time itself is in flux, an ‘already/not yet’ paradox where the seeds of the future live within the soil of the past and the branches and trunks of the present. This is where the metaphor of seeds is so valuable, because within these tiny nuggets, wrapped in carapaces and shells, is everything that is needed for new life. These seeds provide a framework for planting core theological constructs — and of course our theological method — into existing Quaker communities, thus renewing them with new life. These seeds also hold the potential of being planted into new communities which may not even be born yet, and which could use this theological model as a framework for developing their own beliefs and practices. This reflects traditional Quaker use of ‘seed’ as a metaphor for the existence of the Divine within the person, waiting to be ‘planted’ within the person’s soul.
The Quaker theological approach of seeds exists in the same space as hope: aware of the immanent presence of profound change, always happening now, yet offering hope for a future, as seeds are small pieces of the future, held in a continuous stasis state of potential life (potentially for years), carried around by wind and water and creatures and fire until it is ready to open itself to the hope that is planting: being rooted in specific soil, with the vulnerability to change inherent in being stuck somewhere specific. Seeds carry the promise of a future. Apocalypse, in Greek, simply means ‘revealing’ (or ‘revelation’) a future reality — it needn’t inherently mean the end of the world. Thus, seeds offer hope for a future in the face of the uncertainty and vulnerability of being alive. Seeds, for Quakers, is therefore an eschatology of hope: both tied together, with neither speaking without the other responding.
This article situates Quaker theology within the broader Christian theological tradition through demonstrating the effectiveness of examining these interwoven elements of Quaker theology through the framework of the synthetic model of contextual theology. The central theological idea presented here is that the foundational elements of Quaker theological method work together as a community, all contributing their own perspective to the experience of engaging theologically in the world as a Quaker, in an infinitely complex interweaving of relationships and encounters between every element. Each element of the watershed ecosystem metaphor also represents an overarching theological category within which it exists. The central metaphor of watershed ecosystem is a new description of Quaker theology that seeks to meet the current moment of climate crisis, which also fits within the stream of Quaker theological tradition.
This essay is adapted from my keynote address at the ‘Friendly Witness: The Spiritual Ground of Quaker Social Action’ conference, held at Boston University and Beacon Hill Friends House (Boston, MA) on 19 April 2023.
Grant, R.,
Punshon, J., ‘The End of (Quaker) History? Some Reflections on the Process’, in Pink Dandelion, B., (ed.),
Daniels, C. W. and Grant, R., ‘Introduction’, in
Angell, S. W., ‘God, Christ, and the Light’, in Angell, S. W. and Pink Dandelion, B., (eds.),
Mellor, K., ‘The Question of Christianity’, in Pink Dandelion, B. and Collins, P., (eds.),
Spencer, C. D., ‘Quakers in Theological Context’, in
Burdick, T. and Pink Dandelion, B., ‘Global Quakerism: 1920–2015’, in Angell, S. W. and Pink Dandelion, B., (eds.),
Kennedy, M. H., Irish
Pink Dandelion, B., ‘Conclusion: The Nature of Quaker Studies’, in Pink Dandelion, B., (ed.),
Muers, R.,
Randazzo, C.,
David Tracy argues that constructive theology can be informed by critical theory, which in turn connects contextual theology as a type of constructive theology. See Tracy, D., ‘Theological Method’, in Hodgson, P. C. and King, R.H., (eds.),
Bevans, S. B.,
Cone, J.,
Kärkkäinen, V.,
Kärkkäinen, V.,
Kliever, L. D., ‘Experience-Religious’, in Musser, D. W. and Price, J. L., (eds.),
Shults, F. L.,
Kärkkäinen, V.,
Bevans, S. B.,
Horrel, D. G., ‘Appeals to the Bible in Ecotheology and Environmental Ethics’,
Daniels, C. W.,
Bock, C. and Randazzo, C.,
This is a core tenet of Liberal Quakerism. It is stated as such in the first passage in
Gorman, G. H.,
Alex Wildwood represents an expression of this perspective which is non-Christian: ‘I felt I was finally beginning to square the circle, to bring what I had experienced in diverse other places and forms: experiences of the Spirit in spontaneous rituals, in seasonal circles, in being real with one another and in simple acts of human kindness – with the faith and practice of the Quaker-Christian community which I had felt led amongst. For Hicks was pointing to an experience central to Quaker faith: not a
Priestland, G.,
Thompson, S. P.,
Scott, R. C.,
Muers, R.,
Bevans, S. B.,
Daniels, C. W.,
Daniels, C. W.,
Randazzo, C.,
Grant, R.,
Scully, J. L., ‘Virtuous Friends: Morality and Quaker Identity’, in Pink Dandelion, B. and Collins, P., (eds.),
Deane-Drummond, C.,
Bock, C. and Randazzo, C.,
Central and Southern Africa Yearly Meeting,
Battle, M.,
Bonhoeffer, D., Kelly, G. B., and Nelson, F.B.,
Tutu, D.,
Bock, C. and Randazzo, C.,
Myers, C., (ed.),
This includes such thinkers as Jane Jacobs, Lewis Mumford, W.E.B. DuBois, Frederick Law Olmsted, Le Corbusier, and David Harvey. See LeGates, R. T. and Stout, F., (eds.),
Kevin Lynch’s
Notable recent works include Day, K. and Edwards, E. M., (eds.),
Bailey, A. R. and Bryson, J. R., ‘A Quaker Experiment in Town Planning: George Cadbury and the Construction of Bournville Model Village’,
Abbott, M. P. and Abbott, C., ‘Redefining Quaker Simplicity: The Friends Committee on National Legislation Building, 2005’,
Randazzo, C., ‘A Quaker Theology of the City: Placing Quaker Testimony, Ecotheology, and “place” in Conversation’, in
Bock, C. and Randazzo, C.,
National Ocean Service, ‘What is a Watershed?’, accessed 20 June 2024,
American Rivers, ‘Delaware River’, accessed 20 June 2024,
Randazzo, C.,
Bock, C. and Randazzo, C.,
Randazzo, C., ‘“The Divine Light of Creation”: Liberal Quaker Metaphors of Divine/Creation Interdependence’, in Bock, C. and Potthoff, S., (eds.),
Randazzo, C.,
Randazzo, C., ‘Christian AND Universalist?: Charting Liberal Quaker Theological Developments through the Swarthmore Lectures’,
Randazzo, C., ‘Non-Theism’, in Angell, S. W. and Pink Dandelion, B., (eds.),
Randazzo, C. and Russell, D., ‘The Inner Light and the Light of God: Islamic and Quaker Mysticism in Dialogue’, in Kershner, J., (ed.),
Gwyn, D.,
Randazzo, C., ‘Liberal Quaker Pneumatology’, in Daniels, W. and Grant, R., (eds.),
Woodard, C.,
Woodard, C.,
Pink Dandelion, B., ‘The Layered Theoscape of Philadelphia: The Quaker Experiment as a Religious Crucible’, in Nelson, E. and Wright, J., (eds.),
Murphy, A. R., Liberty
Randazzo, C.,
Heller, M., ‘John Woolman’s Environmental Consciousness’, in Bock, C. and Pothoff, S., (eds.),
Kershner, J. R.,
Woolman, J., ‘Some Considerations on the Keeping of Negroes’, in Moulton, P., (ed.),
I must note that this is not unique to Quakers: the metaphor of Light appears numerous times in both the Jewish and Christian Scriptures. A variety of Christian thinkers and mystics from every corner of the Christian theological universe (including and especially Friends) have experienced, and described their understanding of — and encounters with — the Divine using imagery of Light, and Light continues to serve as an accessible way of understanding the Divine Presence for Christians in the present day. SeeAngell, S., ‘God, Christ, and the Light’, p. 171.
Bock, C. and Randazzo, C.,
Brown, A. B.,
Silcock, H. T.,
Randazzo, C.,
Gwyn, D.,
Muers, R.,
Boswell, M., ‘Loving “That of God”: Participatory Love and the Quaker Way,’ in Daniels, W. and Grant, R., (eds.),
Angell, S. W., ‘God, Christ, and the Light’, in Angell, S. W. and Pink Dandelion, B., (eds.),
Jurgen Moltmann’s ideas about hope as eschatology has been deeply influential in this framing of seeds as eschatological hope. See Moltmann, J.,
The author has no competing interests to declare.