Reply #50: An interesting question I have pondered

[quaker bill]

You are generally correct. Friend's concern for humility and understanding that each of us, at best, only possesses a small fraction of the truth, generally prevents us from "prosletizing", at least in the typical sense. In a religious sense, we do not seek personal credit for doing "god's work". In that we ascribe to very little that might be termed "religious dogma" there is also very little to "shove down people's throats".

All of this tends to cause us to do things in a more or less anonymous way. In fact, most of the grants my Meeting makes are anonymous.

Quakers have not always been this quiet. Liberalism has a long tradition based in moral values which are consistent with the Christian message as we understand it. Perhaps it is time again for Friends and other like minded Christians speak their convictions more freely.

To betray a Quaker perspective, in my work for social justice, I have certainly run into fundies who are as you describe. On the other hand I have certainly run into many who have no ulterior motives. I tend to try to meet people where I find them. This is best facilitated by not bearing stereotypes.