Here's one example from Susanne K:
1. Is there something about Quaker theology that makes it more appealing to the kind of people who get college degrees? Is there something about Quaker theology that makes it unappealing to the kind of people who don’t get college degrees? If so, why?
2. Or is it something about current liberal Quaker culture? If so, why?
3. Or is it something to do with current liberal Quaker practice? If so, why?
4. Or do you think it is just a coincidence? If so, why?
5. Optional: Are you a college graduate? Do/es one or both of your parents have a college degree?
Question 1: No. No. No. No. I was working class (a third shift worker in fact) when I first came to Meeting. I didn't have a college degree. I was living paycheck-to-paycheck in a tiny three-room apartment (one room, the room I used as a bedroom, was unheated). And yet, waiting worship and continuing revelation spoke to me. I felt I could get closer to God at Meeting than I could anywhere else; and I'd been a seeker for over ten years before I found Friends.
Quakerism spoke to Joe Franko, who grew up poor. It spoke to George Lakey, who grew up working class. The fact is, George Fox and almost all of the early Quaker adherents were poor. The theology spoke to them.
So there is no theological or practical block to Quakerism because of your class background or income.
Question 2: See my blog.
Question 3: See my answer to Question 1.
Questions 1-5: Does anyone else get the feeling they're being tested? Maybe it's only me because I've never tested well.
The questions really should be: What is it about liberal Quaker culture is keeping poor and working class people away? AND how do we change that culture? (Not SHOULD we)
I don't mean to be picking on Susanne. Recently, The Friendly Funnel asked a similar question (and got some similar responses).
I also don't mean to say they shouldn't have asked their questions. Perhaps now, though, when my readers hear another Friend ask that similar questions, they will let the person know that their questions have bias, and perhaps show them their mistaken assumptions. I know when I see questions like this again in the Quaker blogosphere, my comment will be a link this post.