Convergent or Divergent -- Where Are Quakers Going?

Nancy and I attended a meeting last evening with about 60 other Friends from three yearly meetings to discuss the desire of forming an association of progressive Friends. Reflecting on that meeting today, I came to the conclusion, based on what I heard last night, my work as a congregational consultant, and my heart, that perhaps – and it’s just my opinion – that much of what I would hope from such a group is underway in the convergent Friends movement.

The convergent Friends movement is, it seems to me, the Quaker version of the emergent church movement – a group, according to their own words, “is a growing, generative friendship among missional Christians seeking to love our world in the Spirit of Jesus Christ.” (Emergent Village). They also say that they are about

“Growing”: which indicates our desire to develop as the dreams of God for the healing, redemption, and reconciliation of the world develop.
“Generative”: which means that we expect our friendship to generate new ideas, connections, opportunities, and works of beauty.
“Friendship”: Because we firmly hold that living in reconciled friendship trumps traditional orthodoxies – indeed, orthodoxy requires reconciliation as a prerequisite.
“Missional”: Because we believe that the call of the gospel is an outward, apostolic call into the world.

Why I think the convergent Friends movement has much to offer is that it embraces the above all within the context of the rich diversity of Quaker faith and practice. I like the idea behind the word “convergent” – one definition of which is ”tending to come together from different directions.” I am concerned that there be places for theological hospitality and deep discussion about Friends testimonies and their applicability in today’s world. I don’t think that developing another group of “like-minded” Friends is going to be very helpful to us. That would seem to me to be “divergent.” I know what I cherish are rich times of worship across “lines.” What feeds my soul is when whatever dialogue growing out of that worship is done with respect and caring – me listening and learning from my Evangelical brothers and sisters, my more mystical brothers and sisters, my liberal brothers and sisters and letting Christ teach me through all of them.

I don’t think convergent Friends is the final answer for all Friends in all circumstances. But I do think it has a lot to offer to those of us inside Friends who long for places of deep spiritual engagement (and all that means) and those outside of Friends who hear about us and wonder where to connect with a people who seek to be known as the Friends of God in an open and welcoming way.

--Brent

PS Robin Mohr, a blogger at What Canst Thou Say and a Friend from San Francisco, is organizing a dinner in Indiana on April 6 for anybody interested in convergent Friends. It will be at Ploughshares Farm (Nancy’s and my home) that evening. You can read more about it and sign up to attend at http://robinmsf.blogspot.com/2008/01/convergent-friends-dinner-in-indiana.html If you're itnerested, please visit Robin's blog and sign up to attend.

Betty Butterfield, Quaker Worship, & Our Theological Hospitality

O wad some Power the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
from -- "To A Louse: On Seeing One On A Lady's Bonnet, At Church"
Robert Burns, 1786

As I posted on my other blog (holyordinary.blogspot.com), I was reminded of that thought by Burns recently after receiving an email from my friend Keith. Now Keith is not his real name -- even though that's what I call him, even to his wife -- and for purposes of this post it's probably best I don't use his real name. That's because Keith is highly respected in the religious community of our fair city and I'd hate to do anything that might harm that reputation.

But he is sort of a smart-aleck and knows that I am, so sent me a link to the video that follows -- the religious adventures of Betty Butterefield. Betty is on a search for the right church, and as Keith told me via the miracle of email, she visited the Quakers.

The posting on my other blog has generated some thinking that I want to share on this one, because of it's emphasis on Friends and our witness and worship. And one thing is that Betty describes the group as looking like an AA meeting -- adults sitting in a circle and being quiet. She wants to "break the ice" and so stands up and says, "Hi, I'm Betty and I'm an alcoholic."

It made me wonder how many other folks have visited Friends and wondered if somebody had forgotten their part of the program? Do we do anything to help people know what to expect? Should we? If so, what. A little pamphlet on silence and worship hardly seems like enough -- and yet what would be enough? How welcoming are we -- really -- to the Bettys who wander into our midst?

Betty, talking about Quakers during her discourse on visiting the Unitarians, helped, in spite (or maybe because) of her satire, to see ourselves as others see us.
--Brent
PS Yes, I know I said I wasn't going to blog here anymore, but I just couldn't help myself.

A Caroling We Go

The Friends In Fellowship blog will most likely not make it into the new year. But the Friends In Fellowship Group will continue to meet every other week at Ploughshares Farm in Mooresville, IN at 6:30 in the evening.

On December 23, the last meeting night of 2007, the group's leading was to gather as usual, but instead of our usual long silences and intentional conversation, to begin with silence and break into song. Christmas songs, to be exact. Carols will be the theme of the evening -- along with cookies for the young (and young at heart) to decorate and egg nog to savor. If you live in Indiana (or just feel like driving!), come and bring a request for your favorite Christmas carol. No singing ability needed -- just the desire to make a joyful noise with other like-hearted folks.

Pastoral Candidates

I think I've found the reason Friends are having such a leadership problem. This was forwarded to me by a Ministry and Counsel member who wished, for obvious reasons, to be remain anonymous.

The following is a confidential report on several candidates being considered for a pastorate.

Adam: Good man but problems with his wife. Also one reference told of how his wife and he enjoy walking nude in the woods.

Noah: Former pastorate of 120 years with not even one convert. Prone to unrealistic building projects.

Abraham: Though the references reported wife-swapping, the facts seem to show he never slept with another man's wife, but did offer to share his own wife with another man.

Joseph: A big thinker, but a braggart, believes in dream-interpreting, and has a prison record.

Moses: A modest and meek man, but poor communicator, even stuttering at times. Sometimes blows his stack and acts rashly. Some say he left an earlier church over a murder charge.

David: The most promising leader of all until we discovered the affair he had with his neighbor's wife.

Solomon: Great preacher but our parsonage would never hold all those wives.

Elijah: Prone to depression. Collapses under pressure.

Elisha: Reported to have lived with a single widow while at his former church.

Hosea: A tender and loving pastor but our people could never handle his wife's occupation.

Jeremiah: Emotionally unstable, alarmist, negative, always lamenting things, reported to have taken a long trip to bury his underwear on the bank of a foreign river.

Isaiah: On the fringe? Claims to have seen angels in church. Has trouble with his language.

Jonah: Refused God's call into ministry until he was forced to obey by getting swallowed up by a great fish. He told us the fish later spit him out on the shore near here. We hung up.

Amos: Too backward and unpolished. With some seminary training he might have promise, but has a hang-up against wealthy people—might fit in better in a poor congregation.

Melchizedek: Great credentials at current work place, but where does this guy come from? No information on his resume about former work records. Every line about parents was left blank and he refused to supply a birth date. (This aside from Les: Ancient Jewish tradition has it that Melchizedek is really Shem. If you check out the lifespan of Shem in the Bible, it seems to be true!)

John: Says he is a Baptist, but definitely doesn't dress like one. Has slept in the outdoors for months on end, has a weird diet, and provokes denominational leaders.

Peter: Too blue collar. Has a bad temper-even has been known to curse. Had a big run-in with Paul in Antioch. Aggressive, but a loose cannon.

Paul: Powerful CEO type leader and fascinating preacher. However, short on tact, unforgiving with younger ministers, harsh and has been known to preach all night.

James & John: Package deal preacher & associate seemed good at first, but found out they have an ego problem regarding other fellow workers and seating positions. Threatened an entire town after an insult. Also known to try to discourage workers who didn't follow along with them.

Timothy: Too young!

Methuselah: Too old . . . WAY too old!

Jesus: Has had popular times, but once his church grew to 5000 he managed to offend them all, and then this church dwindled down to twelve people. Seldom stays in one place very long. And, of course, he's single -- at his age, you have to wonder why.

Judas: His references are solid. A steady plodder. Conservative. Good connections. Knows how to handle money. We're inviting him to preach this Sunday. Possibilities here!

God's Radiant Love

If we are to be a church of radiant love, where do we start? How do we become such a people?

The first step begins with the realization that we are the children of a God of radiant love. We all know that God is love, but we tend to forget how overwhelming that love is.

The season of advent, not celebrated by us non-liturgical Quakers, is upon us. The idea behind it, though, illustrates the radiance of God’s love in a way that nothing else does. This is no passive expression. This is God entering into relationship with us in a way that is almost incomprehensible. The mystery of the incarnation is of Jesus’ bringing us God’s love wrapped in the familiar packaging of a human body.

God constantly reaches out to us. Besides coming in Jesus, He shows it every day by the kindness of our fellow travelers, the unexpected little graces that come into our lives in the midst of the various mists we may find ourselves fumbling about in. Through it all, always faithful, ever-present, often unrecognized, is God’s abiding love. The tears of our loving heavenly parent mix with our own, whether they be tears of happiness or grief or despair.

Recognition of that fact, that we are always clasped in the embrace of a God of radiant love, is the first step on becoming a church, a people, of radiant love.

--Brent

Peace, Peace, Peace, or ...

Last night, at the Friends in Fellowship worship group, the topic of the intentional (though unplanned) conversation was the Friends peace testimony. It arose out of the observation that yesterday was Veteran's/Armistice/Remembrance Day (depending on where you live). A day that was the original armistice day of the Great War -- the war to end all wars. Which, as is obvious, it didn't.

So we talked about whether or not the peace testimony had any efficacy, was worth pursuing, was a leading from the Lord, came from inside us, was futile, was needed, would end war, would allow war to continue, and myriad other things. It was a deep and wide ranging spiritual conversation -- with each person speaking from his or her heart. And finally, that's what we came down to -- it has to do with the heart, not the head.

Rational, logical, and theological explanations can be made for the Peace Testimony. But if we adopt it in our hearts and then speak it to the hearts of others, will it have any chance of working. Because, for all the logical reasons behind it, violence does sometimes seem to work very efficiently and with a minimal amount of time invested. Yet, we all recognize that while it may seem to work quickly and effectively, it's effects are rarely easily calculated and the seeds it sows often spring to the surface long after we think they should.

So, heart speaking to heart, faith speaking to faith, being obedient to the call of Christ in our hearts, seemed to us to be the only basis for peace in our -- or any -- time.
-- Brent

A Mission Statement?

One day while preparing for a United Way meeting, I looked over the agenda. There at the bottom was a mission statement. It set me to wondering what kind of mission statement should Friends have?

Ephesians 4:1-16 gives what I believe it should be. In it, Paul gives wise instruction to the church at Ephesus – and us. He urges us to find unity in our diversity of gifts. “If you are one in the Spirit of God,” he seems to say, “you will inevitably be at peace with one another. And in doing so you will grow into full maturity in love.”

One of my favorite fiction writers is the Catholic priest Andrew Greeley. One of his books is about the election of a pope (too bad the recent real election of the Pope didn't end the way Greeley's book did -- but that's another blog!). In his novel, one of the cardinals gives a speech in which he says,
“...we are a Church of love. Our message from the Lord Himself even today is the message that God is love and that we are those who are trying, however badly, to reflect that love in the world…. Important for us today … is the affirmation that we exist to preach a God of love, we try to be a people of love and we want our Church to be, insofar as we poor humans can make it, a Church of radiant love. Does such a Church have a future? How could it not?”

That should be our mission -- to grow in love with each other and God while sharing the gifts that God has given us with our fellow Friends and the wider world.

Would the Friends church then have a future?

How could it not?
-- Brent