QuakerInfo.com Forum

Pulpculture · Joined: 28 Apr 2003 Posts: 564 Location: England

For me the spirit talks to me everywhere and not just at 10:30 on a Sunday. If I was moved by something during the week and it affected me then I can't see what's wrong with sharing it (if it has a purpose). Some Friends have ministered poems from a card that have touched me to this day. I occasionally attend anohter meeting and there is a old and very wise Friend who ministers at least twice every week. Each to his/ her own I guess. I haven't been to a meeting yet where ministering has become a serious issue but I am sure it happens. The second meeting I refer to has a gentleman that has an annoying coat that continuously rustles throughout the meeting and he has various OCD's that mean he doesn't stop moving. I find I can't concentrate at all because his coat is permanently ministering to me. That said I get huge satisfaction that another friend has brought him along as he doesn't get out of his house hardly at all. I find comfort that he is in a place he enjoys and feels comfortable.
_________________
.

I said don't forget Burma!

Anthony · Joined: 30 Jun 2004 Posts: 1542

I have felt exercised by what I have considered inappropriate ministry inasmuch as feeling uncomfortable because I felt guilty for considering it inappropriate in the first place. Occasionally, someone will minister from notes that have been prepared before Meeting because the person ministering had considered the 'message' had inspired them during the week, so it may inspire us during Meeting for Worship. I find this doesn't work; I have felt the preparedness of such ministry and its lack of spontaneity and leading from communion with the Inner Light arising from a gathered Meeting for Worship. We may feel inspired outside of Meeting but the true value of Quaker ministry is surely what arises during Meeting. At most, I could accept that key words may be helpful but surely the ministry itself must come from the heart and not notes.

I quite like the the 'annoying coat' and how Matt translates it into a coat that is 'permanently ministering' to him - such coats are not uncommon. In particular, I find 'ministering books' to be a source of distraction and I can get irritated by those who choose to read for long periods throughout Meeting without the slightest awareness of how distracting the noise of their turning pages may be to others, particularly to those who are not deaf. Interestingly, I have noted that I don't become distracted or irritated by noise that is unavoidable but only by noise that is unnecessary and easily avoided.

I have considered how much my distractions, irritations or judgements shows me that I am not approaching this from the Light of Understand but rather from self interest. Do I go to Meeting simply for my own benefit or to enable and join with others to ensure a gathered Meeting? In other words, are not those with rustling coats and pages offering me an opportunity to be more patient and enabling, whilst they are left in peace to rustle and read and thus get the best out of Meeting for themselves? I am not at Meeting for Worship just myself - am I? Shocked

A silent ministry of patience is perhaps what I am being asked to contribute - but it can be a challenge Embarassed

In the Life
My piece was pat and all ready to say,
She rose first. I threw my piece away.
My well-turned stuff
Was not so rough
As hers, but easy elegant and smooth.
Beginning middle-end
It had and point
And aptly quoted prophet priest and poet.
Hers was uncouth
Wanting in art
Laboured scarce - audible and out of joint.
Three times she lost the thread
And sitting left her message half unsaid.
'Why then did thee throw it
Into the discard?'
Friend,
It had head
(Like this). Hers oh had heart,

(Robert Hewison 1965. Quaker Faith and Practice. UK. 2.64)

kevin roberts · Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 4:15 pm Post subject:

james · Joined: 11 Jun 2004 Posts: 1108 Location: Minneapolis

In general I lean the same way as Shay and others. I have a great preference for messages that seem to be spontaneous and where the speaker seems not to have known he or she was going to speak. I have sometimes been quite moved by messages of great depth and feeling but unseemly shape, where the speaker had to struggle to get out something out that just had to get out, but was challenged finding the words to express it. I even recall a time when a Friend rose to speak and got so tangled by the language she couldn't get through it or clearly get the idea out, and had to surrender and sit down again. It was a very powerful moment for all of us, and I never learned quite what the matter of the message might have been. I guess it turned out to be about the tenderness of human imperfection.

At the same time I wouldn't propose it as a hard and fast rule; if something occurs to one during the week, or reads an inspiring passage that seizes one with a power that cannot be denied, I don't think the fact that it didn't emerge out of nowhere during the hour of worship should automatically exclude it from verbal ministry.

Occasionally myself I feel the germ of a ministry rise during worship, insufficient for delivering but with a sense, I'm going to have to deliver this at some point. Weeks or months can pass with it simmering in the back of my brain, until it finds a shape and boils over and I must speak. It's neither entirely planned nor unplanned, but I do feel I'm not really in control of the process--that is part of what tells me it is genuine.
_________________
James Riemermann
www.nontheistfriends.org
www.liberalquakers.org

kevin roberts · Posted: Sat May 29, 2010 12:24 pm Post subject:

michaeldavidjay · Joined: 21 Dec 2006 Posts: 452

I appreciate quietism -- but some of this thread is foreign to me... I would be seriously eldered if I gave spoken ministry without preparation at my 'home meeting'.

--post scipt--

By appreciate -- I mean... I think that we made a mistake when we associated abuse with Quietism. the reactionary rejection of quietism in my YM caused us to lose much of the genius of Quakerism -- Quietism is about submission to God -- our rejection of Quietism allowed us to glorify the work of man... I think this was a grave mistake.
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?

Anthony · Joined: 30 Jun 2004 Posts: 1542

michaeldavidjay · Joined: 21 Dec 2006 Posts: 452

Oops I wrote that badly.

At my home meeting, I would be eldered if I gave unprepared vocal ministry. If my vocal ministry was dis-unified... or my speech was disjointed -- if I seemed to be speaking without knowing the direction of my speech. (I could not say a line -- wait 4 seconds, then say the next line -- it would not be appreciated... it also would not be appreciated if I did not start knowing the conclusion... they expect 'sermons'.)
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?

james · Joined: 11 Jun 2004 Posts: 1108 Location: Minneapolis

michaeldavidjay · Joined: 21 Dec 2006 Posts: 452

I think of Quietism as John Woolman's and Elias Hick's Quakerism -- a view that people should submit to God, and be careful about doing anything without God's help... to wait and be sure. I think abuses happened... but I don't think its because of the core values of Quietism -- I think its more about a combination of judgmental attitudes and laziness. Those problems are still there when changing philosophies.
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?

james · Joined: 11 Jun 2004 Posts: 1108 Location: Minneapolis

OK, I think I know what you mean now. The vast majority of Friends I know would agree with that view, but would never describe themselves as quietists. (Myself, I think every decision we make is purely human, but I'm not a very representative Quaker.)
_________________
James Riemermann
www.nontheistfriends.org
www.liberalquakers.org

michaeldavidjay · Joined: 21 Dec 2006 Posts: 452

I take that view -- because many of the more 'evangelical' friends do not follow these views -- in day to day practice... and de-emphasize them in theory -- often wanting to prove God's right calling by 'success'. (added) If spoken ministry is not... good preaching -- it is unworthy of God et c. We were much inflluenced by methodists
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?

james · Joined: 11 Jun 2004 Posts: 1108 Location: Minneapolis

Thinking about my last few messages I can't help but wonder, is there a contradiction in my views? If I think all our inspiration is human, none of it from God, why would I have a preference for messages where I feel the speaker is not entirely in control of the process?

I guess I'd say, I believe in the unconscious, and that human beings do much of our most productive thinking and feeling below the surface of the mind, taking into consideration perceptions and processes that are hard or even impossible to pin down rationally. The world of art, certainly, depends on a sensitivity to images, impulses, phrases, melodies, rhythms, whose power cannot be explained, only experienced. This is as true of the making of art, as it is of the enjoyment of art.

Not only art, but any act of creation--a new scientific or technological understanding--often floats up unbidden from below the surface of everyday awareness. Likewise a mature moral sense requires a sensitivity to feelings, senses, impulses (the inner light?)--that are not entirely rational, at least not at first glance.

This sensitivity to the unconscious can easily be swamped by the minutia of everyday life, so we can easily lose track of it if we don't take care to nurture it, to build a quiet place where it can thrive.

Unlike some, perhaps, I think that anything that rises from this mysterious place must then be subjected to all the rational testing we can bring to bear. Then at some point, when we've considered it deeply and carefully, we make a decision according to everything we've considered. The fact that a leading initially "feels right" is a good start, but it isn't enough. True in art, true in science, true in morality, true in religion. Or at least it should be true.
_________________
James Riemermann
www.nontheistfriends.org
www.liberalquakers.org

michaeldavidjay · Joined: 21 Dec 2006 Posts: 452

personally, I would like to see more freedom... I have found value in the wholely silent meeting, and with a range of spoken ministry, from lectures to those who spoke while overwhelmed with emotion. It is odd, for me, that a discpline expected of me is named anathama.
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?