What I Would Have Said in Meeting for Worship Today

... if it had gone on a little longer. (Or perhaps if I had been a little braver, or "faster," or perhaps the experience wasn't meant for that Meeting, but for me. Or for this blog?)

So there I was visiting Providence Meeting, reasonably centered, in a reasonably centered meeting in which two or three people had spoken already, when apropos of nothing, I started thinking about the offices of Christ. The thought was one of those little pop-up thoughts one has in unprogrammed meeting for worship (that is, I have them and I hear others do too), where I think, "oh, I could speak about that" but the very thinking of that second thought shows that the first idea isn't (at least not yet) so much a message for the group --the Spirit speaking through me-- as an idea I had -- my ego wanting to do something. Well, I toyed for a moment with what I would say --there were four main offices that I could remember: priest, ruler, prophet, teacher/counselor; that usually popular Christian theology in the U.S. focuses on the office of priest, dwelling on the atonement, the blood, the sacrifice, all that stuff I have such a hard time with; while liberal Friends might perhaps be more interested in the other offices.

Then I got amused by how I might be misunderstood if a listener in the meeting wasn't familiar with the use of the word office to mean "job" or "function" or "capability," and instead might imagine Jesus in his office, doing paperwork. I phrased a joke in my mind: "Mr. Christ, please call your office..." Then the phone rang. In the meetinghouse. Behind my right shoulder. (I thought it was a cell phone, but it turned out later that they have a phone in another room divided from the meetingroom by only a shutter.)

So I was left with a question: which office of Christ is a Friends' meetinghouse?

It's probably the one where he exercises his teaching capabilities; wasn't it Fox who said, "Christ is come to teach his people himself"? And then, if a meeting for business is being held in a rightly ordered way, I suppose it would be held in the office where he's the ruler. (Does Jesus use inches or centimeters on his office rulers? Sorry...)

I was first introduced to the usefulness of thinking about the offices of Christ through the short book Douglas Gwyn contributed to about the peace testimony: A Declaration on Peace: in God's people the world's renewal has begun (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1991). You could look it up here at Herald Press. They begin the book by explaining how the meeting/congregation as a body ("God's people") participates in, or embodies, God's work (these offices), pursuing a "collective vocation." Great stuff.

Evangelizing

Evangelizing -- let's DO it!

....that was the essence of the spirit I was overcome with two weekends ago. I caused a bit of a stir: I was at this workshop about spiritually-grounded social action for interested folks within New England Yearly Meeting -- they weren't really expecting that word, I think. You could feel that frisson of naughtiness circulate in the room... Oooo... feel the freedom of speaking what you believe, I might say... but more the point: what if it's a service for others, that speaks to their needs and yearnings? We were talking about building a broad movement of political activism (which I do work on) that would speak to the average person and de-polarize our society. But this in a context of The Lamb's War. Spiritual struggle. The 1650's Quakers who actually quaked -- and lobbied their government, and did sit-ins, and preached in public, and prayed for their enemies, and did all sorts of outlandish things. (We brought in Gandhi in this workshop too --and he saw his movement as a spiritual struggle, too, if I understand rightly.)

Well... if we're talking about reaching people politically, in a struggle against oppression that's both political and spiritual.... shouldn't we be reaching them spiritually, too?

More later... in accordance with my community's minute on technology, our Internet server is about to close down for the night...

I just had a clearness

On Saturday I had a clearness meeting, in hopes of helping me discern what to do about my meeting membership. It was very moving for me. I didn't reach clarity about what to do; but we had less than an hour and I hope to continue. Currently, you see, I'm a member of monthly meeting (Celo) a thousand miles away from where I live; I haven't seen anyone from Celo for a year now. I feel I should transfer; but matters are complicated because my local meeting doesn't satisfy me in some ways. About the clearness, there are two points I'd like to log here on the web:

Clearnesses are great and everyone should have one in their lives soon. I feel so grateful for being listened to so carefully. And they can really help you get in touch.

Meeting membership: an invitation to take it more seriously. Some folks have been surprised that I'm taking it so seriously. Many weighty Friends do urge me to transfer. But I've run into some folks (usually older than I) who are against the very idea of membership, on grounds that it's restrictive or elitist. Others say, oh, I grew up Quaker (go to FGC/a Quaker school/yearly meeting/etc), I don't need to sign a paper in order to be a Friend. And indeed, indeed, the truth of the matter is an inner t(T)ruth. But membership is about commitment, and declaration; and being taken care of. I committed to help Celo; and attended business meeting regularly, and volunteered, and gave them money (and still do!). I declared my commitment to Friends' practices and beliefs {beliefs? which ones are those?...}. And being taken care of: an element many folks don't take heed of. Celo has held clearnesses for me before (three!); has given me money for Quakerly travel; they always asked me how I was doing. Most of all, it's a spiritual joining. I loved them; they loved me. When I sat, one of the group, in worship, I could feel their thoughts around me, as we joined a subterranean river, communicating without words. I want that again.