Maybe the answer is ‘neither’ or ‘both’! But if I had to come down on one side or the other, I would go with the latter. It seems to me that if someone is waiting for a more mystical or ecstatic ‘compulsion’ then it is likely that he/she will wait for a very long time. I would argue that the notion that vocal ministry arises from an action of God, over and beyond inner promptings, adds further confusion to the action. As I see it verbal ministry arises, in the first instance, from a human experience.
Many people believe in a 'God out there', who directly intervenes in the affairs of people. I believe that it is neither productive nor wise to sit and wait for the for a ‘God out there' to intervene directly in the affairs of people. I also believe that the important thing for Quakers is to trust that when a group of people trusting in the reality of God, choose to meet in silent worship, they can in truth, discern God’s will. By remaining faithful to the process of silent worship and by remaining open to being guided from within, the community remains open to discerning God’s will for his people.
If some people are waiting for God to intervene, 'at a future time', then it is little wonder that they do not trust what is going on within them 'currently'. Perhaps some people are waiting to get an ‘all clear’ signal or the proverbial 'kick up the backside'. Other people, however may be focused on the present rather than on the future, and so are more likely to experience inner promptings of love and truth, and such a person is also more likely to take heed of these promptings as the leadings of God, and as a consequence will be happier to stand to offer verbal ministry.
Meanwhile a person waiting for ‘a mystical or ecstatic experience’ may well from the very absence of trusting ‘inner promptings’, judge any ‘current inner promptings’ as coming from a lesser place and so be fearful of sharing these in verbal ministry. Where there is an emphasis on the 'ego' as a negative element of the personality, their arises a fear of being judged as ‘egocentric’. In my understanding 'the ego' is more properly understood as the positive 'choice-maker' which each of us needs to respect and come to terms with, if we are to engage in anything challenging.
The healthy making of ‘an ego choice’ is of course to be distinguished from 'ego egocentricity' which is what happens when someone acts as if they were the center, or alternatively refrains from acting because of a fear of ‘appearing foolish’ or ‘out of step with the group'. A person who perceives much ministry as 'egocentric' will I believe, as a consequence, have a 'fear' that impedes them from trusting their inner promptings. The consequence is that the outcome is more likely to be 'egocentric'.
The person who accepts the challenge of ministering, even when aware that the content might be perceived by some as being 'less than brilliant’; and when the ministry may even be criticized – such a person is brave, and I certainly would not call this person 'egocentric'. I’m reminded of St. Paul’s words:- ‘God’s gift was not a spirit of timidity but the Spirit of power, and love, and self-control.’ (2 Tim. 1:7).
Can I add here, that I fully accept the validity of the fact that many people who come to a Quaker MfW do not, for a variety of reasons wish to offer verbal ministry, and I am not suggesting for a moment that everyone who attends, even regularly, should offer verbal ministry. I fully accept the wisdom and the practice of offering Quaker Space to the newcomer, the troubled and in fact anyone who desires just such space, but this is slightly beside the point of the place of verbal ministry in a Quaker understanding of MfW.
I believe that verbal ministry that comes from one’s inner promptings, is likely to be desirable, especially when the one ministering has the sense of the content being relevant to more than just one’s own personal living, and when one is aware of and sensitive to the overall ministry within the meeting. I believe that ‘shared worship’ should have a real element of the sharing of that, which comes from 'that of God' in the lives of those gathered. I feel strongly that worship is about more than 'just drinking in' and privately valuing what comes to a person individually. It surprises me when I hear people describe verbal ministry as being something exceptional; and it also surprises me that some people do not seem to have a sense that sometimes ‘God’ may be calling them to share their insights with the gathered community. I am not suggesting for a moment that silence should be ignored or that the hour should be filled with verbal ministry, but rather that verbal ministry from a wider range of people should be truly welcomed.
I know that it is challenging for some people to stand up and offer verbal minister. However this is quite a different thing from being silenced by fears about the inadequacy of one’s efforts. I believe it is incumbent upon all of us to be ‘people of encouragement'. Expressions life 'daffodil ministry', with negative overtones should be assiduously avoided. I would argue that a single verbal ministry arising from the leadings of God, may well be ‘the word’ that might well help others. We might all leave the Meeting House refreshed and more determined ‘to do God’s will’, out there in Sheffield and beyond.
Let’s not sit waiting for the ‘mystical or ecstatic experience’; but let each one of us just trust the more ordinary inner promptings of love and truth. This applies both in Worship and in the rest of our lives. ‘Let us trust them as the leadings of God, whose Light shows us our darkness and brings us to new life’. I agree with Simon, as mentioned in “The Nature of the ‘Inner Light’”, (24th April), that it has been the Quaker Experience that the trusting of the ordinary everyday experiences, may bring the more ‘mystical’ experience following in its trail. But these extraordinary experiences are not the important thing. I know that I can relate to this in my experience of Quaker Worship, as I believe it has been Simon’s in the area of the ‘peace-tax’ in its relationship to ‘conscience’.
No comments:
Post a Comment