But I am still not sure about the label "convergent Friends." When I wrote about convergent Friends before, I said,
Maybe all of this talk about Convergent Friends is a sign that we need to reexamine what it means to be a modern Quaker and put more effort into figuring out how we are going to relate to all those other folks who are not like us, but are still Quakers.After this past weekend, I am more convinced this is true.
A theme that ran through the workshops was that although those there feel strongly that Quakerism has something powerful and something to offer a hungry world, we were all missing something too. If we were completely spiritually fed in our own meetings and faith communities, we would not be drawn to this kind of gathering.
Throughout the weekend, some found bits that they had been missing through expectant worship, prayer, reading the Bible, singing, and talking to others. But it also seemed clear by the end that we had not resolved anything and there was still a lot of work to do.
In reading through the Bible, I have been deep in Ezekiel for several weeks now. It was poignant for me that themes from Ezekiel came up over the weekend, particularly the story of Ezekiel raising the bones, prophesying to them, and breathing life into them. (Ezekiel 37).
A passage in the chapter before that also spoke to me. God said,
I'll pour pure water over you and scrub you clean. I'll give you a new heart, put a new spirit in you. I'll remove the stone heart from your body and replace it with a heart that's God-willed, not self-willed. I'll put my Spirit in you and make it possible for you to do what I tell you and live by my commands. (Ezekiel 36: 25-27).One of the things we did that moved me the most was walking through stations of the Lord's prayer. Instead of rushing through it, we actively participated in different parts, including a place where we washed our hands and asked God to cleanse us.
I came out of the weekend with the sense that convergent Friends are not a new kind of Friend. Our gathering was a group of people searching for Quaker renewal. If a catchy title like "convergent" gets people to come together and think about the future of Friends, that's great. But I am more interested in what we are going to do next than how to define convergent.
While I was in Ben Lomond, I thought about a series of questions that I wrote last year at the Quaker Women's Theology Conference. They seem to fit, so I will end with those.
What are we afraid of? What is fear keeping us from doing? What do we hope will happen in the future? Why do we meet? What can we do to help each other to grow in faith and community? What do we need as a group? What roles need to be filled and who are the people led to fill those roles? What can we do to nurture this sense of bridging the gaps when we go back to our meetings?I am grateful to Friends for spending time with me in the presence of God over the weekend. God may not always be nice, but God is there.
"But I am more interested in what we are going to do next than how to define convergent." Amen!
ReplyDeleteThanks Ashley for coming and thanks for sharing this reflection.
So good to see your words. I feel I am traveling alongside you in some ways. I have seen and heard and felt a similar "rethinking" of the word Convergent for many of the same reasons you lift up here.
ReplyDeleteAnd then there is this piece you write:
If we were completely spiritually fed in our own meetings and faith communities, we would not be drawn to this kind of gathering.
It is for this same reason that, when I can, I attend retreats to which I am invited through FGC's Traveling Ministries Program. Not many Friends there know the word "convergent" but our sensibilities and yearnings are the same:
to see a deepening of our tradition, a return to nearly-forgotten practices, an integration of our inward convictions with our outward behavior, and a greater corporate willingness to listen more intently for, and be obedient to, the Inward Teacher.
Blessings,
Liz Opp, The Good Raised Up
Ashley, I was thinking more about this and wanted to add that while I totally agree that we should not sit around discussing how to define a label, I think that convergent does name a (Quaker) particular project with a particular vision and language that not everyone shares. I would suggest that this common vision is what makes possible "what we are going to do next" and without we'd have a free-for-all that would leave us spinning our wheels.
ReplyDeleteSo while I'm not wedded to word, I am wedded to the idea that in order to move forward we need to have some shared language and vision, which "convergent" signifies for us. What we did this past weekend followed this pattern, we actually didn't really talk about or define "convergent" at all, but did cast a shared vision of sorts that was directed towards what's next.
Would you agree that this tension is important? Or is there another way you see it, or something else you had in mind?
Liz - I love the image of all of us traveling alongside each other. It was great to meet people this weekend who have the same questions and I am grateful for the technology that allows us to connect even if we can't meet in person. I am glad that you get to spend time with like minded Friends through the traveling ministries program and I hope to meet you in person someday.
ReplyDeleteWess - I say use the label as long as it works. For now, it seems like we can say "convergent Friends" and mean all of the above (i.e. combining conservative traditions and the emerging church, converging with different kinds of Friends, and Quaker renewal). If people start picking it apart or arguing about who is in and who is out, then it will have outlasted its usefulness.
I think Liz's comment above would be a good, inclusive definition of convergent: "Friends who want to see a deepening of our tradition, a return to nearly-forgotten practices, an integration of our inward convictions with our outward behavior, and a greater corporate willingness to listen more intently for, and be obedient to, the Inward Teacher."
Good to meet you this past weekend, Ashley! I'm stealing this from Martin, but he wrote "new traditionalists" as a title of a video he took of me. I've been thinking about that a while--revisiting the traditions, while breaking new ground with them. What do you think of this? It seems to try and remind us of our roots as a Christian faith and incorporate the past into our current leadings. Then again, I think the word "traditionalist" isn't always that inclusive, which is why "convergent" speaks to me.
ReplyDeleteNonetheless, here we are--converging--together online, and I'm glad we are able to go beyond our meetings on the shared ground of Quakerism together.
Hi Chad, it was nice meeting you over the weekend too! I like the idea of convergent Friends as the new traditionalists -- it captures the idea of Friends who are looking to old traditions in wrestling with the question of where Friends are going. I was also glad to see that you made the video describing your analogy of jazz musicians learning old classics. If convergent Friends (by any name) are going to go anywhere, we need to remain grounded in our traditions while seeking out others who are interested in renewal.
ReplyDelete