When I look at the history of the Society of Friends, I am always bothered by the great What If. What if Friends in 1827 had said ok, we have two somewhat different understandings of the basis of Quaker spirituality, so let’s find a way to continue to work together so that our witness to the Kingdom of God among us won’t be divided or compromised by our differences? What if the Wilburites and Gurneyites had been able to say, different strokes for different folks. You do worship in the way that seems most meaningful to you and we’ll do the same and we’ll respect and honor one another’s choices. Or what if (should I tremble to say this) the planners of the Richmond Conference had invited all Yearly Meetings and Friends groups to send delegates and not just those whom they considered to be “orthodox”? Who actually gave them the right to decide who was orthodox and who was not? It might even be said that the Richmond Conference and its aftermath was the real beginning of organized exclusion among Friends.
Historical accounts that I have read of the first separation suggest that the number of Friends who aligned themselves with Elias Hicks was not as much a statement of agreement with his doctrine as a protest against the efforts of those Friends who attempted to deny him the right to speak. While the motivation of those in power was no do a desire to protect Friends from what they regarded as false doctrine, the clear message that came out of the incident was that the larger body of Friends preferred weighing the speaker’s words and discerning truth for themselves rather than allowing others no matter how well intentioned to make that decision for them.
A couple of years ago I was working on co-ordinating a yearly meeting wide study of the NCYM-FUM Faith and Practice, which involved basically putting together a road show to go into each quarter and do a series of sessions on topics like Quaker history, theology, structure and organization, testimonies, etc. This also meant finding knowledgeable individuals in each of these areas to lead the discussions. I was amazed at how quickly I received lists from several quarters of who was and was not acceptable to them as session leaders. Most of the negatives were directed towards Guilford College, that bastion (or bastardization as a number of Friends seem to see it) of Quaker education and values.
I had some problems with this because one of the individuals on the don’t send list who shall remain nameless was a long-bearded, straw hat wearing, bicycle pumping fellow who along with the other classes he teaches at the aforementioned institution, offers one on the Biblical basis of the Quaker testimonies and over the years has introduced countless students from other Friends’ traditions who have never used one before to the Bible. And I am personally acquainted with some totally awesome YAFs who came to faith in Christ during their time at Guilford and are doing some amazing things now. Isn’t this what “orthodox”Friends are supposed to want to happen?
I also found it pretty strange that perceived problems with someone’s theology rendered years of training and education in the ways of Friends of no value, that an individual’s knowledge of Quaker history or organization and structure was only acceptable if their theology was “correct.” With the advice and consent of two weighty Friends in one of the anti-Guilford quarters, I did not make a substitution as requested by the “leadership” of the quarterly meeting but had the individual in question lead the session on testimonies. We had the folks who attended each session fill out an evaluation after it was over. This session received the highest rating of all those done in that quarter.
This year our Yearly Meeting at the urging of some brave souls has adopted Peace as its theme. I say brave souls because in a number of our meetings those American flags are prominently displayed at the front of the meeting house and I have seen a numbers of signs outside meetings saying “support out troops.” Peace of course is not just about the cessation of war, and some of the folks on our planning committee suggested some workshops at our annual sessions on things like Alternatives to Violence and Conflict Resolution in Meetings (what a thought -that we might have to learn to live peaceably with one another before the world will take seriously our peace testimony). Unfortunately, but not unexpectedly in all this talk of peace, a conflict arose because the leadership insisted that expertise and experience in peace work was not the criteria for determining who should be asked to facilitate the workshops, but whether or not individuals were “orthodox” in their theology.
However, don’t give us all the credit for this step back into our less than glorious past. Throughout Quakerdom there are those on the right who are afraid of what might happen if what might happen if their members are exposed to those on the left, and those on the left who are afraid to be exposed to those on the right, and programed Friends who don’t want their members exposed to unprogramed Friends, and vice versa, and Christ centered Friends who want nothing to do with other traditions, and non-Christ centered Friends with the same attitude. What if, instead of continuing the tradition of trying to shut out different voices begun by the clamor over Friend Elias back in 1827, we tried welcoming those with a different point of view and trusted the Spirit within instead of our own selves to guide us into Truth?
What if, as my friend Betsy Blake suggested in her video, we could all be Friends?
Monday, July 19, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
"Exploring the Meaning and Purpose of Quaker Structure" by Scott
I have been exploring and mulling over in my mind the purpose and intent of Quaker structure. Years ago when I worked in a Yearly Meeting office the Superintendent I served with had a great way of looking at it. He would say, "The Yearly Meeting serves the local meeting, the local meeting does not serve the Yearly Meeting." I often think about that because my experience is that Yearly Meeting structures and often international Quaker organizations often seem set up for the local meeting to serve them.
This is not to say that Yearly Meeting offices and international offices don't have a purpose or place. But could it be said that a huge paradigm shift needs to take place and we might need to reimagine the whole set up? What would it look like if rather then the Yearly Meeting structures being set up that all the local meeting energy was flowing towards the Yearly Meeting programming the energy and resources flowed from the Yearly Meeting to the local meeting? (I would like to add to that the idea that rather then sending the Yearly Meeting's "Askings" or "Assessments" the Yearly Meetings sent money to the local meetings - but that's another post).
I recognize that at some point early Friends established structure and organization. My sense, though, is that their vision was that the structure would serve the vision and mission and not that the mission was to serve the structure. Quakers often seem in survival mode these days and in that mode there is a scrambling for resources and a piece of the pie. In that mode, immense pressure is put on local meetings to make sure that the Yearly Meetings survive.
What if the structure of Yearly Meetings in their present form are not meant to stay that way? In other words, can local meetings survive if there were Yearly Meeting offices? Could local meetings still minister and function if there were no Yearly Meeting committees? Could local meetings continue to thrive if there were no Yearly Meeting programs? My sense is they could. To be sure, there would still be some things that Yearly Meetings structures would and should need to provide but have the layers of what Yearly Meeting structures off have become so heavy and thick that it's weighing down the mission of what Friends need to be about?
I'm exploring this...and certainly don't have all the answers. All I know is that the life blood of Friends is the local meeting if there are no local meetings there are no Yearly Meetings and international organizations. It would seem that the thriving and flourishing of the local meeting would be of prime importance.
This is not to say that Yearly Meeting offices and international offices don't have a purpose or place. But could it be said that a huge paradigm shift needs to take place and we might need to reimagine the whole set up? What would it look like if rather then the Yearly Meeting structures being set up that all the local meeting energy was flowing towards the Yearly Meeting programming the energy and resources flowed from the Yearly Meeting to the local meeting? (I would like to add to that the idea that rather then sending the Yearly Meeting's "Askings" or "Assessments" the Yearly Meetings sent money to the local meetings - but that's another post).
I recognize that at some point early Friends established structure and organization. My sense, though, is that their vision was that the structure would serve the vision and mission and not that the mission was to serve the structure. Quakers often seem in survival mode these days and in that mode there is a scrambling for resources and a piece of the pie. In that mode, immense pressure is put on local meetings to make sure that the Yearly Meetings survive.
What if the structure of Yearly Meetings in their present form are not meant to stay that way? In other words, can local meetings survive if there were Yearly Meeting offices? Could local meetings still minister and function if there were no Yearly Meeting committees? Could local meetings continue to thrive if there were no Yearly Meeting programs? My sense is they could. To be sure, there would still be some things that Yearly Meetings structures would and should need to provide but have the layers of what Yearly Meeting structures off have become so heavy and thick that it's weighing down the mission of what Friends need to be about?
I'm exploring this...and certainly don't have all the answers. All I know is that the life blood of Friends is the local meeting if there are no local meetings there are no Yearly Meetings and international organizations. It would seem that the thriving and flourishing of the local meeting would be of prime importance.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
"Blue Bird Houses and the Beauty of Diversity" by Tony
One of the most important things I do every year is put up houses in which beautiful mountain bluebirds nest. These are amazing creatures, no artist could ever come close to the incredible shade of blue of their wings. And when I see that a pair has nested in one of our houses, I am excited because I know that those eggs will hatch eventually and more of those glorious creatures will fly out into the world. And I know that we have been a part of making that happen and the world is a better place and a more beautiful place because they are there.
As I thought about this, it struck me that our meeting is a bluebird house of sorts as well, that people come in looking for a safe space to nest, to grow spiritually and move toward becoming who God wants them to be. Some remain with us for a long time, some sojourn for a spell and move on, but hopefully the results are the same -the world is a better and more beautiful place because the light of God’s love is shining out through them.
As I was sitting on my deck feeling very poetic and sort of other wordly about this, a bird flew overhead and plop -right on the deck rail a big old mess of bird droppings - yep, that happens too. It’s one of the prices you pay for having birds around, along with all the sunflower hulls and thistle and chaff that gets left all around the feeders. Birds make a mess and sometimes the beauty can lost as least for a while in the clean up process. But that’s not unique to birds either. We don’t get perfect people in our fellowship. We get the bruised, the broken, the walking wounded who more than anything else need to know that they are loved unconditionally by the One who made them. They come with a lot of baggage to unload, past hurts and problems that have to be opened gently to let the healing in. It’s a messy process and sometimes there’s a lot of chaff and droppings to be cleaned up with people as well and we can lose sight of the new creature that’s emerging. It’s a dirty job sometimes, but isn’t that what ministry really is?
When I shared these thoughts with our fellowship, one individual quickly said, “what if you get goldfinches in your bluebird house or cardinals? Do you chase them out to make room for the bluebirds, or do you let them stay?” The answer is we let them stay. As beautiful as the bluebirds are, their color is made more vivid by seeing birds of red and yellow and brown and black and white in the yard with them. I am blessed to live in a place that attracts such a variety of birds and celebrate whatever inhabitants God provides for our bird houses, both the physical and spiritual ones.
As I thought about this, it struck me that our meeting is a bluebird house of sorts as well, that people come in looking for a safe space to nest, to grow spiritually and move toward becoming who God wants them to be. Some remain with us for a long time, some sojourn for a spell and move on, but hopefully the results are the same -the world is a better and more beautiful place because the light of God’s love is shining out through them.
As I was sitting on my deck feeling very poetic and sort of other wordly about this, a bird flew overhead and plop -right on the deck rail a big old mess of bird droppings - yep, that happens too. It’s one of the prices you pay for having birds around, along with all the sunflower hulls and thistle and chaff that gets left all around the feeders. Birds make a mess and sometimes the beauty can lost as least for a while in the clean up process. But that’s not unique to birds either. We don’t get perfect people in our fellowship. We get the bruised, the broken, the walking wounded who more than anything else need to know that they are loved unconditionally by the One who made them. They come with a lot of baggage to unload, past hurts and problems that have to be opened gently to let the healing in. It’s a messy process and sometimes there’s a lot of chaff and droppings to be cleaned up with people as well and we can lose sight of the new creature that’s emerging. It’s a dirty job sometimes, but isn’t that what ministry really is?
When I shared these thoughts with our fellowship, one individual quickly said, “what if you get goldfinches in your bluebird house or cardinals? Do you chase them out to make room for the bluebirds, or do you let them stay?” The answer is we let them stay. As beautiful as the bluebirds are, their color is made more vivid by seeing birds of red and yellow and brown and black and white in the yard with them. I am blessed to live in a place that attracts such a variety of birds and celebrate whatever inhabitants God provides for our bird houses, both the physical and spiritual ones.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
"The Ministry Among Us" (Tony's response regarding Scott's Open Worship post)
I wonder how many pastoral ministers would make the same confession I did on Scott’s recent post about open worship – there have been times in my ministry when I have given a message when I have not received one because it was expected of me ( part of what I’m supposed to do as a released Friend for pastoral ministry). The sad part is after awhile you can do it without anybody even noticing. In fact, in my own experience, most of the same folks will say “good message today” on their way out the door. If I said I don’t have a message today, people would wonder what I’d been doing all week that I didn’t get around to what they see as my major responsibility, and maybe even start to question whether they should be looking for another minister.
But I look back at dear old George who on more than one occasion when invited to speak at a particular time and place showed up but never opened his mouth because God did not give him anything to speak for that place and time. And if it happened to someone as deeply spiritual and as in tune with God as George Fox, it’s bound to happen to someone like me. So it troubles me that we’ve somehow gotten the ministry into a place where it’s not ok to say that. What does it say about our belief that all are ministers and have an equal responsibility to listen for God’s message? And even if no one offers vocal ministry in the meeting, does that diminish our worship experience?
Maybe what I should say is sometimes I have a message, or a part of a message, but I don’t have THE message this week. I remember the days in my home meeting before I was a recorded minister when messages came to me during open worship, those times when your heart starts pounding and you get all shaky and your knees feel weak, but no matter how hard you fight it you have no choice but to stand and deliver that which you have received.
That still happens to me, sometimes during sermon preparation and sometimes even during delivery, but I get excited seeing it happen to someone else during our open worship time because it’s a visual reminder that the risen Christ is among us. It’s also to me much more of an affirmation of a real worship service than the comments made on the way out the door. More and more I’m coming to see my role as a worship facilitator, creating an environment and space where the Spirit of Christ and the gathered body can interact. I guess the reason I’m actually in the ministry is because I love the idea that God can use my feeble attempts to be faithful to Him as a springboard to propel others into His presence.
But I look back at dear old George who on more than one occasion when invited to speak at a particular time and place showed up but never opened his mouth because God did not give him anything to speak for that place and time. And if it happened to someone as deeply spiritual and as in tune with God as George Fox, it’s bound to happen to someone like me. So it troubles me that we’ve somehow gotten the ministry into a place where it’s not ok to say that. What does it say about our belief that all are ministers and have an equal responsibility to listen for God’s message? And even if no one offers vocal ministry in the meeting, does that diminish our worship experience?
Maybe what I should say is sometimes I have a message, or a part of a message, but I don’t have THE message this week. I remember the days in my home meeting before I was a recorded minister when messages came to me during open worship, those times when your heart starts pounding and you get all shaky and your knees feel weak, but no matter how hard you fight it you have no choice but to stand and deliver that which you have received.
That still happens to me, sometimes during sermon preparation and sometimes even during delivery, but I get excited seeing it happen to someone else during our open worship time because it’s a visual reminder that the risen Christ is among us. It’s also to me much more of an affirmation of a real worship service than the comments made on the way out the door. More and more I’m coming to see my role as a worship facilitator, creating an environment and space where the Spirit of Christ and the gathered body can interact. I guess the reason I’m actually in the ministry is because I love the idea that God can use my feeble attempts to be faithful to Him as a springboard to propel others into His presence.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
"Unapologetically Christian vs Christ-Centered" by Tony
One of the concerns I came away from the YAF gathering in Wichita with is the use of the phrases Christ-centered and unapologetically Christian. While some folks seem comfortable using these terms interchangeably, to me there is a significant difference. Christ-centered is a statement of where I am but it does not require or even suggest that anyone else needs to be at the same place, so it feels more open to the kind of theological hospitality that is characteristic of convergent Friends. For me, it is a place of openness that invites people into conversation about what that means. To be unapologetically anything is the language of presupposed confrontation, i.e. I have drawn a line in the sand and I will not back down even if you demand it of me. It feels like the language of walls rather than bridges and seems to invite others to build their own walls as well (what if the next group to host a YAF event decides they need to be unapologetically non-Christian ?). And there it seems you have the history of Friends to date. So why would we need or want gatherings or events that only add another row of stones to the wall rather than seeking to remove one?
I am not unapologetically Christian. When you look at Christianity’s track record, it’s hard for me to imagine how anyone would not feel the need to be extremely apologetic for the persecutions and gross injustices that have been inflicted on the world by those who have called themselves Christians. Not only does the word Christian carry all this baggage from the past, but in the present it has come to be associated with a set of theological, political, and social stances that I do not always find to be reflective of my own understanding and experience of what it means to follow Jesus. This is why I am more comfortable describing myself as being Christ-centered or as being a follower of Jesus, or a disciple, not in the exclusive sense of being some spiritual guru, but in the true meaning of the word which is simply a learner.
If there is hope for a future for Friends marked by anything other than the same divisions and resentments we have nurtured in the past, we have to find a non-confrontational way of being with one another and listening to one another. And the key word here is find. In order to find something, we have to actively engage ourselves in the act of looking for it, as the Scripture says, “seek and you will find.” It will not just happen but requires an intentional atmosphere of openness and hospitality to and for one another. Not just YAFs, but all of us need to work to create that kind of space in all our gatherings.
I am not unapologetically Christian. When you look at Christianity’s track record, it’s hard for me to imagine how anyone would not feel the need to be extremely apologetic for the persecutions and gross injustices that have been inflicted on the world by those who have called themselves Christians. Not only does the word Christian carry all this baggage from the past, but in the present it has come to be associated with a set of theological, political, and social stances that I do not always find to be reflective of my own understanding and experience of what it means to follow Jesus. This is why I am more comfortable describing myself as being Christ-centered or as being a follower of Jesus, or a disciple, not in the exclusive sense of being some spiritual guru, but in the true meaning of the word which is simply a learner.
If there is hope for a future for Friends marked by anything other than the same divisions and resentments we have nurtured in the past, we have to find a non-confrontational way of being with one another and listening to one another. And the key word here is find. In order to find something, we have to actively engage ourselves in the act of looking for it, as the Scripture says, “seek and you will find.” It will not just happen but requires an intentional atmosphere of openness and hospitality to and for one another. Not just YAFs, but all of us need to work to create that kind of space in all our gatherings.
Friday, May 28, 2010
"A Case for Unprogrammed Worship...By a Programmed Pastoral Friend" ~ Scott Wagoner
This Sunday is fifth Sunday. Every fifth Sunday we (Deep River Friends Meeting) have a semi-programmed worship. We are a pastoral programmed meeting in North Carolina Yearly Meeting (Friends United Meeting) so our worship each Sunday follows a fairly programmed order. But, on the fifth Sunday, we break out of that routine and extend our Open Worship time to include at least thirty minutes of our worship. As a pastor and programmed Friend I love this unprogrammed worship on the fifth Sunday. Some may say I love it because it gets me off the hook of having to prepare a sermon and I get "the day off." As attractive at that might be, that's not the real reason I love it. Here are a few reasons:
1) Having extened Open Worship or semi-programmed worship - or unprogrammed worship - in our meeting serves as an important reminder to me that I am not the only one that has a message. I don't know how other pastors might respond but I know how easy it is to think at times that I am the only one that has a message to give on Sunday morning. Our unprogrammed time of worship reminds me that this is not the case.
2) Our unprogrammed worship time reminds me that other folks do have a message and are very capable of bringing powerful vocal ministry to our meeting for worship. Sometimes this might be the sharing of an extended thought, a prophetic word, maybe a testimonial of how God has been at work in their life, or even a song or poem. Whatever it is, it often comes from a very deep and authentic place which has a power of its own. .
3) During the unprogrammed worship time the silence itself can be healing. Like many others I live in a very noisy world. I also live in a world where many voices clamor for my attention. In this world I often don't take the time to be silent, to listen, to clear the clutter in my soul. In the silence I am given the opportunity to rest and to hear the One Voice that truly loves me and cares for me in a way that no one else can. The silence is healing in that I am allowed a space to hear God and hear my life.
4) In unprogrammed worship I am given a gift and opportunity I very rarely get - a time to listen to God and God's calling upon my True Self. Certainly, there are other times I could do this if I made the time...but I don't make the time. Unprogrammed worship invites me back to this experience of truly sitting before the Creator and hearing the Voice of Love speak to me in the the most tender and direct manner. In those moments of silence, I have often heard God speak in ways I have never heard before. Not because God wasnt speaking but because I was not listening.
For folks that are often used to a programmed worship, a time of unprogrammed worship doesnt come easy. Some choose not to come. Some look at their watches and wonder why the time is going so slow. But some, if they are willing to explore the gift that is offered them, discover (or rediscover) the power of God's voice in the Holy quietness. And just maybe they will never be the same.
1) Having extened Open Worship or semi-programmed worship - or unprogrammed worship - in our meeting serves as an important reminder to me that I am not the only one that has a message. I don't know how other pastors might respond but I know how easy it is to think at times that I am the only one that has a message to give on Sunday morning. Our unprogrammed time of worship reminds me that this is not the case.
2) Our unprogrammed worship time reminds me that other folks do have a message and are very capable of bringing powerful vocal ministry to our meeting for worship. Sometimes this might be the sharing of an extended thought, a prophetic word, maybe a testimonial of how God has been at work in their life, or even a song or poem. Whatever it is, it often comes from a very deep and authentic place which has a power of its own. .
3) During the unprogrammed worship time the silence itself can be healing. Like many others I live in a very noisy world. I also live in a world where many voices clamor for my attention. In this world I often don't take the time to be silent, to listen, to clear the clutter in my soul. In the silence I am given the opportunity to rest and to hear the One Voice that truly loves me and cares for me in a way that no one else can. The silence is healing in that I am allowed a space to hear God and hear my life.
4) In unprogrammed worship I am given a gift and opportunity I very rarely get - a time to listen to God and God's calling upon my True Self. Certainly, there are other times I could do this if I made the time...but I don't make the time. Unprogrammed worship invites me back to this experience of truly sitting before the Creator and hearing the Voice of Love speak to me in the the most tender and direct manner. In those moments of silence, I have often heard God speak in ways I have never heard before. Not because God wasnt speaking but because I was not listening.
For folks that are often used to a programmed worship, a time of unprogrammed worship doesnt come easy. Some choose not to come. Some look at their watches and wonder why the time is going so slow. But some, if they are willing to explore the gift that is offered them, discover (or rediscover) the power of God's voice in the Holy quietness. And just maybe they will never be the same.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
"Kids Are The Best Teacher" by Ruth Lowe
(Our guest blogger is Ruth Lowe. Ruth is Tony's daughter and a recent graduate of Guilford College)
On a sunny May afternoon, 6 year-old Emma Pierce-Coleman and I went for a walk down to the field behind her house, and like always, Emma ended up wading in the creek. I’m sure it didn’t occur to her that with both of our big moves coming up that this was our last chance to spend time together in The Field, like we had so many times before, but I was painfully aware of it. During one of the darkest and most depressing times in my life thus far, spending time with kids and dogs in a sunny field beside a creek really kept me going.
On this particular afternoon, Emma was in the creek “helping” a stick float down the slow moving creek. She walked down the length of the creek, water up to her knees, navigating the stick through the water. As is our custom, I walked along the bank of the creek. Every few feet Emma would call out to me. “Are you still there?” Sometimes it was hard to see me through the thick foliage on the bank. “Yes, I’m right here!” Occasionally I would lose sight of her too. “Emma, are you there? Is everything ok?” Yelling through the bushes she would report to me the progress of her stick and her journey. “There’s some big rocks coming up ahead.” She’s come a long way since last summer, a mere 5 year-old, hadn’t even been to kindergarten, she followed her older sister down the creek and got stuck on a rock. I’d gone sloshing into the creek after her and scooped the crying Emma off of the rock and carried her to shore. Not now though. She’s navigating it by herself pretty well. My role is pretty much just to walk beside her and reassure her. “I just fell in but I can
change clothes when I get home,” her little voice reports after the sound of a big splash. I just laugh. This isn’t anything new. “Yup, that’s right.”
From outside of the creek, I have a better perspective. I can tell where Emma is in relation to the land and how close she is to the edge of the field where the creek bends, and she always gets out. “Am I at the end yet?” She calls. “No, about half way there, keep going!” I encourage her. “Ok, keep walking with me!” her little voice comes bursting through the mulberry bushes.
What Emma wanted from me is what we all want from our spiritual communities and from the Divine. I don’t always understand Emma’s task (why can’t she just let the stick float by itself?) but I support her because it’s important to her. She tells me of the challenges that are facing her (There’s a lot of rocks up ahead, it’s really deep right here!) and I encourage her and reassure her until she makes it through the rough patches. From outside of the creek I give her a bigger perspective on where she is on her journey. And when she’s completed her task and the stick has made it to the bend in the creek, we hold hands and run home together through the field.
On a sunny May afternoon, 6 year-old Emma Pierce-Coleman and I went for a walk down to the field behind her house, and like always, Emma ended up wading in the creek. I’m sure it didn’t occur to her that with both of our big moves coming up that this was our last chance to spend time together in The Field, like we had so many times before, but I was painfully aware of it. During one of the darkest and most depressing times in my life thus far, spending time with kids and dogs in a sunny field beside a creek really kept me going.
On this particular afternoon, Emma was in the creek “helping” a stick float down the slow moving creek. She walked down the length of the creek, water up to her knees, navigating the stick through the water. As is our custom, I walked along the bank of the creek. Every few feet Emma would call out to me. “Are you still there?” Sometimes it was hard to see me through the thick foliage on the bank. “Yes, I’m right here!” Occasionally I would lose sight of her too. “Emma, are you there? Is everything ok?” Yelling through the bushes she would report to me the progress of her stick and her journey. “There’s some big rocks coming up ahead.” She’s come a long way since last summer, a mere 5 year-old, hadn’t even been to kindergarten, she followed her older sister down the creek and got stuck on a rock. I’d gone sloshing into the creek after her and scooped the crying Emma off of the rock and carried her to shore. Not now though. She’s navigating it by herself pretty well. My role is pretty much just to walk beside her and reassure her. “I just fell in but I can
change clothes when I get home,” her little voice reports after the sound of a big splash. I just laugh. This isn’t anything new. “Yup, that’s right.”
From outside of the creek, I have a better perspective. I can tell where Emma is in relation to the land and how close she is to the edge of the field where the creek bends, and she always gets out. “Am I at the end yet?” She calls. “No, about half way there, keep going!” I encourage her. “Ok, keep walking with me!” her little voice comes bursting through the mulberry bushes.
What Emma wanted from me is what we all want from our spiritual communities and from the Divine. I don’t always understand Emma’s task (why can’t she just let the stick float by itself?) but I support her because it’s important to her. She tells me of the challenges that are facing her (There’s a lot of rocks up ahead, it’s really deep right here!) and I encourage her and reassure her until she makes it through the rough patches. From outside of the creek I give her a bigger perspective on where she is on her journey. And when she’s completed her task and the stick has made it to the bend in the creek, we hold hands and run home together through the field.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)