There’s a sense among Friends that the idea of convergence is a new thing, and is something that began on the Internet. I’d like to propose that this sense, though understandable, is incomplete.
“One challenge for those who would renew connections among all Friends is to listen through preconceived notions and not be limited by rational discourse. The power of the still, small voice of God often brings lessons in humility and unexpected openings.”
This isn’t a quote from a blog, but from a book called “A Certain Kind of Perfection”, which is an anthology organized by Margery Post Abbott and includes the writing of historical, liberal, and evangelical friends. It was published in 1997 and was the second book about Quakerism that I ever read, back when I was going through Convincement. That quote is from the Introduction, during which she lays out the case for convergence as understood by the Quaker blogmass of today:
“Understanding each other’s theology is not something Quakers have done well. Understanding the words of theology without admitting the validity or even the existence of the experience of the love of God behind the words leads only to dispute. One of the almost humorous phenomena of the early nineteenth century was the constant stream of publications that quoted early Friends in support of every conceivable doctrinal position. Thoughtful Friends today remind us of the ambiguities and paradoxes encompassed within the beliefs of the first generation of Quakers. I join in this challenge to explore the nature of these paradoxes…
May we focus on the richness we can gain as we sift through our various ways and place new emphasis on the essential Quaker message. Isaac Penington’s admonition, first published in 1681, still holds true. The ‘main thing is to know the guide, to follow the guide, to receive from him the light whereby I am to walk; and not to take things for truths because others see them to be truths, but to wait till the spirit makes them manifest in me.’”
What is particularly interesting to me is that she actually offers us a way forward to convergence, without ever using that term:
“Through my encounters with evangelical Friends and the consequent explorations of the roots of my own faith as a liberal Friend, I find a connection between these two traditions in the unlikely concept of perfection… we all believe that as we turn towards God, then are obedient to divine guidance, we will experience an inward peace and act with compassion, humility, and righteousness. We can, through the work of the Spirit, live out God’s reign on earth. All Friends seek to live out of the love expressed in the Sermon on the Mount… When understood as wholeness, spiritual maturity, soundness, completion, or even obedience, perfection starts to become more accessible to me. Other Friends who find the terms perfection and holiness difficult are more apt to speak of discipleship, obedience, baptism with the Holy Spirit, or the ‘Lordship of Jesus Christ’. For a few, spiritual formation or inner healing are the most expressive terms for perfection. ‘Teleos’, the Biblical word for perfection, means ‘end goal’ and suggests an orientation more than a fixed state of being.”
I’m not sure I can say it any better than she did, so I will ask you all what you think: is she onto something here?
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 5th, 2007 at 5:37 pm
Martin Kelley
“Convergence” is just the buzz-friendly term for a certain quality of respectful intra-Quaker ecumenism and cross-curiosity that’s been happening for years. It’s probably part of the nature of this sort of work that it’s outside of the mainstream of the big organizations; the internet simply makes it easier to people to find each other and get involved. Margery Abbott is one of those Friends who have been pointing the way for years through her books, visits and projects she’s been involved with.
I’m sorry to say that “A Certain Kind of Perfection” is among the too-many books that has stayed on my “got to read sometime” list. I like the idea of perfection as a bridge across the Quaker traditions though I’d have to hear more about how to pitch it to liberal Quakes.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Robin M.
Margery Post Abbott, her pamphlet about the Multwood women’s reading group, and her speaking at Quaker Heritage Day in Berkeley with Peggy Senger Parsons following the publication of Walk Worthy of Your Calling, were all explicitly inspirations for me and my interest in convergence.
I think that what convergent Friends have in common, across various divides, is an interest in personal and corporate (perfection, improvement, deepening, renewal, transformation, increasing Godliness, or any of the terms she uses above), and a conviction that Quakerism is a valuable (the best?) means to that end.
November 6th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
thefriendlyfunnel
I’m glad you’re already familiar with her, Robin. When I reread her anthology, I realized, “Hey! This is why I like the idea of convergence so much!” (Since it was one of the first books on Quakerism I ever read, it really influenced what I think about Quaker society as a whole, and I’m so grateful for it.)
Martin: I think you’d enjoy “A Certain Kind of Perfection”. So move it up that list of yours. :)
November 6th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Nate Swift
Having been uncomfortable with the idea of divisions and even conflicts within the Society (as well as in the different Christian faith traditions) for a long time in a sort of unfocussed way, the term “convergence” and the current conversation came as one of those “aha!” moments. Learning about what is being said and done, and finding background materiel such as this is exciting for me as I sense a new and more widespread urgency to a movement of the Spirit that is not new in itself. Figuring out my part in the movement is another matter.
November 6th, 2007 at 5:46 pm
John Kindley
I think something along these lines, i.e. finding unity in greater respect for ideals of perfection, was what I was trying to get at a couple weeks ago in my blog post titled “A further reflection on convergence and a proposal for a double standard” (a choice of title which was perhaps unduly undiplomatic). That post focused on issues of sexual morality, which unfortunately seem just as (and possibly more) significant in our ongoing Quaker divisions between liberal and evangelical as issues surrounding the proper role of Jesus and Scripture in Quaker spirituality. It’s unfortunate, and rather telling, that sexual issues have loomed so large in the religious disagreements and divisions that have affected not only Quakers but other religious denominations, particularly it seems since the 1960s. In a properly ordered soul and a properly ordered society, on the other hand, sex is seen simply as a natural part of life, which like other bodily appetites must be kept modestly subject to the head and the heart, and also as something which, in its potential to procreate new life and to hurt ourselves and other people, is fraught with moral consequences to a degree that, e.g., our bodily appetite for food is not.