Page 13 - 1.News and Views Spring 2025 for Jim.

Meeting for worship for Buisness was taking. I have not believed it was in the eloquence of the
ministry, rather that it seems to come from without.

If we proceed to listen, to respond to that tap, we then have to allow that message to percolate within
us, much as we do with spoken ministry. Generally speaking therefore, not to make an instant
interpretation, but allow it to reach somewhere within us where it makes some sense, or it becomes
really clear. Taking the initiative and asking God for a conversation, or, worse, to do something for us,
seems presumptuous, as if it's OK to approach God whenever the time suits us. Of course, we do
approach God when we are in dire need and hopefully receive some comfort or some helpful hints. I
suspect that at times, like a wise parent, God leaves us to work it out for ourselves, trusting in our
ability to do so. Does all this mean that I am comfortable with being open to the presence of God? Not
at all, I am firmly in the ‘glass darkly’ and coping with uncertainty categories.

I am, however. in that category of people who believe that God has spoken, in some form, to them. I
am hesitant to write this: people who claim such a connection with God tend to be approached in a
sideways manner with a handy reason for some urgent matter elsewhere at the ready. George Fox
believed he did not need the intermediary of a priest to connect with God: this belief is part of the
bedrock of Quakerism. Elgar believed that music is everywhere, all he had to do was reach out and
grasp it. God, or whatever name you prefer is rather like that, but I make no claim whatsoever that I
have any degree of expertise in understanding what I may receive, or indeed that I unfailingly attend to
that tap and listen intently. Earthly matters can so easily crowd out that tap, cause it not to be noticed.

I said I would address the question of belief to some extent. It is true that we have no fixed, or indeed
variable, creed. I am happy with that. To believe something is not the same as following a creed. As we
Quakers are not too disturbed by uncertainty in these matters of faith, I, yes, believe that we are as
people crossing a river by means of stepping stones, in a thick mist so we cannot see the distant bank,
which represents the end of our life on earth. As we stand on a particular stepping stone, wondering
which of the many stones we should move to, for we have no choice but to move forward in life, we
believe that the one we are on is safe, otherwise we quickly jump onto another one which looks safe.

At times we are content to move through life via identical stones, equivalent to something like a creed,
content to move via what is safe and familiar. At other times we are faced with unfamiliar stones,
which may look safer and more suitable. If they suit us when we move, we believe in their safety and
are content with more of the same. In other words, we need to believe that where we stand at any
point in time is the right place at that point in time, but as we travel through life, the right place may
look somewhat different, a different stone that we believe is safe and right for us.

This has been written in some haste as circumstances delayed the opportunity to start earlier.
Consequently it may appear to suggest I have answers to these matters – I am aware that sometimes
my writing comes over as proclaiming certainty. All it does is reflect my relative contentment with my
present stone. The next stone may nudge me to believe in a different process. My practice in
counselling was never to point out glaring contradictions, even in one sentence, that I sometimes
heard from clients. Each client's truth was merely moving from one truth to another, from one stone
to stand on to another. Belief and truth may be constant for a long period, but hopefully are never
immune from changing in the experimental fashion described by early Friends.

13