dive into mark

Empty Meetinghouse © Mike Goren / CC

The absence from Friends’ worship of the outward observance of the Lord’s Supper, water baptism, and other sacraments emphasizes the reality of inward experience. Friends are aware of the power of a true, inward baptism of the Holy Spirit; in meeting for worship at its best they know direct communion with God and fellowship with one another. These experiences make the outward rites seem unnecessary and, to some Friends, a hindrance to full attainment of the spiritual experiences which are symbolized.

… Friends affirm the sacramental nature of the whole of life when it is under the leading of the Spirit. Any moment, any relationship, any object when so touched can serve as a sacrament. Insofar as we are faithful in our testimonies, our very lives may thus serve for others as the outward and visible evidence of inward and invisible communion.

Faith and Practice, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting

§

Seven comments here (latest comments)

1. I enjoyed that. I’ve been to some ostentatious ceremonies, involving lots of gold, and I much prefer the simple approach.

   — Eric Mill 

2. I once thought the sacrament of the Religious Society of Friends was silence. A weighty Friend suggested that the sacrament was more a verb tied to one’s actions “when it is under the leading of the Spirit”. Your sons give their own “vocal ministry”, affirming, that life is action, when your father brings them to Meeting on First Day.

   — Jim Deming 

3. As the member of a very sacramental church (some would even say our liturgy is Byzantine ;) I absolutely agree that there /must/ be an inward experience — that sacrament cannot be an outward-only experience.

   That said, my experience, and the (admittedly disaffected) Anabaptists I’ve talked to agree, is that we need the physical manifestation of the sacraments. We’re not purely spiritual beings and the physical act leads us to the spiritual truth. Still, I would say even this physical/spiritual dichotomy (physical act vs spiritual truth) is a false one. The spiritual truth is “one” with the physical act.

   — Mark A Hershberger 

4. Although I don’t consider myself religious I have a deep connection with the thought expressed here: “Any moment, any relationship, any object when so touched can serve as a sacrament.” Thank you for posting it, Mark.

   — Joel Norvell 

5. Interesting indeed. While I admit that I really don’t see how “The absence… emphasizes the reality of inward experience,” I can definitely agree that “Any moment, any relationship, any object when so touched can serve as a sacrament.” I’ve always considered the physical “sacraments” to be mere symbols, but important symbols nonetheless. Certainly not distractions so long as their true meaning is understood.

   — Bob Aman 

6. Spending time at the main Friend’s Meeting House in Philly during the 2000 Republican National Convention, which I was *protesting*, not attending (!), only increased my respect for this religious tradition. Which is noteworthy since, as an atheist formally-trained, former religious studies scholar, my default position is not exactly to respect religious traditions.

   The Friends in Philly took us in when the cops started cracking heads (yes, it really happened Virginia) and Al Sharpton came into town to speak up for us. An odd pairing, Al Sharpton and the Friends, but that’s Philly for ya.

   I’ll always be grateful to both.

   — Kendall Clark 

7. Thanks Mark, for posting that thing — “…any object…”, even.

   In Copenhagen (Denmark) I saw a Friends poster—really just an A4 printout set in Times New Roman—with their core tenets as bullet-points. Their simplicity is potent stuff. I also respect this tradition. (Me: an ex-Christian atheist.)

   — Olle Jonsson 

Respond privately

I am no longer accepting public comments on this post, but you can use this form to contact me privately. (Your message will not be published.)

§