Daily Old Testament: Isaiah 36 and My Own Book "Leadings: A Catholic's Journey Through Quakerism" (Part 31)

Tonight is the night of our dear savior's birth. May God bless us all with His Light and Power and Presence!

Isaiah 36 – Footnote says this “Appendix” is a poem of return from exile and associated with Second Isaiah. Modern scholars think the “Second Isaiah” is not the work of the 8^th c. prophet. The name of Isaiah is not mentioned and the historical setting is 200 years after his time. Jerusalem has fallen and the nation is in exile. Cyrus is already present. Oracles of this part are more consoling and remote from the time of Ahaz and Hezekiah. The style is more rhetorical and repetitive. Monotheism is not only affirmed; it is expounded. Religious universalism is clearly expressed. Second Isaiah starts in chapter 40.

In the 14^th year of Hezekiah, Sennacherib of Assyria attacked. They wonder why Hezekiah is so confident that he would rebel, acting on reliance on his alliance with Egypt “that broken reed. . .which pricks and pierces the hand of the man who leans on it” (36:6). The cup-bearer wants those on the ramparts to hear what he is saying. The message is reported to King Hezekiah.

From Leadings: A Catholic’s Journey Through Quakerism

Part 31

Early Friends, of course, rejected “tradition” as the Catholic Church defines it as something wholly of man, not of God; but in this it seems to me they were being inconsistent with their own insight. In a sense they were denying that the Spirit could every have led the early church to organize itself as it did under the authority of bishops who were ordained and part of a continuing chain of leadership linking them to the apostles. Friends denied that the Spirit would ever have led the church to institute outward sacraments, creeds, and ordinances to keep the apostolic foundation secure. Friends saw “continuing revelation” as applying only to those gathered into their own particular vision of the church; the idea would have prospective validity only. The things the early church had decided were somehow not part of the chain of revelation, but still it is interesting to compare their approach to that of the Catholic Church. While both Catholics and Quakers hold that the Holy Spirit continues to inspire and work in his people and his church, both strongly insist that any new revelation be consistent with the foundations laid by the apostles. Our God is not a God of confusion but a God of order, so claims of new insights must cohere with foundational teaching.

In the Catholic Church the right and duty of discernment on the issue of what new insights are consistent with the foundation belongs to the hierarchy, though in practice there is input from the grassroots. Among Friends, however, the right and duty of discernment with respect to “new insight into the established gospel” as Robert Barclay called it, devolves onto the membership as a whole. The interesting thing is that in both communities—Catholic and Quaker—the process of accepting new insights is very slow and methodical. In a properly functioning Meeting, changes in corporate testimony, while always theoretically possible, are as rare as they are in the Catholic Church. The rules established by early Friends require virtual unanimity to institute new practices or approaches. But when changes are convincing and a strong relationship to the gospel foundations are shown, the changes brought about under the doctrine of continuing revelation are impressive. Friends were among the first, if not the first, Christian group to forbid members in good standing to own slaves. They rejected the stigma of inferiority that attached to women in other Christian denominations and were among the first Christian groups to work against the death penalty. Their deep conviction that was and violence are inconsistent with Christian profession is widely known and respected. They also were among the first Christians to challenge class and race privilege as being similarly inconsistent with the gospel.

On the other hand, Friends did not and do not see the same “continuing revelation” in the observances and practices that developed in the early church to preserve and transmit what Catholics call “the deposit of faith”—that foundation to which Robert Barclay referred, on which the faith is built. They did not and do not see “continuing revelation” in the methods the church adopted to assure the soundness of the foundation or to meet the challenges of growth, persecution, and the deepening insights that came with both. But I think that the history of the Christian faith shows that these methods were also important for assuring that the gospel would survive in the world. Faith in the reality and need for continuing revelation brings change, but slow respectful change. This is what I have seen among Friends at their best and in the Catholic Church at its best as well. The Catholic Church’s past is just much longer and more complex than is that of Friends.

Daily Old Testament: Isaiah 33-35 and My Own Book "Leadings: A Catholic's Journey Through Quakerism" (Part 30)

Isaiah 33 – Woe to the plunderer who has never been plundered himself. They will suffer what they have inflicted on others. “He who acts with integrity, who speaks sincerely and rejects extortionate profit, who waves away bribes from his hands, shuts suggestions of murder out of his ears and closes his eyes against crime; this man will dwell in the heights, he will find refuge in a citadel built on rock” (33:15-16).

Isaiah 34 – A prophesy about the end of Edom. Yahweh is angry with all the nations and has “marked them down for slaughter” (34:2). The land is “drenched with blood” (34:7) and “it shall lie waste age after age” (34:10). Over it “Yahweh will stretch the measuring line of chaos and the plumb-line of emptiness” (34:11).

Isaiah 35 – An ironic word – “Look, your God is coming, vengeance is coming, the retribution of God; he is coming to save you. Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, the ears of the deaf unsealed, then the lame shall leap like a deer and the tongues of the dumb sing for joy” (35:4-5). Those Yahweh ransoms shall return to Zion “shouting for joy” (35:10).

From Leadings: A Catholic’s Journey Through Quakerism

Part 30

Another “Quaker notion” that can be found in Catholic spirituality is the idea of “continuing revelation”. I have mentioned it several times. In a way, Catholics understood continuing revelation way before Quakers ever entered the scene. They simply called it tradition. Tradition and continuing revelation are grounded in the same belief—that God is not an artifact of history. He is as active today in the lives of his faithful as he was in the lives of the holy men and women of old, the ones we read about in the Bible. And he is active in the corporate life of his church, just as he was active in the creation of the universe, the history of his chosen people, and in the life of his Son. His wisdom is not confined to the Scriptures, though they are a product of his Spirit in a uniquely helpful way. But the men and women of Scripture are just men and women like us. God’s Spirit led and opened truth to them, and it does to us as well—not everyone in the same measure, but everyone nevertheless. We could not know God at all unless we had his Spirit in us:

“These things [things that are part of God’s wisdom] God

has revealed to us through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches

everything, even the depths of God” (1 Cor. 2:10).

But continuing revelation is not just an individual phenomenon, not even mainly an individual phenomenon. It is primarily corporate. It is something the gathered people work out together over time, not something any one believer can definitively discern. When Christ promises that the Advocate will be sent to teach the disciples everything (John 14:26), it is possible to interpret this as applying to each one individually, but it makes more sense to see it as a promise that runs to the group, to the body they will become together. Clearly it did not take long for the church to hold that the guidance of the Holy Spirit Christ bestowed upon them belonged in some more reliable sense to the corporate body and in particular to its bishops than it did to individual members (not that individual members could not claim a measure of this same spiritual guidance). So when the church set out to discern truth in controversial areas such as the conflict between Hebrew and Hellenic Jews at the First Council of Jerusalem, it was a corporate task, not an individual one. Similarly, when controversy arose as to what writing Christians should look to as authoritative and which were to be given less weight, it was a council of the church that made the final judgment. That is how the Scriptures most Protestants take as solely authoritative came to be assembled and canonized. It is on the authority of the councils and the church that organized them that the authority of Scripture must rest in the last analysis. Had the church as an institution lacked the guidance of the Spirit, one could hardly argue that the judgments of the councils they called should be respected.

Daily Old Testament: Habakkuk 1-2 and My Own Article on "Continuing Revelation" (Part 7)

Introduction to Habakkuk

Eighth of the 12 minor prophets. The text was probably from the late 7^th c. when the Chaldaeans [Hellenic term for Babylonians] were growing strong. The first two books are part of the Dead Sea Scrolls

Habakkuk 1 –“How long, O Lord, must I call for help? But you do not listen! ‘Violence is everywhere!’ I cry, but you do not come to save” (1:2). “I am surrounded by people who love to argue and fight. The law has become paralyzed and there is no justice in the courts” (1:4).

I think at least half the Bible is made up of cries for God’s attention, maybe half of all human history!

God responds to the prophet here though. “I am doing something in your own day, something you wouldn’t believe even if someone told you about it. I am raising up the Babylonians, a cruel and violent people. They will march across the world and conquer other lands” (1:5-6). They are violent and ambitious. “They sweep past like the wind and are gone. But they are deeply guilty, for their own strength is their god” (1:11).

The prophet cannot fathom that the Lord would let his people be destroyed. “Must we be strung up on the hooks and caught in their nets while they rejoice and celebrate? Then they will worship their nets and burn incense in front of them” (1:15-16). Will they never be stopped?

Habakkuk 2 – The prophet waits for God to respond to his complaints, and He finally does, but the promise He makes is for a future redemption. “If it seems slow in coming, wait patiently, for it will surely take place” (2:3). The wealthy trust that all will be well, but “wealth is treacherous and the arrogant are never at rest. They open their mouths as wide as the grave, and like death, they are never satisfied” (2:5).

But the comfortable wealth they think they enjoy will not last forever. “You believe your wealth will buy security, putting your family’s nest beyond the reach of danger. But by the murders you committed, you have shamed your name and forfeited your lives” (2:9-10).

All the evils committed by these self-centered people – gloating over weaknesses in other they help to cultivate, destroying the forests of Lebanon, destroying animals in the wild, making idols to worship – all these things will be revealed as empty and lifeless.

From Leadings: A Catholic’s Journey Through Quakerism -

“Continuing Revelation”

Part 7

I did finally make the decision to join the Society of Friends in 1981-82. It was not a decision that implied complete accord or comfort with the state of things among Friends, or even complete agreement with everything early Friends had said about the gospel.

I was not entirely in agreement with early Friends’ radical rejection of outward things. To me it seemed obvious that the outward dimension of our human lives—our experiences, words, histories, what others observe and say—all played an essential role in the “epistemology” of faith, its development in us. We needed to get “to know” the Christ who was in us by getting acquainted with him as best we could by learning what we could about him – what others wrote about him, about his life and about why others saw him as the fulfillment of the “types and shadows” of God’s presence under the Old Covenant.

My whole journey had been one of coming to know within the things I had stumbled around outwardly for years. I could in no way say from my experience that I could have come into these things without the outward dimension, but I didn’t hold Fox’s rejection of “outwardness” against him either. I just sensed that what he had meant by “outward” was different in some essential way from what modern people understood by the term. Modern Friends had a much more rigorous sense of what was to be understood by “outward”, including in the concept not only outward rites or formulas but even the concepts embodied in the words we used, the conceptual and linguistic forms the Christian religion had taken in its development.

The other thing I could not accept was early Friends’ complete rejection of sixteen hundred years of church history as sunk in apostasy. This seemed to me a little over the top, part of the Reformation’s radical rejection of the “tradition” as it had developed in the Catholic Church. But I excused these excesses by seeing Friends to some extent as prophets to the churches of the seventeenth century. They had not recovered a lost gospel; they had simply challenged Christians in all churches against getting caught up in the outward forms of Christianity—whether the outward form was a way of worshipping, a creedal formula, or a way of approaching Scripture—and to emphasize the inward and experiential dimension of the gospel in which they professed to believe. Then again, I tried to look past this disagreement by not seeing it as something central to the early Quaker message but something incidental only, a part of their Reformation zeal.

Daily Old Testament: Zepahniah 1-3 and My Own Article on "Continuing Revelation" (Part 6)

Introduction: Zephaniah, one of the “minor prophets,” was the great-grandson of Hezekiah and lived during the time of Josiah (641-610 BC). He was a contemporary and supporter of Jeremiah and was active as a prophet during the reign of King Josiah (641-611). The two preceding kings – Amon and Manassah had introduced the cult of Baal and Astarte into the Holy City and Josiah wanted to put an end to it.

Zephaniah 1 – After introducing Zephaniah, there is no preliminary statement saying that the words are from the Lord.  He begins with the Lord’s message and it is painful: “I mean to sweep away everything off the face of the earth . . .sweep away men and beasts. . .send the wicked staggering, and wipe man off the face of the earth. . .” (1:2-3)

“I will put an end to all the idolatrous priests, so that the memory of them will disappear. [T]hey go up to their roofs and bow down to the sun, moon, and stars. They claim to follow the Lord, but then they worship Molech too” (1:4-5).

“Stand in silence in the presence of the Sovereign Lord, for the awesome day of the Lord’s judgment is near” (1:7).

The Lord will punish the leaders of Judah, those who take part in pagan worship and those who engage in violence and deceit (1:9). The merchants and traders also will be destroyed, those who are complacent about how they live. “That terrible day of the Lord is near. . . a day of bitter tears a day when even strong men will cry out” (1:14). Silver and gold will not save anyone. “He will make a terrifying end of all the people on earth” (1:18).

Zephaniah 2 – The prophet puts out a call to conversion: “Seek the Lord, all who are humble, and follow his commands. Seek to do what is right and to live humbly” (2:3). If you do this, perhaps the Lord will protect you on the day of anger.

“Gaza and Ashkelon will be abandoned, Ashdod and Ekron torn down” (2:4). The Philistine coast will be destroyed. “The remnant of the tribe of Judah will pasture there. They will rest at night in the abandoned houses in Ashkelon. For the Lord their God will visit his people in kindness and restore their prosperity again” (2:7).

Zephaniah refers to Egypt as Ethiopia because the Ethiopians ruled there right around this time; they too will go down, along with the land of Assyria to the north (2:13). All of those who were full of pride and looked their noses down on Judah, they all will be brought low.

Zephaniah 3 – Jerusalem will suffer too. “She would never listen to the call, would never learn the lesson; she has never trusted in Yahweh, never drawn near to her God” (3:2). The leaders, the judges and the prophets are all like “roaring lions”, “ravenous wolves” and “arrogant liars”; the “priests defile the Temple by disobeying God’s instructions” (3:4).

The Lord will not entirely abandon the city, however. God promises to one day “live among [them]” (3:15), King of His own land Israel. “He is a mighty savior. He will take delight in you with gladness. With his love, he will calm all your fears” (3:17). Those who oppressed you will be punished and those who have been exiled will return. “I will give you a good name, a name of distinction, among all the nations of the earth, as I restore your fortunes before their very eyes. I, the Lord, have spoken!” (3:20).

I have long been interested in the difference between the language and mentality of the Old Testament prophets and the language and mentality of those “reformer”/”prophets” who lived in Europe during the time of the Reformation. The early prophets saw God as ready to punish and even completely reject his “chosen” ones, but these prophets never separated themselves from the punished ones, never went off and thought of starting the whole thing over again from scratch.

From Leadings: A Catholic’s Journey Through Quakerism -

“Continuing Revelation”

Part 6

While the statements of Friends’ principles and testimonies in the “Disciplines” are not technically binding, the way things are articulated among members tends to stray a good deal from official statements—adopting more contemporary ideas, approaches, and ways of articulating values. The whole tenor of antiwar discussions among Friends during the Vietnam conflict varied hardly at all from what I had heard among atheistic antiwar activists. Of course, I speak only from my own experience here and do not mean to imply that Friends elsewhere did not employ more faith-based rationales for opposing the war. But I also noticed this in other areas as well, such as support for women’s rights and human rights generally. Here Friends’ articulation was rooted in Enlightenment rights theory—not in any radical understanding of Christ’s teaching.

In the early 1980s, when I was considering joining Friends, the issues of continuing revelation and the question of personal and community discernment were at the root of many of the tensions that existed in the Society. There was no unity among unprogrammed Friends on the question of whether or not the Scriptures were texts somehow “given forth” by the Spirit we worshipped, and there was no fundamental unity over the nature or identity of that Spirit itself. So while most Friends went about confidently asserting that the Spirit was giving forth truth today as it had done throughout history, virtually every attempt to test openings against Scripture or against tradition fell flat. In the year when I was considering joining, however, the seriousness of the situation did not hit me. It seemed so logically possible to win the day—everything in the earliest witness of Friends was so consistent and so deeply Christian it just seemed impossible for things to be as off track as they now sometimes appeared. But time would change my assessment.

Daily Old Testament: Micah 6-7and My Own Article on "Continuing Revelation" (Part 5)

Micah 6 – The mountains and hills will be witness to Yahweh’s accusations against his people – the very foundations of the earth. God has given us so many blessings – how shall we return thanks? Sacrifices? Libations? First-born children? NO!! “What is good has been explained to you, man; this is what Yahweh asks of you: only this, to act justly, to love tenderly and to walk humbly with your God” (6:8).

But what we do instead is keep the standard of the world – we gain wealth by cheating and violence (6:11-12). Omri and Ahab set the bad example then, but there are similar models in our day.  Because they [and we] follow these bad examples the Lord says, “I will make an example of you, bringing you to complete ruin. You will be treated with contempt, mocked by all who see you” (6:16).

Micah 7 – The prophet is miserable. “The godly people have all disappeared; not one honest person is left on the earth” (7:2). Corruption is everywhere – “the man in power pronounces as he pleases” (7:3). But punishment will come from the North (the traditional invasion route). Micah says, “for my part, I look to Yahweh, my hope is in the God who will save me” (7:7).

“Do not gloat over me, my enemy: though I have fallen, I shall rise; though I live in darkness, Yahweh is my light" (7:8). This does not happen just once in history and it does not apply to only one people. We today also yearn for God’s care and his word to be felt palpably in our lives, both personal and corporate. “As in the days when you came out of Egypt grant us to see wonders” (7:13).

“What god can compare with you: taking fault away, pardoning crime, not cherishing anger for ever but delighting in showing mercy?” (7:18). Have pity on us. The great faithfulness of God is celebrated by Micah.  God, who gave promises to Abraham and Jacob, whose people so often fail him and run off after other gods; this God of ours will never fail to deal with the guilt and sin of those who seek Him out.  The promise always remains though only a small remnant of those under the promise respond.

From Leadings: A Catholic’s Journey Through Quakerism -

“Continuing Revelation”

Part 5

The idea of checking one’s own sense of who Christ was with the Christ of Scripture was an important one to me. I remember wondering how modern Friends could be so cavalier about not feeling they needed to be familiar with the Scriptures, when really the only way we could be introduced to Christ was through these early writings. That he was more than the writings, I could accept; but that he could be known without first being revealed to us through the men who had known him or known others who had known him—this I had trouble seeing. The Scriptures were not dispensable even if they were not completely exhaustive.

The other part of the Friends’ discernment approach that I found meaningful was the way they used the idea of the cross—that the life Christ offered us was on the other side of the cross. The way this worked was simple—you could test a leading by asking yourself if the leading would bring you satisfaction and a sense of fulfilled desire or restraint and self-denial. If the leading served your “worldly desires” or gratified you in some immediate way, it was probably not from God. I know this sounds crazy to modern ears, perhaps a little masochistic too. But it was not. Maybe it was oversimplified, but the idea of it was that if something you felt called to do simply served you, your wishes, or your will, it probably was something rooted in your own will. And what you strove to come into as a Friend was to stand in God’s will and come into a life that stood in his will. The testimony of Friends was that this life would ultimately be much richer and much better than any life you could conceive of in your own power.

Another important principle of discernment among Friends was the principle of testing individual leadings against the corporate judgment of the gathered Meeting. This was the whole purpose of what later came to be called the Meeting for Business. Here “clearness” could be sought by individuals who felt burdened with some “leading” or “call” they needed support for—like traveling in the ministry or undertaking some project requiring resources beyond those personally available. The Meeting could also step in if it was united in believing that a Friend had overstepped his or her guide or brought disrepute on the Society.

The principles outlined here created among Friends a conservative way of containing the dangers inherent in their new covenant approach to Christ’s gospel. And when they were combined with making changes in the established decisions and conducting the practical affairs of the Society, they were very stable indeed. Indeed, it was difficult to make any changes to established ways of conducting community business or articulating the principles of the Society. Any policy or practice formally instituted by a Meeting or Yearly Meeting for its constitutive Meetings was impossible to change without there being “unity” to change it—and unity meant fundamental accord among everyone involved in the business session called to consider the policy. There were a few ways around this demand, but very few. It would be too complicated to describe in detail the business procedures Friends instituted in the early days of the Society, but they have kept the Society’s formal documents (the minutes and disciplines published by Meetings and Yearly Meetings) very “traditional”, very consistent with early documents and statements.

Daily Old Testament: Micah 5 and My Own Article on "Continuing Revelation" (Part 4)

Micah 5 – The terrible weakness and frailty of Israel’s earthly kings is compared to the coming strength of the messianic ruler “[Y]ou, (Bethlehem) Ephrathah, the least of the clans . . .out of you will be born for me the one who is to rule over Israel. . .” (5:2). “The people of Israel will be abandoned to their enemies until the woman in labor gives birth” (5:3). Then the time will come when a new ruler of Israel will come and lead his fellow countrymen “with the Lord’s strength, in the majesty of the name of the Lord his God” (5:4). He will lead his flock from exile back to the own land.

The remnant “left in Israel will take their place among the nations. They will be like a lion among the animals of the forest, . . . [and] the people of Israel will stand up to their foes, and all their enemies will be wiped out” (5:9). The Lord says He will tear down their walls, put an end to witchcraft, destroy idols and sacred pillars, “so you will never again worship the world of your own hands” (5:13). The Lord will pour out his vengeance on “all the nations that refuse to obey me” (5:15).

From Leadings: A Catholic’s Journey Through Quakerism -

“Continuing Revelation”

Part 4

Still, there were some outward guideposts or principles you could employ in discernment. These were never written in the form of rules (heaven forbid!); they simply developed over time. One was insisting on the unchanging nature of God’s truth. Just as the promises of Christ are utterly constant, so the “spirit of Christ, by which we are guided, is not changeable, so as once to command us from a thing as evil and again to move unto it” (Fox, Journal, 399).  This principle was associated with Friends’ articulation of their peace testimony, but it was equally applicable to all the truths they saw as flowing from God.

The Spirit of Christ they had “come into” was the same Spirit that had “given forth” the Scriptures, so it stood to reason that Scripture could be used to test the consistency of one’s personal leading to the witness of Christ contained there. The fruits of your profession should be fruits of the Spirit—“love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control” (Gal. 5:22)—not the fruits of the “fleshly”, unredeemed nature—“fornication, impurity . . .idolatry   strife, jealousy, anger . . . and things like these” (Gal. 5:19-21). If there was a clear statement of principle set forth there, you could not easily set yourself in opposition to it. Friends denied that this amounted to “setting up” Scripture as an outward authority, but the effect was much the same. If Scripture clearly testified to something and you felt led to a path that was inconsistent with it, or if the fruits of what you believed promised to be bad or destructive, you were likely to be judged out of unity with the Truth.

Yet there are difficulties in this way of looking at things. The Scriptures, if viewed as a matter of words only, contain inconsistent admonitions. On the question of slavery, for example, there are words that seem to sanction or accept slavery as a part of civilized life, which believers may participate in—such as Paul’s advice to slaves to “obey [their] early masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ . . .” (Eph. 6:5). Yet Friends challenged the definitiveness of Paul’s words in several ways—by examining closely the “fruits” of slavery in both slave-owner and slave and finding them universally corrupting and destructive, and second, by arguing that the whole tenor and development of the biblical “story” that God’s Spirit had given forth helped us to see that man was not to be viewed or used as chattel.

Christ was the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow as far as Friends were concerned. Another way of applying the test of consistency was to ask if the Christ you were listening to and obeying inwardly was the same Christ that the Scriptures had revealed, or if he had changed to suit the times you lived in. This standard was beautifully articulated by James Nayler:

“Now seeing he has appeared who is from everlasting and changes not, here is an everlasting trial for you all . . . whether you profess him from the letter or the light; come try [test] whether Christ is in you. Measure your life and weigh your profession with that which cannot deceive you, which has stood and will stand forever, for he is sealed of the father.

First, see if your Christ be the same that was from everlasting to everlasting, or is he changed according to the times: . . . Does he whom you obey as your leader lead you out to war against this world and all the pride and glory, fashions and customs, love and pleasures and whatever else is not of God therein? Does he justify any life now but what he justified in the prophets and apostles and saints of old?” (Nayler, Early Quaker Writings, 109-110).

There is an irony here however, which should not go unmentioned. Nayler was one of the most promising of Fox’s early followers. But only three years after writing these words, he himself faced severe censure (virtual rejection) by Fox and other Quaker leaders when he brought their movement into disrepute by engaging in a stupid display of “street theater”—permitting himself to be greeted entering a town in the manner in which Christ had been greeted on entering Jerusalem with palms and praises of a bevy of female followers. The municipal authorities responded by charging him with blasphemy, a charge that resulted in his being pilloried, whipped, his tongue bored through with a hot iron, a “B” for blasphemer being branded on his forehead, and three years imprisonment. He was eventually accepted back into the Society and his writing continued to be held in esteem. Nayler’s actions demonstrated the very difficulty we are exploring her.

Were you led into the same kind of lowliness Christ exemplified, or were you led into self-aggrandizement and pride, thinking you knew more than you really did? Did you seek to justify a way of life that was fundamentally different from the way of life the saints had always been called to live or to seek some liberty no follower of Christ would have sought? The standard was not changed—only the means by which we came into a knowledge of that standard.

Were you eager to serve others and to shed the love of God abroad, or were you led into actions that served your own interests?

“. . . be servants to the Truth and do not strive for mastery, but serve one another in Love, “Wash one another’s feet” (John 13:14). Take Christ for your example that I may hear of no strife among you” (Fox, Letters, 55).

Were you enamored of worldly fashions and honors, or did you turn your back on these things as Christ had? Infatuation with the world’s delights had to be put aside if one was to come into the life Christ offered, for that life lay on the other side of his cross.

Daily Old Testament: Micah 4 and My Own Article on "Continuing Revelation" (Part 3)

Micah 4 – “In the last days, the mountain of the Lord’s house will be the highest of all—the most important place on earth. It will be raised above the other hills, and people from all over the world will stream there to worship. People from many nations will come and say, ‘Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of Jacob’s God. There he will teach us his ways, and we will walk in his paths.’” (4:1-2).

God will “wield authority over many peoples . . .they will hammer their swords into ploughshares, their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will no longer fight against nation, nor train for war anymore. Everyone will live in peace and prosperity, enjoying their own grapevines and fig trees, for there will be nothing to fear” (4:3-4). This is the promise of the Lord.

The chapter ends with a promise that the Lord will gather the lame and the exiles together, “those whom I have filled with grief” (4:6), and they will become a strong nation. “The kingship will be restored to my precious Jerusalem” (4:8). The exile has actually not yet begun. But this promise is one they will take with them. But the Babylonians do not know that the Lord will make them strong in the end.

From Leadings: A Catholic’s Journey Through Quakerism -

“Continuing Revelation”

Part 3

The idea of “continuing revelation” was a very important concept for early Friends, but it didn’t stand alone. It stood in tension with another important idea—the idea that the Spirit of God that brought forth all truth was not a God of disorder. The best articulation of this in the early years was in Robert Barclay’s Apology, published first in 1673 to defend Friends’ interpretation of the gospel against charges of heresy. Barclay defends the idea that the Spirit of God continues to lead and influence the faithful, but he is careful to assure his readers that such continuing revelation will never lead to utterly new and contradictory “truths”.

“We firmly believe that there is no other doctrine or gospel to be preached other than that which was delivered by the apostles. And we freely subscribe to the saying in Gal. 1:8: ‘If we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed.’

In other words, we distinguish between a revelation of a new gospel and new doctrines, and new insight into the established gospel and doctrines. We plead for the latter, but we utterly deny the former. We firmly believe that there are no new foundations to be laid other than those which have already been laid. But added insight is needed on matters for which the foundations have already been laid” Dean Freiday, ed., Barclay’s Apology in Modern English - published through a grant from the Rebecca White Trust of the Monthly Meeting of Friends of Philadelphia, 1967, 63).

Early Friends knew that there were competing voices within people, and they knew and spoke eloquently about the fact that hearing and obeying God required a personal experience of Christ’s cross in relation to their own wills and selves. Fox himself had struggled against the competing voices that called to him, the “two thirsts” that clamored within him for attention during Christ’s ministration to him in the “spiritual wilderness” (The “ministration of Moses” in his own journey).

When certain early recruits to the Quaker vision of the gospel went off on escapades Fox thought were not authentic or that brought the movement into disrepute, he set up a structure of Monthly Meetings that he hoped would oversee individuals and test their leadings. But I don’t think Fox every fully appreciated the potential for confusion that lay in his rejection of outward standards. He simply believed that the gospel he had recovered had a power and an order in it that reached to the heart and transformed it. Christ’s sheep “know his voice. They will not follow a stranger, but they will run from him because the do not know the voice of stranger” (John 10:4-5). If there were disorderly people in a Monthly Meeting, he encouraged the “more seasoned” to go to them and labor with them as Jesus recommends in Matthew’s gospel (18: 15-17).

Daily Old Testament: Micah 1 and My Own Article on "Continuing Revelation" (Part 1)

Micah

Introduction - This prophetic book was written sometime in the 8^th c. BC before the fall of Samaria in 722 BC. Micah is one of the twelve “minor prophets”; he was a contemporary of Isaiah, Amos and Hosea and the kings who reigned during his prophetic life were Jotham (742-735), Ahaz (735-715) and Hezekiah (715-696). His message is addressed to both Samaria and Jerusalem; he was the first prophet to predict the downfall of Jerusalem. But he also prophesied Jerusalem’s restoration and an “era of universal peace.”  There are parts of his prophetic message that later became central to Christianity, especially his prophesy that Bethlehem would be the birthplace of the Messiah.

Micah 1 – “Look! The Lord is coming! He leaves his throne in heaven and tramples the heights of the earth. The mountains melt beneath his feet and flow into the valleys like wax in a fire, like water pouring down a hill” (1:3-4).

Why is the Lord coming? Because of Israel’s “rebellion” (1:5), and especially the sins of Samaria, its capital. The city has turned to idolatry, and in Judah too its major city, Jerusalem has turned to idols as well.

The prophet declares that the Lord will “make the city of Samaria a heap of ruins” (1:6). All the idols will be destroyed. “These thing were bought with the money earned by her prostitution” (1:7). It is his called to “mourn and lament.” (1:8). He will “walk around barefoot and naked . . . howl like a jackal and moan like an owl” (1:8).

There are notes indicating that the writer is using a lot of assonance and playing on the words used to emphasize that the twelve cities are all guilty of different crimes. He begs the people of Judah to repent “for the children you love will be snatched away. Make yourselves as bald as a vulture, for your little ones will be exiled to distant lands” (1:16)

“Continuing Revelation”

Now I come to what many who admire Friends’ spirituality see as the “fly in the ointment”. How can you be sure that the voice you are hearing and obeying is God’s voice?

It was no trouble in the 1970s and ‘80s to find support for the idea—revolutionary in the seventeenth century—that the individual might come into a personal sense of what truth is. Everyone I knew in the 1970s and ‘80s believed that he or she could arrive at truth through his or her own efforts—trial, error, reflection, consultation with others. The really tough question was how could you know if your view of the truth was true. Was anything really true in an absolute sense?

Fox’s conviction that the inward Teacher would direct all people without the need for others to instruct them, the sense he had of Scripture being secondary to the Spirit in terms of authority, his call for people to come away from the dry husks of outward forms and legalism in religion all seemed consistent with the notion that individuals could find their way on their own.

Contemporaries of Fox often mocked the Friends’ assertion that they could know God’s will experientially without the aid of church authority of Scripture. Fox tells of one incident he faced:

“ . . . one [man] burst out into a passion and said he could speak his experiences as well as I; but I told him experience was one thing but to go with a message and a word from the Lord as the prophets and the apostles had and did, and as I had done to them, this was another thing” (Quoted in Faith and Practice, sec. 19:07).

Fox did not think he was promoting religious subjectivism. He really thought it was Christ—the Christ of the Scriptures and the Christ of history—who dwelled in us and taught us the way to go. But this Spirit of Christ and the truths he embodied were not reducible to church formulas or dead and encased in Scripture texts. This Christ lived. He was resurrected and with us always. Fox and early Friends very much believed in the reality of God’s continuing revelation in history.