What Would Spirit Have Me Do?

How Friends Incubator for Public Ministry Is Lifting Up Spiritual Gifts

Founded in 2025 by Maryland Friend Windy Cooler, the Friends Incubator for Public Ministry offers education, opportunities for spiritual development, and community building for Quakers who feel called to ministries. Each participant in the fellowship collaborates with an elder and their larger meeting community. Fellows participate in residencies, storytelling, and retreats, according to the incubator’s website. Two members of the organization’s advisory board, Della Stanley-Green and nova sturrup, spoke with Friends Journal after a recent weeklong retreat at Pendle Hill study center in Wallingford, Pa. The conversations have been edited for length and clarity.

Interview with Della Stanley-Green

Sharlee DiMenichi: Please give me an overview of your current and historic role with the incubator.

Della Stanley-Green: I’m currently on the advisory board, and I actually was part of the temporary advisory group that worked with Windy Cooler as she was moving from the idea of the incubator into its establishment. I’ve been around for the early stages as well as the current reality.

SD: Tell me about the development of the incubator.

DS-G: In that year before the incubator was actually launched as an entity, Windy put together several collaborative programs, including three workshops on public ministry that she and the Quaker Leadership Center that I work for did together with Powell House. There were several Quaker organizations that were collaborating in getting this discussion of public ministry out in front of things. There were articles that Windy was writing for Friends Journal. My codirector, Andy Stanton-Henry, was a co-presenter with Windy in the three workshops in the fall of 2024. Those workshops were really well-received with a nice breadth of Friends participating.

SD: How did you first realize the need for spiritual and financial support of public ministry, and how did that realization evolve over time?

DS-G: I grew up as a Quaker preacher’s kid. I know that some folks are like, “Oh, Quaker pastors, we don’t have those.” Well, some of us do. So I’ve always been aware of that on one level. On another level, it was not until I was an adult that I realized there are lots of other people engaged in public ministries that may or may not be supported by a Quaker institution or a Quaker meeting. So it’s always been something that’s in the mix in my mind. If somebody feels called to something in their meeting, there ought to be something to help them be able to be released. That old concept of being released for ministry—which I think is probably the healthiest model that we’ve had—I don’t think we know what it means anymore. How do we make sure that the needs of people called to public ministry are cared for, so they do not weigh on the minds, hearts, and spirits of those who are called to ministry? Some Friends think, “Well, unless a person has the financial means to do those kinds of things, they shouldn’t engage in that kind of ministry.” I think that’s very classist.

SD: Could you talk a bit more about being released to minister? What does that involve?

DS-G: I think mostly it is about having these conversations about what is needed. Back in the day, it would have been—particularly when a pair of women traveled in the ministry—how their kids were taken care of. The people in the meeting would work together with the rest of the family to make sure that their children were taken care of. If a person is going to be gone for two months traveling in ministry, for example, are there Friends who will stop by their home and make sure that things are okay and take care of their lawn, take care of their pets, assist them in thinking about whether they might want to rent their house out for those couple of months?

SD: How do you respond to the belief that Quakers are all ministers, so public ministers should not receive particular support?

DS-G: I disagree with that. I do believe we’re all ministers. I think we’ve lost some sense of what that means, too. I think sometimes we cut it down to this person is gifted to serve on this committee or that committee, rather than really helping them learn what their spiritual gifts are. We could also learn how they contribute not just to the life of the meeting but the life of the world.

I think what we’re saying is not everybody has gifts for the same things. This is not a great analogy, but it’s the best I can think of right now. I am five feet, two inches tall, and I am past middle age. I am not going to be a WNBA basketball player. I’m just not gifted for that. But it doesn’t mean that there aren’t things that I can do in this world that are helpful or entertaining or whatever.

I think when we deny that people have different gifts from each other, and some of them are called to things that are maybe a little bit more extraordinary, that doesn’t diminish the gifts of other people. We’re not about diminishing people. We’re about lifting people up. I think it was Elton Trueblood who said it wasn’t that Quakers didn’t have clergy; we actually abolished the laity. 

We’re all doing things that say, “Look, God’s present.” The more we can release people in public ministry, the more we will discover that all kinds of gifts of ministry will begin to be noticed.

SD: And how do you define public ministry?

DS-G: I define it as any ministry that has an effect beyond the four walls of the meetinghouse.

SD: What are the most common internal obstacles Friends must overcome to live their callings to public ministry?

DS-G: I think there’s often a sense of, who am I to be doing this? For many Friends, that’s a stage that just has to be gone through. I think we have to talk about that stage. It’s okay to struggle with that; it’s okay to question it; and it’s really helpful to bring that to other Friends and to engage in a clearness committee, talk with the spiritual director, or gather a couple of treasured friends and talk these things through.

SD: What personal characteristics make someone a good elder for a person in the fellowship program?

DS-G: There’s always the foundational willingness and ability to listen at a deep spiritual level. Elders also can ask really good questions—just like one would ask in a clearness committee—that are open-ended and not designed to promote one’s agenda or one’s particular perspective. Also it’s good to have that sense that you can be with that person, support that person, and to help ground that person. An elder would be clearly deeply rooted in their own spiritual practices and regularly engaging in them.

SD: What are some examples of spiritual questions people explore when considering whether they are called to public ministry?

DS-G: A question that I asked myself was, why does this matter? Why does this matter to me? Why does this matter now? Why has this particular concern been laid on my heart? There are not always straightforward or even clear answers to all those questions, but those are the kinds of questions that make a real difference.

SD: What are the typical practical constraints that prevent Friends from following a leading to public ministry?

DS-G: They might not be sure that they will be supported in their meeting or that the meeting may not sufficiently understand what public ministry is and why it matters. Even among programmed and pastoral Friends, there can be a suspicion about whether people are trying to make their mark on the world or among Friends: that there’s not enough humility involved. I would counter that to say sometimes I think we as Friends misunderstand humility to mean that we have to abase ourselves. And I don’t think that is healthy at all. I think humility means a right measure of ourselves: knowing where we’re not prepared, knowing where we have to learn things, and knowing where we need to rely on other people.

The concept of equity versus equality can also apply in this situation. To many Friends, equality means we don’t do anything that makes anybody look different from anybody else. Whereas with equity, we understand that people have different starting places. It also means sometimes we have different ending places, and they’re equal in value. Those landing places are equal because they’re about being who we were gifted to be in the world. If we squash gifts of ministry, we’re squandering gifts. As a Christian Quaker, I would say that by not acknowledging people’s gifts in ministry and not helping release them, we are probably guilty of squashing the Spirit.

SD: What do you most want Friends exploring calls to public ministry to know?

DS-G: They are not alone.

SD: What would you like to add?

DS-G: What’s been exciting to me about this project is that the incubator has tapped into something that is already going on. People have already been frustrated with not knowing how to engage in public ministry in ways that are as life-giving as they need, as their meetings need, as the world needs, and as the Religious Society of Friends needs.

Interview with nova sturrup

Sharlee DiMenichi: Please give me an overview of your current and historic role with the incubator.

nova sturrup: I am on the board, and I was also one of the teachers for the retreat that just happened [in April]. I spent the week facilitating training, workshops, and conversations for the fellows and their elders.

SD: Would you tell me more about that? How did you prepare for it?

ns: I had a co-facilitator. It was amazing. We chose a different theme every day, and moved through the week just kind of flowing. We prepared for it with a few meetings, sharing readings, sharing music, sharing quotes. It was very interesting once we got there: the reality of what we were holding was different from what we had prepared to do. We did some triage in the moment, and changed a bunch of the curriculum, moved some things around, and ended up allowing the fellows to take the lead in terms of conversations. They were asking such great questions and so curious and thoughtful about what they were sharing about their ministries and their experiences with becoming public ministers or becoming recorded. The room was really alive every time we met, and it was just incredibly beautiful. So I felt, as a facilitator, like there was Spirit moving so clearly that I could step back and allow it, rather than make what we had planned happen.

SD: How did you first realize the need for spiritual and financial support of public ministry, and how did that realization evolve over time?

ns: I listened to people who identified as public ministers, or people that I identify as public ministers. And when you listen to what people need, it’s really easy to hear that resources are some of the things: resources of all kinds, whether they’re education or finances.

SD: How do you respond to the belief that Quakers are all ministers, so public ministers should not receive particular support?

ns: I hear that. I hear the first part, “Quakers are all ministers,” and that is where I stop with it. I think the “therefore public ministers shouldn’t receive support” is a really hard place to be in. So much of what Quakers have done throughout our history is public ministry. I don’t think we would know as much as we do about our history—or even have a history—without people who were willing to minister to those outside of the faith.

SD: How do you define public ministry?

ns: Public ministry is ministry which is done with people who are outside the in-group of Friends: so ministry that’s world-facing.

SD: What personal characteristics make someone a good elder for someone in the fellowship program?

ns: There are so many wonderful elders in the cohort right now, and I think that those elders are also ministers. They are good elders because they pay attention: they notice. And in those noticings, they are responsive. They’re really tending to their fellows.

SD: What are some examples of spiritual questions people explore when considering whether they are called to public ministry?

ns: The most basic question is, what would Spirit have me do?

SD: What are the typical practical constraints that prevent Friends from following a leading to public ministry?

ns: One of the constraints is the conversation that everyone’s a minister, therefore nobody should have support. Having support doesn’t make someone special; it just makes them a public minister. We all have support in our ministries, no matter what direction they face. We have committees, and we have people we work with on those committees, and that’s support. We have an entire meeting structure that is support. So why not have support for those of us who are working outside of the context of the meeting?

SD: What do you most want Friends exploring calls to public ministry to know?

ns: That there is a space for them, that they’re seen, and that they’re supported.

SD: What would you like to add?

ns: I’m really proud of everything that has been accomplished so far. The incubator is really scrappy; we’re just getting started. The fellows and elders met together for the very first time. It was the inaugural retreat this past week, and it went really well, so I’m really excited about that.