Letters - 14 July 2017
From spueezing out the Spirit to Woodbrooke
Squeezing out the Spirit?
It seems to me that Stephen Feltham’s recent article (30 June) is the most important one the Friend has published for some time. But I think that he is worrying unnecessarily. Politics is, after all, about finding the best way to order relations between members of a community.
When Clifford Street Meeting House was reconstructed and renamed more than thirty-five years ago, a talk was given by John Kay, a respected member of the Meeting and no firebrand. He said: ‘From the very beginning Quakers were lobbyists, and we have been so for 300 years… And so we go on, and so we shall have to go on, trying to influence governments bit by bit. So in our minds there is no separation between the secular and the spiritual [my italics]. One cannot act without the embodiment in institutions of the other.’
I agree as strongly as any Friend that it is essential that we not be identified with a particular political party – which we are not. But I also feel that if we do not stand up for our testimonies – peace and equality among them – we are betraying our beliefs. Politics is not a dirty word and Friends have always been involved in trying to make our Society more peaceful and more just. I hope that we shall go on doing so.
David Rubinstein
In his opinion piece Stephen Feltman sets out his perception of political bias and bureaucratic control amongst staff at Friends House.
My experience is quite different. I find that staff take open, spirit-led actions and engage in discerning, servant-led leadership, which upholds and supports Friends across the Yearly Meeting. There is a commitment to presenting information clearly and transparently and to reflecting Quaker values in an intelligent, meaningful way. Any criticism is always given serious consideration and there is a genuine sensitivity to different views. Quaker discipline and right ordering are upheld through adherence to the processes the Yearly Meeting has agreed.
The outcome is not always perfect, nor is it always to every Friend’s satisfaction, but I am always thankful when we speak out together as Quakers.
Martin Ford
I agree with Stephen Feltham’s article. In addition, it seems that Quakers have, in a misguided attempt to appear ‘inclusive’, watered down the religious foundations of their Society to the point where no one – least of all potential new members – can tell what they actually believe in.
Quakers like to claim that they have no particular creed. All well and good, but the fact is that any group of humans must have a common set of values if it is to stay united in the long term. What exactly is a Quaker?
Any suggestions? I would propose that a Quaker:
1. believes in something greater than themselves, but not of the physical world (that is to say, God, but not the medieval European version);
2. believes that this thing is present in us all, and can potentially lead us to more fulfilled lives, if we listen for it; and
3. is in broad agreement with our Quaker testimonies.
Yes, this definition excludes our atheist neighbours; in reality, even inclusiveness has its limits. Happily, there is already a club for them: Humanists UK. This fine organisation is going from strength to strength, precisely because they are not afraid to state who they are and what they stand for.
James Yeoman
Yearly Meeting Gathering
I have read through the Events listing and see it quite differently to Antonia Swinson (7 July).
Yes, there are many workshops on political and social issues but the theme this year is ‘movement building’, so I would expect this.
The word ‘spirit’ may not be included but I know that most of these topics come from careful discernment and are strongly linked to our testimonies, which are the bedrock of our witness as Quakers. I remain a Quaker because my spiritual beliefs are expressed in how I live my life and I think this is well reflected in the range of events on offer.
I am sorry, too, at the criticism of a ‘professional politician’ giving the Swarthmore Lecture. Is it not possible that Catherine West became a politician out of a deep desire, as a Quaker, to create a more just society? I certainly see that as having a strong spiritual foundation and am looking forward to the lecture.
Gerald Conyngham
‘Christians should keep the helm and guide the vessel to its port; not meanly steal out at the stern of the world and leave those that are in it without a pilot to be driven by the fury of evil times upon the sand of ruin’ (William Penn, 1682).
Climate change and the threat of nuclear weapons are perhaps the two most important issues that face the next generation. Are these just ‘political causes’ and do not concern the Spirit?
Our two Quaker MPs have chosen the parliamentary route to further Quaker concerns; this route offers a wonderful opportunity to influence decision makers on all sorts of matters (there are other routes) and obviously it has its dangers, but they have shown already that they are prepared to sacrifice promotion if voting with Labour policy seems to be against their principles, and their constituents trust them to give voice to their worries.
We should welcome the chance to hear what they have to say, and I applaud the Swarthmore Lecture committee for giving us the opportunity to listen to Catherine West.
Elaine Miles
Our Friend seems selective in her criticism of this year’s Yearly Meeting.
Out of the themes for five days I see that one is: ‘Heart – Power within. What is our spiritual grounding in activism and social change?’
Another is headed: ‘What does God require of us?’
The choice of the term ‘professional politician’, to me, devalues the person who is to give the Swarthmore Lecture.
We all want social justice and the way to obtain it, I think, is through parliament. The implication of the words ‘professional politician’ seems to me to imply that Ruth Cadbury and Catherine West have lost their integrity, but I hope I am wrong.
Joseph Pease was the first Quaker MP. He was followed by John Bright, who certainly did not lack integrity or courage, which he much needed when he spoke against popular but immoral causes.
By the way, Catherine West’s Swarthmore Lecture is on the subject of tackling inequality through politics.
Eric Walker
One can easily become overwhelmed by the full programme offered at Yearly Meeting Gatherings (YMG). I know I would, if I did anything other than the Yearly Meeting (YM) sessions, and the preparation for them!
But it is up to each person to choose what gives the Spirit a place to expand and have life and depth in their hearts, and what might squeeze it out. Each person is different.
At this YMG we have kept the meal times free, and are particularly encouraging Friends to start impromptu conversations and events, so if Antonia Swinson (7 July) feels something is lacking in the events schedule, please make it happen yourself.
The theme of YMG this year – movement building – lends itself to looking at different ways in which Friends are living out their faith in the world. In other years we focus more on Quaker identity and spirituality.
We have encouraged each participant to look for what anchors them in worship and prayer, whether by early or late Meeting for Worship, a quiet walk in the field paths around the site, dancing, yoga or shared meals.
When the YM clerks met to do practical preparation recently, we started by sharing our hopes for YMG. What emerged was a hope for a week of deep discernment, opening ourselves to the movement of the Spirit.
We had a sense of excitement at what might come after three years of consideration on this theme both in YM itself and throughout the Yearly Meeting.
Deborah Rowlands
Clerk of Yearly Meeting
Woodbrooke
Sheila Fox (30 June) asks when Woodbrooke began using ‘Quaker Study Centre’ in its publicity. The answer is the early 1970s.
I was the staff member involved in the production of much of the publicity material at that time. I think it was felt that adding ‘Quaker Study Centre’ communicated better what we were. Sometimes ‘one of the Selly Oak Colleges’ was added and often ‘College’ still used in formal communications.
‘Woodbrooke’ remained the short version, with all the positive associations it brings up for many Friends, then and clearly still now.
Chris Lawson
