Letters - 16 June 2017
From equality and education to a good spirit
Equality and education
It is now exactly twenty years ago that I, as clerk of the school committee, was involved in the closure of Great Ayton Friends’ School.
I am deeply distressed and concerned to see a repetition of the comments that were made then (9 June), at the precise moment that Walden pupils are seeking new schools, teachers are seeking new jobs while their applications are being tainted by being from a ‘failed’ school, catering and ground staff and all others are being made redundant, and local suppliers are facing problems.
I, a mere attender, found myself alone, defending ‘Quakers’ in the media and on the street, over what many involved saw as a tragedy while some Quakers publicly questioned the value of private education.
Equality demands that those involved in Walden School are treated with respect and compassion at what is a traumatic time for them all.
This is not a time for discussion on the future of Friends’ schools and such discussions should cease until matters at Walden are settled.
Friends need to look to their own responsibility as individuals and as a Society, particularly in the management of Quaker schools like Ayton.
Friends should understand that since Ayton’s closure, the number of children in ‘private’ education in this area has rocketed. Ayton is no longer a safe haven for those who fail in these hothouses, or a choice for others attracted to the Quaker ethos.
I hope that our testimony to equality covers much more in life than mere finance, as I am aware of many children from well-off families who are deeply deprived.
Robert Campbell
Words and Woodbrooke
The article by Antony Barlow (9 June) certainly resonated with me.
I received a leaflet on Sunday at Meeting for Worship detailing courses at the Woodbrooke Quaker Study Centre, with its new logo – which to me is meaningless – and noticed that at no time were Quakers mentioned. What is happening?
Quakers are already under the radar for most people in this country and we are rarely mentioned in the media. Where are we? Are we afraid of saying who we are? George Fox and early Quakers must be turning in their graves.
Certainly, I am seriously questioning continuing my small monthly contribution to Woodbrooke and yet I know from experience that their online courses are superb and I enjoy the online Meetings for Worship. Plus, of course, the wonderful building and residential courses.
We need to shout more about who we are and what we stand for.
Jo Fisher
I agree with Antony Barlow – I regret that Woodbrooke Quaker Study Centre has dropped ‘Quaker’ from its new logo.
I believe that Quakers and Quaker organisations should be proud to proclaim that they are Quaker, and that to be able to brand an organisation as Quaker is a positive attribute and can help with marketing.
I realise that an organisation that is ‘independent’ of Britain Yearly Meeting may feel that including Quaker in their brand may be restricting on their independence. However, being too independent reduces the ability to claim Quaker help in the event of problems such as a financial shortfall, as has happened with at least two independent Quaker organisations in 2016-17.
In recent years ‘Quaker Woodbrooke’ has worked hard to build a close relationship with our Quaker Area Meeting after many years previously of distance. I have been so pleased at this development.
Quaker Woodbrooke has built a fabulous philosophical garden room as part of its ‘more visitor friendly’ development programme. I have been so impressed with this development.
So, I just do not understand why Quaker Woodbrooke is withdrawing from its Quaker statement of belonging.
I hope Quaker Woodbrooke will think again, and revisit its new Quaker lacking branding statement.
David Fish
Letting premises to political parties
On 8 June those who voted will mostly not know that others have already chosen their MP for them: millions of pounds rather than millions of votes had already determined the composition of the House of Commons.
The chequebooks of Gina Miller, Jeremy Hoskins and other wealthy backers have been used to support candidates who favour their views. Thus, long before this public election, there had been a private selection. In Quaker faith & practice we are advised to remember our responsibilities to civil society and to counsel and support those involved in political activities – I am arguing that this is a corporate, not an individual, witness.
The policy of most Area Meetings is to not let premises to political parties, lest it appear Friends endorse any particular one of them, and to decline to let to non-political groups whose values we do not agree with.
For the sake of our appearance to non-Quakers we are, I believe, contradicting our own religious witness: unless a person is entirely disrupting our Meeting for Worship we never exclude them for the beliefs they hold.
Our Quaker witness calls us not to be politically indifferent but to uphold everybody involved in political activities: we support and enable all public discourse and, therefore, we ought to be letting our Meeting houses to political parties.
Arron Banks effectively bankrolled UKIP and the EU referendum. In buying what he desired he changed the fate of billions of people in hundreds of countries: we must witness against private cash replacing public debate.
David B Lawrence
Equality and the election
Rosemary O’Dea (26 May) quoted John Pilger: ‘The majority vote by Britons to leave the European Union was an act of raw democracy. Millions of ordinary people refused to be bullied, intimidated and dismissed with open contempt by their presumed betters in the major parties… business… banking… and the media.’
Unfortunately not. Those in favour of Brexit treated them the same way. Has he forgotten the coverage in newspapers like the Daily Mail or the campaign bus with the NHS pledge?
Democracy depends on an informed and active electorate but it seems many influential leaders make every effort to bamboozle and manipulate them. I am reminded of the old adage about mushroom politics – ‘keep them in the dark and throw manure on them’.
We should all be in favour of the expression of the popular will, but not when it is captured by demagogues. Real populism would engage with people and their concerns and explore with them what solutions would really satisfy the values and aspirations we claim to hold – that is really reaching for that of God in everyone and speaking truth to the powerful and with those who feel powerless.
Friends’ general election website suggested activities of that kind, not least ‘take a table, two chairs and some cups of tea, and invite passersby to join you and discuss politics – without suggesting they support any particular party’.
This can be done at any time, knowing that another election will come along soon enough.
Clem McCartney
A devoted reader
I was delighted to read your item (2 June) about a Friend who was such an avid Guardian reader that when he died the funeral directors encased his coffin in back numbers of his favourite newspaper.
When I first started to go to Meeting for Worship in the 1940s it was still the custom (as now) that when a Friend stood to minister, the rest of those present remained seated, but if a Friend kneeled to offer vocal prayer (which was still common at that time), the rest would stand up.
There was a story (probably apocryphal) that a Friend had recently started a prayer with ‘Lord, as Thou will have read in yesterday’s Manchester Guardian…’
I wonder whether this led to one of the Advices of that time: ‘In vocal prayer, do not let supplication lead to exhortation, as if the Lord required information.’
Long live the Guardian!
Paul Honigmann
A good spirit
While Piers Maddox’s article ‘Gudda future’ (2 June) – and his reference to the precious life spirit and the impulse to act – very much speaks to me, experience causes me to doubt the assertion that ‘action is everything… words without action mean nothing’.
A focus on action can also be a busyness and a need to control which shields a troubled spirit that often causes painful rifts.
A good spirit may lead to action (though not inevitably) but it doesn’t necessarily follow that action leads to a good spirit.
Andrew Sterling
