Letters - 07 November 2025
From safe places to antisemitism
Safe places
The report from Meeting for Sufferings (17 October) described one proposal of ‘a future in which all Meeting houses had been sold, and Friends were worshipping in warehouses or people’s homes’. I can see the attraction of this proposal: a return to ostensibly simpler ways, and a rejection of the burden that looking after Meeting houses can undoubtedly become. But I don’t think the implications have been thought through, either for our commitment to equality, or our wish to be open to new attenders.
Worshipping at Friends’ homes assumes that there will be local Friends with homes big enough for this. But even where these exist, will they be accessible to people with disabilities? And what of the Friends who don’t have suitable homes – perhaps they are house-sharing, or have unsympathetic landlords, or are overcrowded and don’t want to be embarrassed by, for example, family members’ beds in the living room. Are they to be second-class Friends? Will worshipping in a private home put new people (particularly lone women, and families) off, due to safety concerns? It seems a recipe for a self-perpetuating, fairly privileged Society, doomed to shrink.
I’m not saying worshipping in private homes is without worth. I know of several cases where this has been a welcome and much-appreciated addition to the local Quaker landscape. But it has to be ‘as well as’, not ‘instead of’. I’d go even further: we should be bold and aspire to more Meeting houses (however modest), not fewer. The most Quaker-curious person I know has to travel to a separate town to physically attend a Meeting, which, with small children and a full-time job, is a big undertaking that she can’t do often. We are missing out not having safe places for her and other seekers to access.
Lorna Richardson
Testimonies
My thanks to Ol Rappaport for his article on Quaker testimonies (24 October). The use of words and slogans to advertise our Quaker values are easy to latch onto, and will attract some people. But they have very little connection with the depth of our listening, and finding guidance in the silence of our Meetings for Worship. All the best Quaker work in the past has come from concerns which have arisen from this source.
Dare I say we are relying too much on management?
Margaret Sadler
