From Oath of allegiance to Peace and prayer

Letters - 12 May 2023

From Oath of allegiance to Peace and prayer

by The Friend 12th May 2023

Oath of allegiance

I was pleased when Charles spoke of seeing himself as defender of faiths, rather than as defender of the (Anglican) faith, as it seemed to show a broader vision than nationalism. So I was rather taken aback when I heard that we are being asked to take an oath of allegiance to Charles. This concerns me as a Quaker for a number of reasons.

1) Our loyalty is to something greater than our nation.
Jesus is said (Luke 4:8) to have given a rough quote of Deuteronomy 6:13, saying ‘It is written “You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve”’. To interpret this for our times, I think the essence is, you are to care for all humanity or all nature, and not have a narrower loyalty to individuals, groups or nations. Swearing loyalty to a British king would seem to go against this.

2) Do not swear oaths.
The early Quakers got into a lot of trouble because they would not swear. They based this on what Jesus said – ‘Do not swear at all… Let what you say be simply “yes” or “no”’ (Matthew 5: 34-37). This is picked up in Advice & queries 37: ‘Taking oaths implies a double standard of truth: in choosing to affirm instead, be aware of the claim to integrity you are making’.

3) Equality.
Jesus said you should not be called master, as you have only one master, who is Christ. (Matthew 23:10). The early Quakers would not show subservience to their social superiors by taking off their hats (‘hat honour’). The oath of allegiance is asking us to do rather more than take off our hats to Charles.

I think and hope that few Quakers will be taking the oath of allegiance.

Elizabeth Coleman

Did anyone ask the Quakers whether they would like to swear an oath of allegiance to Charles?

Andrew Hewitt

Bullying?

I refer to recent correspondence (17 March, 21 April) about bullying in our Meetings. No doubt examples of bullying occur among us. It is never acceptable, but is it ‘endemic’? Is there a ‘lack of moral leadership’? I hope we can keep a sense of perspective about this. 

The safeguarding policy from Britain Yearly Meeting includes explicit advice to ‘any behaviour that could be perceived as bullying’. One of the roles of pastoral Friends is that ‘should difficulties between Friends arise, they may be able to offer help at an early stage so that misunderstandings may be resolved… to explore underlying causes and endeavour to restore harmony’ (Quaker faith & practice 12.13).

Destructive conflicts can arise in Meetings from unspoken hurts that can fester. So, policies are all very well, but the more we can all be alert to the possibility of such hurts the more likely that resolution, and healing, can come about. I hope that anyone feeling bullied or unheard could find someone in their Meeting or Area Meeting to give them support and practical advice. Failing which, Quaker Life can assist.

Friends, we are all human and fallible and any of us could need help at times. Let us be open to one another, and to the spirit, and use the procedures available to us when needed. Let’s not overgeneralise.

Let us hold on to Isaac Penington’s wise words from 1667, ‘Our life is love, and peace, and tenderness, and bearing one with another, and forgiving one another, and not laying accusations one against the other; but praying one for another, and helping one another up with a tender hand’.

Robin Waterston

Quaker tradition

I sat in ‘The Light’ at Britain Yearly Meeting (BYM) 2023 and listened to the contortions of the clerking team around the non-use of the word God. No doubt these contortions will be replicated in the revised book of discipline (Quaker faith & practice).

It sounded like we were being visited by an embarrassing relative who we put in a corner and fail to properly acknowledge. I personally find this offensive.

Jesus had a personal relationship with God and the Quaker tradition similarly seeks to have this personal contact with God: so why suddenly are we denying this relationship?

Of course the Bible has a story to cover this situation. Perhaps BYM has become like Peter at the crucifixion. When asked if he was a follower of Jesus, he denied he knew him.

I was brought up to give supremacy to the first commandment to ‘love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul and all your mind’ and I have found great joy and fulfilment in this.

Why do modern Quakers always seem to bend to minorities with a different view and thus ultimately subvert the tradition? Why can these minorities not accept the Quaker tradition if they wish to be part of it?

It is a mystery to me how we got to this false position and why we are so feeble we do not defend our historical tradition.

Roger Hill

Accepting differences

With tongue in cheek, can I suggest to Robert Ashton (28 April) that some people drink tea? We can be just as fussy, of course. However, on a more serious note, it makes me think about accepting differences. I was quite taken back by the idea Friends should be thought of as customers. I find that a very worrying direction.

I reflect on the article by Andy Fincham (21 April) about the way early Quakers supported each other through business networks. But Quakerism is more than business, surely. The Masons use business networks to build up their numbers and power, in a similar way to early Quakers, but Masons are very different from Quakers, I hope.

Barbara Mark

New meanings

Stephen Petter (28 April) is to be applauded for his outspokeness in querying the place of ‘atheist Quakers’.

I also have always struggled with this notion as my own understanding is of a religious society based upon Christianity.

However, I know there are many Friends who find huge spiritual satisfaction in Meeting and attend regularly in spite of calling themselves Quakers.

Quakers have always held dear very wide parameters of welcome, which, with a stated desire to be non-hierarchical, probably lies behind the inclusion of attenders holding as much influence as members at Britain Yearly Meeting. Openness can be very helpful.

Society in general changes all the time. Growing up as I did in the 1950s, the notion of a man marrying a man, or of a woman becoming a man, were the stuff of comedy.

It is probably the same with spirituality – everything takes on new meanings over time.

Anne M Jones

Hard agree

Stephen Petter’s letter has a combative tone that I found hard. But my entirely personal response was that there was some truth in it.

I have been an attender at different Meetings for about twenty years. I’m an atheist, though not a ‘refugee from Christianity’. I hold onto the skirt/trouser tails of Quakerism with gratitude, conscious that it is of course a community centrally-grounded in Christianity. I have no interest in silencing that. The joy of my experience is that we sit together with all of this largely in solidarity and peace.

David Abbott

Peace and prayer

We can all add our prayers both for the people suffering under the Russian invasion and for the invaders.

It can never be right to wish harm to anyone, so sending loving, healing energy to the Russian president and the Russian military, as well as the Ukrainian people, must be right and constructive.

If we wish for peace when the war is over, we need to find a way, over time, of reintegrating Russia into the civilised world rather than confirming its position as ‘the enemy’.

Martyn Tozer


Comments


I am in unity with Roger Hill’s comments about the Quaker Tradition.

By Richard Pashley on 11th May 2023 - 19:38


Please login to add a comment