Letters - 14 November 2025
From testimonies to artificial intelligence
Testimonies
I was moved by the two 24 October articles about testimonies. I congratulate the editor for putting them together in the same edition – I often note how different angles of a subject are shared together. An enlightenment and a lesson.
I was grateful to Sungsoo Kim, who described the dilemma of the peace testimony in his sensitive article. I also found food for thought in Ol Rappaport’s piece. After running a couple of study groups with newcomers to Quakers, I can say they wanted to look at the testimonies as a helpful tool toward guidance of Quaker ways. As Ol writes, they are not rules, but I think they do provide rungs in a ladder. They hold wisdom of years of observation and consideration from past Friends; ‘fruits of lived experiences’ as Ol says.
So I am glad we have testimonies. They are a part of our necessary active discernment, as I think Sungsoo was suggesting. They are a way, with our own Meeting communities, of trying to become the ‘best’ we can be – of losing our egos in the energy of the Light.
Barbara Mark
Good standing
It is remarkable that the current edition of Quaker faith & practice makes no reference to the importance attached to our time-honoured convention that normally one stands to give ministry, or indeed to address the Meeting in general – of course allowing exceptions for being infirm or online.
It surely reflects the similar convention in purely secular contexts like giving evidence in court or speaking in parliament. These are situations requiring a certain seriousness and formality. This convention must be based at least in part on the importance to the audience of the speaker being visible and audible in what may be a large gathering, and to avoid more than one person trying to speak at the same time. I wonder what other Friends think?
Ken Cohen
