Letters - 29 August 2014
From the Swarthmore Lecture 2014 to Population
Swarthmore Lecture 2014
‘Open for transformation: being Quaker’ was the title of the 2014 Swarthmore Lecture.
‘Open for transformation’ – Amen! Halelujah!! A real wake-up call to all of us. May we hear Ben Pink Dandelion’s message and act on it, because, as Richard Rohr writes, ‘Transformed people transform people’.
David L Saunders
Yearly Meeting Gathering
Yearly Meeting was good, worthwhile and uplifting, with much fellowship. That is how it should be.
However, there may be matters needing consideration for future events.
Are we happy that, overall, around a million pounds was spent on this Yearly Meeting? Some people made it their annual holiday, but should Quaker business be a holiday activity?
Can all members of the Society afford Yearly Meeting? Some complain the Society is middle-aged, middle-class, white and Anglo-Saxon. Can the unwaged, the disabled, working-class members, and low-income pensioners afford it? Some Meetings can support such members, but attendance at Yearly Meeting is a right. Should members depend on gifts, grants and charity? Should we charge a £35 entrance fee?
Do we accept that all members can attend Yearly Meeting? So, is it right to limit attendance?
Are we really doing the Yearly Meeting business at a residential gathering? One Friend commented that, in their opinion, sessions were more like a carefully staged party conference than a Meeting for Worship for Business. Are we allowing the clock and other activities to determine our decisions instead of discernment?
Friends House was built large enough to accommodate Yearly Meeting. Should we spend money to hire other venues instead?
I do want Quakers to have a good time. I know these questions will be unpopular. But would George Fox recognise Yearly Meeting at Bath? Would Jesus have been allowed to attend?
Geoff Pilliner
You need to login to read subscriber-only content and/or comment on articles.