Meeting for Sufferings: Review of Yearly Meeting, Yearly Meeting Gathering and MfS
'We have clearly heard that spirit-led discernment is central to life as a Quaker.'
The first main item focused on the ongoing review of Yearly Meeting, Yearly Meeting Gathering and MfS. Sarah Donaldson, clerk of the group appointed to conduct the review, said that, although the written report will not come until December, when it will be shared with MfS, she could outline where they were ‘in broad terms’. Since March, the group has run a faith-in-action workshop, embarked on a written consultation and organised three online workshops and a questionnaire. ‘Quite a number of Friends’ had responded, she said, ‘some passionate about governance… some who knew relatively little’. The group had ‘received a wealth of material’ which they were ‘carefully considering’. ‘We have clearly heard that spirit-led discernment is central to life as a Quaker,’ she said. ‘Sadly, some Friends feel that we are not doing enough discernment and that we don’t give enough time for the process, or… involve enough Friends.’
Another ‘thorny issue’, she said, is the relationship between Yearly Meeting, Britain Yearly Meeting trustees, and MfS, with some Friends reporting that they found it ‘confusing and frustrating’. While this can unleash ‘creative tension… too often Friends experience the tension and [find] the creativity lacking’. Implicit in the report was the idea that ‘change is needed’, although some Friends questioned if this was really the case.
During discernement, Friends thanked Sarah for a ‘balanced and helpful report’. One Friend echoed the ‘difficulty’ that some at their Local Meeting have negotiating the different governance structures. ‘It’s a very opaque system…anything you can do to dispel that mystery I would encourage.’
‘Before we launch something like a radical change, one Friend suggested, ‘we should have very convincing evidence there is a need… I’m not convinced there is a consensus.’
Another Friend suggested a possible two-year programme of ‘thought and experimentation’.
A Friend from north Wales said some Quakers had a desperate need for change: ‘we simply can’t find people for roles and we’ve been looking for two or three years to simplify things’. Perhaps it would be helpful to think about ‘evolution rather than change’, said another, ‘and that sense of the spirit manifesting itself in an evolving way’.
‘Change is inevitable,’ another Quaker offered, quoting a philosopher that ‘one can never step in the same river twice… Whatever happens, that idea of Friends being actively part is really important’.
On this note, Sarah asked Friends to encourage Young Friends to get involved: two young group members had to leave, and they hadn’t heard back from the top level of Young Friends General Meeting. Quakers were invited to email thoughts to reviewgroup@quaker.org.uk. The minute noted that ‘the relationship between the components of our governance structure is not always clear, and the resultant tensions need to be addressed to allow more creativity to be released’.
Comments
Please login to add a comment
