Meeting for Sufferings: Worship, business and fellowship

Ian Kirk-Smith reports from Meeting for Sufferings, held on 4 February

The first Meeting for Sufferings of 2017 was held in the George Fox Room at Friends House in London on Saturday 4 February and proved to be a very successful day of worship, business and fellowship.

Friends, who had come from every corner of Britain, engaged with a number of subjects of concern, including sustainability, fracking and housing.

Sufferings, in an item that was added to the written agenda, agreed to the release of a statement on behalf of Quakers in Britain that reflected the unease felt by many Friends at recent political developments in the world. It reaffirms the core Quaker values of ‘peace, love and unity’ and condemned ‘all acts of government which set people against one another’.

The statement is a lucid and unambiguous affirmation of the Christian principles at the foundation of the Religious Society of Friends and says ‘there can be no peace without justice, no love without trust, and no unity without equality’.

It states that, alongside Friends in the USA and the American Friends Service Committee: ‘We stand with those whose lives are blighted by racist, discriminatory policies and those whose faith is denigrated by association with a tiny violent minority’ and asserts that ‘our faith urges us to welcome the stranger as our friend.’

Sufferings also turned the spotlight on itself in considering the annual report of Meeting for Sufferings and in doing a ‘mid-triennium check-in.’ This involved representatives and alternates breaking off into ‘home groups’ in the morning to consider the role and working of Sufferings. Friends reported their discernment back to Meeting for Sufferings after lunch.

In Yearly Meeting 2011 in Canterbury Minute 36 committed Friends in Britain to a strong corporate commitment ‘to become a low-carbon, sustainable community’ – the ‘Canterbury Commitment’.

A major theme in the morning was a consideration of the annual report of the Britain Yearly Meeting (BYM) Sustainability Group, which was set up in response to Minute 36. Lis Burch, clerk of the Group, spoke to the report.

In the report progress in 2016 was reviewed and priorities for 2017 presented.

The report pointed out that ‘more priority should be given to the Commitment throughout BYM governance’ and recommended that ‘all committee terms of reference should incorporate some reference to the Commitment’.

Lis Burch described the background and development of the Group and talked about the wide variety of ways in which Friends – individually, locally and nationally – have put the commitment into practice.

She admitted the Group had ‘sometimes struggled with the need to balance practical work with eldership and oversight’ but said ‘there was a lot to celebrate’ and then highlighted some of the very positive actions that had been taken to implement the Commitment.

The work on sustainability done by the Hospitality Company at Friends House was praised, as were a number of initiatives, such as the Living Witness project, the advocacy on divestment from fossil fuel done by Quaker Peace & Social Witness, the collaboration between Quaker bodies and the work of Local and Area Meetings and individuals.

Friends were encouraged to listen to each other and to engage positively with the corporate commitment to become a low-carbon, sustainable community. One of the key challenges was ‘how to speak with a confident Quaker voice’ on the subject and how to talk to ‘those who do not agree with us’.

Friends were reminded that action on sustainability should ‘flow not from guilt but from love’. There was some discussion on the pros and cons of a ‘baseline survey’.

Sufferings and BYM trustees were asked to accept a revised Recommendations for Action. Changes to these recommendations, originally agreed in 2014, are now divided into five sections: Eldership, Oversight, Living faithfully, Right ordering and Witness.

A Friend said he was ‘glad to hear Friends House is a beacon of good practice’ and another praised the work done on divestment from fossil fuels.

However, on a local level, a concern was raised over the amount of work that was required to implement changes and the resources that would be needed in the future.

One was concerned that Friends in some Local Meetings felt ‘isolated’ and another added: ‘We need to be more open with one another with what we are doing well and what we need to do better.’

Sufferings agreed to a proposal, in the report, to establish a small review group to consider the way forward. Central Nominations Committee was asked to bring forward three or four names for this group.

You need to login to read subscriber-only content and/or comment on articles.