Meeting for Sufferings
Further report on Meeting for Sufferings
What does the future hold? A topic of vital importance to the governance of the Religious Society of Friends was given careful reflection and discernment at Meeting for Sufferings on 5 February: the future role of Meeting for Sufferings itself.
There was an opportunity to consider the implications of the report from the group reviewing trustees and Meeting for Sufferings. Friends broke off into Home Groups in the early afternoon to review and respond to the report, which contained a number of recommendations for consideration. The document will be brought before Yearly Meeting in August 2011.
Michael Hutchinson, acting recording clerk, said to Meeting for Sufferings in the morning that ‘all members of Britain Yearly Meeting are responsible for the work done in our name: for supporting and holding to account those who carry it out on our behalf. We are all called to be better Friends, giving more attention to the issues that arise and are set before our decision making meetings’.
He said that we had to recognise that ‘change is risky and can be painful. Some of those faithfully carrying out the trusteeship functions at the moment fear that Meeting for Sufferings will lose its purpose if this power passes to another body, while others have reminded us how much more there is to the Yearly Meeting than the centrally managed work, and recalled the vision presented last year of how Meeting for Sufferings, freed from its trusteeship responsibilities, can discern a vision for the future and develop this in long-term plans.’
There were many issues for discussion and consideration for the Home Groups, including the question of safeguards and reassurances for the accountability of a small trustee body. In the late afternoon the Home Groups reported back to Meeting for Sufferings in session.
One group raised a concern that was shared by a number of others: the need for more time to be given to discernment in Meeting for Sufferings.
A group addressed the question of the size of Meeting for Sufferings. They suggested that a smaller body could be more effective and might have more ‘life and vigour’.
A Friend was prompted to ask: ‘How does one get the best discernment?’ and was led to comment that Friends may wish to explore the possibilities of electronic communication and the benefits of ‘electronic discernment’.
A group reiterated the ‘crowdedness of agendas’ and suggested that the discussion on Israel and Palestine, which was held during the morning session, would have benefited from much more ‘threshing time’. A Friend was concerned that representatives at Meeting for Sufferings were being made to ‘become pedants when we are being asked to be visionaries’.
The idea of trust was raised a number of times. A Friend said that ‘we should spend more time trusting our trustees than listening to them’. Another Friend echoed this statement and urged representatives to ‘let them get on with the job that they were given to do. What they most needed was a very clear guide.’
The importance of the role of Meeting for Sufferings in keeping a connection between the centre and the local was emphasised in the reports of several groups.
A topic that had been mentioned several times in 2010 was also raised: the inadequate nature of the room in which Meeting for Sufferings is held. Many felt that the room was not suitable venue as representatives could not see each other.
Several groups mentioned the role of Area Meetings and the importance of giving them the support they need.
After some contributions, on the subject of the need for representatives to have more time to get to know each other, a Friend mentioned a principle, which, he said, seemed appropriate: ‘nothing about us without us’. There was approval throughout the room on this statement.
Courtauld House
The future of Courtauld House in Bloomsbury, London, which had been uncertain for some time, has been resolved representatives at Meeting for Sufferings were told. In 2004 Courtauld House, which for many years was the location of the Quaker International Centre, was leased to an American academic institution.
This decision came after a period of some discussion about how it could be of benefit to Quakers in the future. There were a number of alternative possibilities, one being to find a creative partnership with other organisations and maintain it as a base for Quaker activities. The final decision, to lease it out to an American academy, was made on financial criteria.
The American academy, in recent years, had been experiencing financial difficulties in the project based at Courtauld House. New tenants had, consequently, been sought.
Jonathan Fox, clerk of Britain Yearly Meeting trustees, reported to Meeting for Sufferings that the Courtauld House lease has been surrendered, rents have been received and the property is now vacant.
He said that a new lease of 125 years has now been confirmed and a new tenant agreed. This had followed a tendering process. Courtauld House will be used in future as a hall of residence for students.
BP shares
The sale of BP shares and the future building work at Friends House in London were among questions raised at Meeting for Sufferings (MfS) for Jonathan Fox, clerk of Britain Yearly Meeting (BYM) trustees.
He was asked whether Friends had considered exploiting the potential of the ‘air space’ above Friends House in London by ‘building upwards’ – as a number of nearby buildings had done in recent years. Jonathan said that consultants had looked at many possible options for the redevelopment of Friends House. He said that this option had been seriously considered but, after the advantages and disadvantages had been weighed up, it had been felt that it was not an appropriate option for the building.
The focus was placed on redevelopment within the building, with particular attention being paid to sustainability, the reconfiguration of office spaces and the redevelopment of the Large Meeting House.
The selling off of BP shares was also raised. A Friend asked whether the sale had made a loss. Jonathan said that the sale had made a loss. The decision was made on ethical grounds and had been prompted by the environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. He also informed MfS that BYM were reviewing their ethical guidelines at the moment.
Abolition of torture
North Wales Area Meeting and Wirral & Chester Area Meeting both submitted minutes of concern to Meeting for Sufferings on the subject of the abolition of torture.
Meeting for Sufferings acknowledged the ‘steadfast commitment’ of the two AMs in Quaker Concern for the Abolition of Torture (Q-CAT) and Q-CAT’s work on behalf of Britain Yearly Meeting. MfS endorsed the proposals for Q-CAT to work with other churches and appropriate bodies in developing initiatives on this issue.
Q-CAT were asked to liaise with the Quaker Committee for Christian and Interfaith Relations. It has responsibility to work with other churches and faith groups for Britain Yearly Meeting.
You need to login to read subscriber-only content and/or comment on articles.