Discussion or debate
I don’t understand the point Mark Russ makes in his letter (7 March). Mark says that ‘a tolerance of “debate” undermines the 2021 Yearly Meeting’s affirmation of trans Friends’. Minute 31 from 2021’s Yearly Meeting says that ‘We recognise that we need to keep listening and searching together’. The minute goes on to say that ‘We need to rejoice in the things that make us different’.
Seeking to exclude the voices of Friends who disagree seems antithetic to Minute 31.
Tim Regan
Mark Russ suggests that people who question current Quaker thought are not in alignment with the Society’s ideals. This concerns me.
I have again read Minute 31 and am gladdened to find a fairly neutral statement reaffirming that the Religious Society of Friends is open to all. I hope every Meeting welcomes everyone of every stripe with open arms. By my lights the minute does not stifle debate or make demands upon Friends to think in a particular way – I remind Friends of the postscript to the Epistle from the Elders at Balby (1656): ‘[T]hese things we do not lay upon you as a rule or form to walk by, but that all, with the measure of light which is pure and holy, may be guided; and so in the light walking and abiding, these may be fulfilled in the Spirit, not from the letter, for the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life.’
Introducing theoretical statements about sex and gender, as our Friend did in the letter, presents a view that, while offering a particular nuance that does not reflect my own thinking, cannot just be nodded through out of fear of disputation.
For example, while I am glad the author acknowledges that the current trans movement carries implications for women’s rights, I disagree with the conclusion that trans rights strengthen feminist theory or work against misogyny. Our Friend’s arguments rest heavily on gender theory; I believe I detect the influence of Judith Butler, whose writings often require mental contortions to follow.
I believe that suppressing debate, or saying that those who express views at variance with the current stance of the Society are somehow unQuakerly, presents a threat to the future of that Society. How can we know truth if we do not bring different views and weigh them in our hearts under the mantle of Christ in Meeting for Worship, and speak them out in larger Meetings? How can one bring varying views if they fear being labelled, even silently, as ‘anti-trans’ – or just not a ‘good’ enough Friend?
I caution Friends against unquestioningly following dogma for the sake of appearing good.
The Religious Society of Friends is a non-credal church. Let us set a watch against the chilling effect of silencing others on the altar of group-think.
Tristan Jovanović
