Is the Quaker Business Method dead?
47 views
Skip to first unread message
Rosalind Mitchell
Jan 12, 2013, 1:35:49 PM1/12/13
to Quaker-B
Today I attended a full Monthly, sorry, Area Meeting for the first
time in some years. I've been prevented by inaccessiblity for
most of the time I've been living in this neck of the woods, and
today I got there because I was hell-bent on doing so (a bus, a
train to a misleadingly-named station and a 40-minute walk on the
way out; a lift to the station and an hour and a half kicking my
heels in a public house (albeit an exceptionally good one) waiting
for the train home afterwards.)
After being thus out of touch I'm alarmed by what's going on in
BYM. Firstly, I really don't like the idea of trustees running
things. I'd heard horror stories but today came face to face with
what's going on and its appalling. Quakers have a perfectly good
business method tried and tested over several hundred years now
and I don't see the rush to charitable status. If the Charities
Commission can't accommodate our business method then we shouldn't
accommodate the Charities Commission. And the tales of what BYM's
trustees are up to, and the secrecy with which they get up to it,
is also scary. Power in BYM properly resides with Yearly Meeting
with Meeting for Sufferings as its proxy, and with Monthly, sorry,
Area Meetings (how the ghastly new terminology sticks in my
gullet!), proceeding according to the established business method.
Otherwise it becomes an organisation I no longer feel comfortable
identifying with.
Furthermore, it seemed to me that the Quaker Business Method is
dying even within Swarthmoor AM (I can't speak for others). I
felt like a dinosaur when rising to speak; others simply waved a
hand or simply said their piece. There was no space to let the
business breathe, to pause to reflect on what had just been said.
The meeting started at 10.30 and the clerk was rushing to complete
by 12.30 even when still only halfway down the agenda, with
important business to come. Fortunately we agreed to adjourn for
lunch for half an hour before continuing, but there was still far
too much on the agenda to be dealt with properly and one wonders
why these meetings are no longer held monthly. Too much is being
rushed through and too much is being lost.
Is Quakerism as a distinctive movement dying? I fear it is on
this showing.
Oh, and business did come to the commitment to the environment
which gave me the opportunity to rise and point out that I had
committed myself to living simply and respecting the environment
eighteen years ago in deciding to live without a car, and raised
my concern about business meetings at least, and meetings for
worship too for preference, should be held at times and in places
that facilitate access by public transport; this being a far more
practical and effective witness than spending silly amounts of
money on solar panels in a meeting house garden. When the clerk
asked if my point should be minuted, there was a resounding,
vehement, and maybe even venomous NO! from some quarters. I fear
that it is going to be hard work persuading them to love me. :(
Rosie
--
Currently reading: Persepolis, by Marjane Satrapi
time in some years. I've been prevented by inaccessiblity for
most of the time I've been living in this neck of the woods, and
today I got there because I was hell-bent on doing so (a bus, a
train to a misleadingly-named station and a 40-minute walk on the
way out; a lift to the station and an hour and a half kicking my
heels in a public house (albeit an exceptionally good one) waiting
for the train home afterwards.)
After being thus out of touch I'm alarmed by what's going on in
BYM. Firstly, I really don't like the idea of trustees running
things. I'd heard horror stories but today came face to face with
what's going on and its appalling. Quakers have a perfectly good
business method tried and tested over several hundred years now
and I don't see the rush to charitable status. If the Charities
Commission can't accommodate our business method then we shouldn't
accommodate the Charities Commission. And the tales of what BYM's
trustees are up to, and the secrecy with which they get up to it,
is also scary. Power in BYM properly resides with Yearly Meeting
with Meeting for Sufferings as its proxy, and with Monthly, sorry,
Area Meetings (how the ghastly new terminology sticks in my
gullet!), proceeding according to the established business method.
Otherwise it becomes an organisation I no longer feel comfortable
identifying with.
Furthermore, it seemed to me that the Quaker Business Method is
dying even within Swarthmoor AM (I can't speak for others). I
felt like a dinosaur when rising to speak; others simply waved a
hand or simply said their piece. There was no space to let the
business breathe, to pause to reflect on what had just been said.
The meeting started at 10.30 and the clerk was rushing to complete
by 12.30 even when still only halfway down the agenda, with
important business to come. Fortunately we agreed to adjourn for
lunch for half an hour before continuing, but there was still far
too much on the agenda to be dealt with properly and one wonders
why these meetings are no longer held monthly. Too much is being
rushed through and too much is being lost.
Is Quakerism as a distinctive movement dying? I fear it is on
this showing.
Oh, and business did come to the commitment to the environment
which gave me the opportunity to rise and point out that I had
committed myself to living simply and respecting the environment
eighteen years ago in deciding to live without a car, and raised
my concern about business meetings at least, and meetings for
worship too for preference, should be held at times and in places
that facilitate access by public transport; this being a far more
practical and effective witness than spending silly amounts of
money on solar panels in a meeting house garden. When the clerk
asked if my point should be minuted, there was a resounding,
vehement, and maybe even venomous NO! from some quarters. I fear
that it is going to be hard work persuading them to love me. :(
Rosie
--
Currently reading: Persepolis, by Marjane Satrapi
Amelia Schafer-Rutherford
Jan 13, 2013, 4:17:11 AM1/13/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
Rosalind,
--
Holding you in the Light, ASR
There are some many points you have made to agree with, too many. Like you this angers, saddens and confuses me. The amount of bureaucracy of church that has taken over at FH and BYM is not understandable. This disfranchises Friends from their role as the church is breath taking. Our stance as conformist that helps to keep us at a distance from the State, like the demands of the charity commission to comprise our great values, is more than concerning. I have never been so poorly treated by a group of people I have worked (and in this case volunteered) with as I was at BYMG 2011. Mostly because there seemed to be a " I am not the boss, I just work here" attitude. I have not returned to BYM nor taken my children back since. Heartbreaking but has not shaken my faith. As religious Society we all are a part of this, I thought we all are always responsible for the Society.
Having been a raised as a Friend and active all my life, I am struggling with this all the time and am trying to stay engaged. So, Rosalind being the not quite-lone voice is important and thank you for being this forward.
In Peace, Amelia Schafer-Rutherford
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Quaker-B" group.
To post to this group, send email to quak...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to quaker-b+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/quaker-b?hl=en.
Holding you in the Light, ASR
Rosalind Mitchell
Jan 13, 2013, 8:27:40 AM1/13/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
Further to my reply to Simon's post, while I stand by my view that
Quaker-B in its current format has outlived its usefulness, I now
see clearly that there is a very real need for a vigorous forum
for British Friends, independent of BYM. I wonder what the best
format could be, and whether Quaker-B has a role in establishing
it? I gather from something said yesterday that even The Friend
("Independent Quaker journalisism since 1843"!) in its current
über-bland incarnation won't publish anything the commissars at
Fiends House don't want it to.
Roskp
Quaker-B in its current format has outlived its usefulness, I now
see clearly that there is a very real need for a vigorous forum
for British Friends, independent of BYM. I wonder what the best
format could be, and whether Quaker-B has a role in establishing
it? I gather from something said yesterday that even The Friend
("Independent Quaker journalisism since 1843"!) in its current
über-bland incarnation won't publish anything the commissars at
Fiends House don't want it to.
Roskp
Bill Chadkirk
Jan 13, 2013, 10:50:09 AM1/13/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
Hi
I have 4 points to make:
1. In answer to Rosie's question "Is Quakerism dying?". Yes, it is. More
importantly it is transforming from religious to a secular identity and
along the way losing religious insights into such as the way we hold
business. A long, long time ago I said on this list that if I was a
visitor to someone applying for membership who claimed they were an
atheist I would not be able to recommend their admittance. The reaction
was vehemently against my position and personally insulting,
particularly from the north of the border.
2. We have always had charitable status and have been bound by charity
law. We were simply excepted from formal registration by statutory
instrument. The poor charity commissioners have replaced health and
safety in being unfairly blamed for the Quaker ills and woes we are
inflicting on ourselves. The CC are only concerned that funds and assets
are properly husbanded and spent within the objects of the charity, are
properly accounted for and that decision making is transparent.
3. We have become overly organised and managed to death at every level
of the Society. The idea of a concern arising from religious insight has
gone. We now lack the passionate mavericks we need to take the building
of the Kingdom of God forward. Personally I blame the Framework for
Action. "I don't care if your name is Jesus! If it's not in the
Framework for Action it can't be done!". WE are no longer in touch with
our own history and insights. We no longer see ourselves as church of
believers ('Church! We're not a church' cry all those who have never
opened Church Government or read Advices and Queries).
4. It doesn't have to be like this. We can renew ourselves but first we
have to start really talking to one another and reading and rereading
some of those books in our libraries that we barely acknowledge.
Bill
Bill Chadkirk
www.billchadkirk.co.uk
How Shakespeare was invented No. 1
Bottle of milk in hand, Shakespeare looks in cupboard:
"Toby or not Toby, ah, that is the question. Which jug
shall I use?"
I have 4 points to make:
1. In answer to Rosie's question "Is Quakerism dying?". Yes, it is. More
importantly it is transforming from religious to a secular identity and
along the way losing religious insights into such as the way we hold
business. A long, long time ago I said on this list that if I was a
visitor to someone applying for membership who claimed they were an
atheist I would not be able to recommend their admittance. The reaction
was vehemently against my position and personally insulting,
particularly from the north of the border.
2. We have always had charitable status and have been bound by charity
law. We were simply excepted from formal registration by statutory
instrument. The poor charity commissioners have replaced health and
safety in being unfairly blamed for the Quaker ills and woes we are
inflicting on ourselves. The CC are only concerned that funds and assets
are properly husbanded and spent within the objects of the charity, are
properly accounted for and that decision making is transparent.
3. We have become overly organised and managed to death at every level
of the Society. The idea of a concern arising from religious insight has
gone. We now lack the passionate mavericks we need to take the building
of the Kingdom of God forward. Personally I blame the Framework for
Action. "I don't care if your name is Jesus! If it's not in the
Framework for Action it can't be done!". WE are no longer in touch with
our own history and insights. We no longer see ourselves as church of
believers ('Church! We're not a church' cry all those who have never
opened Church Government or read Advices and Queries).
4. It doesn't have to be like this. We can renew ourselves but first we
have to start really talking to one another and reading and rereading
some of those books in our libraries that we barely acknowledge.
Bill
Bill Chadkirk
www.billchadkirk.co.uk
How Shakespeare was invented No. 1
Bottle of milk in hand, Shakespeare looks in cupboard:
"Toby or not Toby, ah, that is the question. Which jug
shall I use?"
Rosalind Mitchell
Jan 13, 2013, 11:15:46 AM1/13/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
This Friend speaks to my condition. (How long is it since we
heard that said in Meeting for Worship for Business? And have we
forgotten what that term means?)
Bill, would you mind if I quoted your post on my blog?
(http://www.42suggestions.co.uk/blog) Or would you like to post
it under your own name?
If we are to regenerate as you suggest, please count me in.
heard that said in Meeting for Worship for Business? And have we
forgotten what that term means?)
Bill, would you mind if I quoted your post on my blog?
(http://www.42suggestions.co.uk/blog) Or would you like to post
it under your own name?
If we are to regenerate as you suggest, please count me in.
Bill Chadkirk
Jan 13, 2013, 11:17:47 AM1/13/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
Post away, post away....
Bill
Bill Chadkirk
www.billchadkirk.co.uk
How Shakespeare was invented No. 1
Bottle of milk in hand, Shakespeare looks in cupboard:
"Toby or not Toby, ah, that is the question. Which jug
shall I use?"
Bill
Bill Chadkirk
www.billchadkirk.co.uk
How Shakespeare was invented No. 1
Bottle of milk in hand, Shakespeare looks in cupboard:
"Toby or not Toby, ah, that is the question. Which jug
shall I use?"
Bill Chadkirk
Jan 13, 2013, 11:19:11 AM1/13/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
Oh, and if you would include a link to my own web-site?!
Bill
Bill Chadkirk
www.billchadkirk.co.uk
How Shakespeare was invented No. 1
Bottle of milk in hand, Shakespeare looks in cupboard:
"Toby or not Toby, ah, that is the question. Which jug
shall I use?"
Bill
Bill Chadkirk
www.billchadkirk.co.uk
How Shakespeare was invented No. 1
Bottle of milk in hand, Shakespeare looks in cupboard:
"Toby or not Toby, ah, that is the question. Which jug
shall I use?"
On 13/01/2013 16:15, Rosalind Mitchell wrote:
Mary Munro-Hill
Jan 13, 2013, 1:50:03 PM1/13/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
With contributions such as this, from Bill, Quaker-B still has a lot of life left in it!
Bill has surely raised the very matters that concern us most (or should concern us most!).
In Friendship,
Mary.
______________________________________________
Mary Munro-Hill
2 South Glebe
Lockington
Driffield
YO25 9ST
( 01430-810633
Chaplaincy Team and Department of Modern Languages
University of Hull
From: Bill Chadkirk
Sent: Sun 13/01/2013 15:50
To: quak...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Quaker-B] Is the Quaker Business Method dead?
How Shakespeare was invented No. 1 Bottle of milk in hand, Shakespeare looks in cupboard: "Toby or not Toby, ah, that is the question. Which jug shall I use?" On 12/01/2013 18:35, Rosalind Mitchell wrote: > Today I attended a full Monthly, sorry, Area Meeting for the first > time in some years. I've been prevented by inaccessiblity for most of > the time I've been living in this neck of the woods, and today I got > there because I was hell-bent on doing so (a bus, a train to a > misleadingly-named station and a 40-minute walk on the way out; a lift > to the station and an hour and a half kicking my heels in a public > house (albeit an exceptionally good one) waiting for the train home > afterwards.) > After being thus out of touch I'm alarmed by what's going on in BYM. > Firstly, I really don't like the idea of trustees running things. I'd > heard horror stories but today came face to face with what's going on > and its appalling. Quakers have a perfectly good business method > tried and tested over several hundred years now and I don't see the > rush to charitable status. If the Charities Commission can't > accommodate our business method then we shouldn't accommodate the > Charities Commission. And the tales of what BYM's trustees are up to, > and the secrecy with which they get up to it, is also scary. Power in > BYM properly resides with Yearly Meeting with Meeting for Sufferings > as its proxy, and with Monthly, sorry, Area Meetings (how the ghastly > new terminology sticks in my gullet!), proceeding according to the > established business method. Otherwise it becomes an organisation I no > longer feel comfortable identifying with. > > Furthermore, it seemed to me that the Quaker Business Method is dying > even within Swarthmoor AM (I can't speak for others). I felt like a > dinosaur when rising to speak; others simply waved a hand or simply > said their piece. There was no space to let the business breathe, to > pause to reflect on what had just been said. The meeting started at > 10.30 and the clerk was rushing to complete by 12.30 even when still > only halfway down the agenda, with important business to come. > Fortunately we agreed to adjourn for lunch for half an hour before > continuing, but there was still far too much on the agenda to be dealt > with properly and one wonders why these meetings are no longer held > monthly. Too much is being rushed through and too much is being lost. > > Is Quakerism as a distinctive movement dying? I fear it is on this > showing. > > Oh, and business did come to the commitment to the environment which > gave me the opportunity to rise and point out that I had committed > myself to living simply and respecting the environment eighteen years > ago in deciding to live without a car, and raised my concern about > business meetings at least, and meetings for worship too for > preference, should be held at times and in places that facilitate > access by public transport; this being a far more practical and > effective witness than spending silly amounts of money on solar panels > in a meeting house garden. When the clerk asked if my point should be > minuted, there was a resounding, vehement, and maybe even venomous NO! > from some quarters. I fear that it is going to be hard work > persuading them to love me. :( > > Rosie > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Quaker-B" group. To post to this group, send email to quak...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to quaker-b+u...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/quaker-b?hl=en.
Rosalind Mitchell
Jan 13, 2013, 5:09:33 PM1/13/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
You may like to have a look at
http://www.42suggestions.co.uk/forum/index.php
as a possible way forward. I've got oodles of web space – far
more than I'm likely to need – ready for use by my new enterprise
and I might as well put it to good use.
http://www.42suggestions.co.uk/forum/index.php
as a possible way forward. I've got oodles of web space – far
more than I'm likely to need – ready for use by my new enterprise
and I might as well put it to good use.
Arthur Fink
Jan 14, 2013, 9:32:02 AM1/14/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
On Jan 12, 2013, at 1:35 PM, Rosalind Mitchell <walne...@gmail.com> wrote:
Today I attended a full Monthly, sorry, Area Meeting for the first time in some years.
Which suggests to me that it make take you some time to fully absorb what is going on. First impressions, first fears, may be misleading.
And the tales of what BYM's trustees are up to, and the secrecy with which they get up to it, is also scary.
Be careful of "tales". What do you know experientially?
Power in BYM properly resides with Yearly Meeting with Meeting for Sufferings as its proxy, and with Monthly, sorry, Area Meetings (how the ghastly new terminology sticks in my gullet!), proceeding according to the established business method.
Ultimately, power resides with God, that Light, that Spirit, as we try to discern. And even as accomodation is made to secular outward forms, this should still be true.
Is Quakerism as a distinctive movement dying? I fear it is on this showing.
My experience is quite contrary . . . that Quakerism in many places is alive and vital.
I fear that it is going to be hard work persuading them to love me. :(
Said that way, it will certainly be true. You may need to find some way to love them . . . even as you feel their faults.
Arthur Fink
Portland Friends Meeting (Maine, USA)
Peaks Island Worship Group (occasional)
10 New Island Ave Peaks Island ME 04108
Wim Nusselder
Jan 14, 2013, 10:12:45 AM1/14/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
Dear Arthur,
You speak to my condition (and I hope to Rosie’s), even though your words are difficult to distinguish from hers in this way.
With f&Friendly greetings,
Wim
Chris Roberts, Newton Meeting, Camden NJ USA
Jan 14, 2013, 2:20:48 PM1/14/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
Thanks Arthur, Chris
Amelia Schafer-Rutherford
Jan 14, 2013, 2:59:35 PM1/14/13
to quak...@googlegroups.com
Thank you Arthur - something I try to do but probable fail to do enough at the times it is the most difficult. - ASR
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Quaker-B" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/quaker-b/-/1MxJOc-jNCAJ.
To post to this group, send email to quak...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to quaker-b+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/quaker-b?hl=en.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages