What Can We Say Today? Questions for the Revision of the Book of Discipline
This essay by Simon
Best and Stuart Masters was first published in The Friends Quarterly, Issue Three, 2014.
Introduction
In
her entry on Quaker Discipline (Faith and Practice) in the Historical Dictionary of the Friends (Quakers) Jan Hoffman notes
that ‘when a yearly meeting becomes aware of “spiritual and social inharmonies”
with its Faith and Practice, a
revision will be undertaken to reflect new revelations given” [1]
In Britain, Meeting for Sufferings has recently decided to recommend to Yearly
Meeting that a revision process is initiated (minute S14/02/06) and so it seems
likely that we will soon be entering a period of consultation and discernment
leading to the revision of our Book of Discipline. Now such a process is about far
more than simply changing a few paragraphs and adding one or two new pieces of Quaker
writing. Quaker Faith and Practice seeks
to communicate something vital about who we are, what we do and what we have to
say to the world. It requires each of us to forego a little of our individual
freedom and autonomy in exchange for the opportunity to participate in a
community with a common identity that represents something more than simply the
sum of its parts. It also requires us to accept that, since we are but one part
of a diverse global family of Friends, we cannot possibly produce a definitive
statement of the Quaker way. Instead we seek to make our particular
contribution to a living and evolving faith and practice. The Book of
Discipline has authority because it is the product of sustained corporate
experience, exploration and discernment. In this essay we will attempt to
identify a number of the key issues and questions that will need to be
addressed during the revision process as they relate to the identity, practice
and message of British Friends at this time. We recognise that there may not be
one single answer to these questions but we believe that some answers will be more
acceptable to us as a community than others. One of the great strengths of the
Book of Discipline is that it is has the capacity to reflect both issues on
which we are in unity and those on which a diversity of opinions exists. In
recognising this fact, we would like to emphasise the value of working within two
key areas of creative tension which seem to be characteristic of the Quaker way.
These are:
1. Rooted and Evolving – between our roots in Christianity and the
Quaker heritage and the growing pluralism and questioning of this tradition and
heritage within our communities?
2. Corporate and Individual – between being ‘a gathered people’ with a
common identity, practice and message and the value of individuals who bring a
diversity of gifts and insights to that community?
It
would seem that for some time now the development of British Quakerism has been
weighted quite strongly towards the evolving and individualistic impulse over
that of a rooted and corporate focus. As this reflects dominant cultural
patterns in the wider society, it will be interesting to see whether we are
entering a period in which this trajectory is accelerated or rebalanced.
We
have divided our analysis into five main themes: the question of God & religious
language, the purpose and experience of Quaker worship, the nature and shape of
Quaker testimony, the practice of Quaker discernment and decision making and
the issue of belonging and Quaker community.
‘God’ and Religious
Language
The
Quaker way has always given priority to spiritual experience over the
development of systematic religious thought. That said, it is clear that individuals
and groups need to be able to interpret their experiences and explain their meaning
to others. Language provides us with an essential tool for expression but it is
an imperfect medium. The meanings of words are culturally and contextually
dependent. Therefore, when we express ourselves in words the intended meaning
is not always clear and misunderstandings are always possible. This can be a
particular problem when it comes to expressing religious experience and belief,
since it is here that we struggle to describe something that is ultimately beyond
words. Concerns about being misunderstood or of giving offense can prevent individuals
and groups from sharing the stories of their spiritual journeys and expressing
what they have found to be true. For example, what the theist seeks to affirm may not be the same as what the nontheist feels
the need to deny. Questions to consider:
1.
Should we spend time arguing about what we mean by
the word ‘God’ and the status of ‘God’ (e.g. as an objective reality or as merely
a human concept) or should we give priority instead to the traditional Quaker
practice of attending to the guidance of our inward teaching (however this
might be understood) and seeking to demonstrate the nature of this teacher by
the way in which
our lives are transformed?
2.
Do
we wish to continue to define ourselves as being ‘rooted in Christianity but
open to new light’? Some express doubts about this but given the significance
of our Christian Quaker heritage and the influence of the life and teachings of
Jesus for our practice and the general shape of our testimony, is it possible
to ignore or deny these roots and maintain our integrity?
3.
Should we remove what some believe to be archaic
terminology from our Book of Discipline or would it be better to add to and
expand the range of religious language used to reflect the richness and diversity
of belief that exists within our communities? We know that early Friends used a
large number of different words for the divine presence. Should we continue
this tradition?
4.
Given that the meaning of words change over time, does
the revision process provide us with the opportunity to re-appropriate and
reinterpret traditional religious language in a way that is compatible with our
current insights?
5.
As
a community, should we set any limits to acceptable Quaker belief? Although we
give priority to right living (orthopraxy) over right belief (orthodoxy), our
beliefs can shape our conduct and the very idea that belief is unimportant is
itself a belief. How should we handle this issue?
6.
Do we recognise the danger of becoming too
preoccupied with rationality and factual certainly? Friends have traditionally acknowledged
the limitations of human knowledge and understanding and hence the need for
humility. Are we able to maintain a respect for the value of doubt and mystery
in our lives and in our spiritual journeys?
Worship
The
Quaker way is based on the awareness of a living Spirit that has the power to
teach and transform us. As a result, the practice of Quaker worship is focused
on enabling both individuals and the gathered community to be led to their
inward teacher. Although Quaker worship is primarily a corporate activity,
individual spiritual practice has traditionally been regarded as a crucial discipline
that helps to deepen the worship experience of the whole community. The person
who comes to worship with heart and mind prepared is able to quickly settle
into the collective stillness and contribute to the community’s capacity to
hear and follow the promptings of love and truth. Over the years our understanding
of worship and how it is practiced has diversified reflecting a growing
individualism and pluralism within Quaker communities. In addition, there has
been a significant change in the length of worship. In the seventeenth century it
was often ‘untimed’ and could last for many hours. Pink Dandelion has noted
that the duration of corporate worship has reduced by about half an hour in
each century since.[2] Questions
to consider:
1.
Is
the traditional understanding of Quaker worship as essentially a shared
communal experience beginning to wane? Do we need to reassert the corporate
nature of Quaker worship practice or is this not a problem?
2.
Is
the idea that we aspire to being in a state of unceasing worship at all times
and in all places still meaningful to us? If so, how do we encourage and nurture
such a practice?
3. We know that in our communities there is a diversity of views about what
it is that we are attending to in worship and a variety of different practices
being adopted. Does this weaken the worship experience? Does this matter?
4.
The
issue of leadership and authority can be a controversial one. Do we fully
recognise and value the role and authority of elders in nurturing the spiritual
life of meetings and in ensuring the right ordering of worship? If so, are we
prepared to recognise their authority in undertaking this role?
5.
Is
the centrality of worship as the essential context in which we make decisions
and do our business as a community still something that we are prepared to take
seriously as a spiritual discipline? How can we make this a more vital and
fulfilling aspect of our corporate life?
6.
Do
we wish to emphasise the essential value of worship at all levels of the Society
(at local, area and yearly meeting levels)? If so, how can we encourage greater
participation of Friends at all these levels?
7.
In
order to deepen our experience and reconnect with earlier Quaker practice should
we give a higher priority to encouraging communities to experiment with longer
and untimed worship? How can this be achieved when Friends have increasingly
busy lives?
8. Do we need to be more willing to experiment with a variety of worship forms
to meet the diverse needs of people (e.g. families with young children) and the
demands of a variety of circumstances? If we do, how can we ensure these are in
harmony with traditional Quaker insights?
Testimony
How we live our faith is central to
being a Quaker, ours is a lived faith. Many people first encounter Quakers, or
are drawn to our meetings because of our witness in the world. We have all seen
the acronym of ‘STEPS’ on a badge or leaflet
– this can be a useful hook but by expressing testimony as a list there
is a danger that it becomes just that, a list of values we try to tick off
rather than an expression of our encounter with the divine. As Maud Grainger says:
“Testimony is about the way in which we live
our lives, it is the expression of our faith. Any list of ‘testimonies’ weakens
the idea of witness and action as our lives transformed through worship.”
Having a list also divides them and
allows us to take action in relation to ‘peace’ or ‘sustainability’ without
seeing the connections between these two expressions of testimony. Maud Grainger speaks of testimony in terms of
threads, running through Quaker history:
“If instead we think
of these words – peace, truth, integrity, simplicity, sustainability, equality
as interweaving threads illustrating our witness through history. These threads
touch our lives and at different times we may feel drawn towards one of them,
some of them, or all of them.”
Our testimony arises out of
concerns, which are to be distinguished from things we are concerned about it.
Quaker concern is more than just issues that we are worried about and more than
just good ideas about how we can respond to these issues. Question to consider:
1.
Do those drawn to our meetings by
our social witness understand that what we do in the world is a consequence of
our spiritual experience as individuals and as a community? How can we enable them to see our action in
the world as having a spiritual dimension?
2.
How can we avoid reducing the
complexity of Quaker testimony to four or five words without being overwhelmed
by a sense of helplessness?
3.
How can we enable each other to see
that ‘small steps’ and ‘big actions’ are both equal and equally valid expressions
of testimony and will be right for different people depending on what resonates
with their life and experience?
4.
Are there any expressions of
testimony that we would want to see as fundamental?
Discernment and Decision-Making
The
Quaker way of decision making is unique. It is not easily described in secular
terms and is qualitative different from a process of consensus. In making
decisions as individuals and as a community we must be open to being led, which
may include being led into surprising or difficult places. Recent articles and letters in the Friend
have portrayed issues which have come to various bodies as ‘debates’ between
two (or more) positions. Such language,
while understandable given the language of the world we live in, leads to
division and to questioning of the decision that was reached. The Quaker
process is such that when misunderstood there can be an expectation that everyone
will have their say and be happy with the outcome. The current Book of Disciple
still speaks of our decision making being about seeking the will of God.
However, only 20% of adult Quakers say that they are seeking the will of God in
Meeting for Worship[3],
Clerks do not see their role as helping the meeting to discern the will of God.
Question to consider:
1.
Do we still understand ‘God’ as a
concept that is capable of having a will? If not what words can we use to
describe our experience of making personal and corporate decisions?
2.
Is the Quaker business method still
a practice of discerning leadings or have we moved to a place where consensus
decision making and possibly even majority voting may be better?
3.
Is the traditional understanding
that discernment and decision making occurs in the spirit of worship still
appropriate for us today?
4.
Do all Friends understand the
discipline of upholding decisions reached by Friends when we are not present,
how can we enable this to be a reality?
5.
Do we need to alter our decision
making processes to ensure that all Friends feel a sense of ownership of the
decision? Can we do this and not lose the essence of Quaker discernment?
Belonging and community
Quakerism
is communitarian by its nature. It always has been. We exist in relationship to
each other and the quality of our relationships affects our communal worship,
our decision making and our lives together. Significantly the Quaker community
is different from and greater than the sum of its parts. We can derive great
support and nurture from belonging to a Quaker community. However, being part
of that community carries with it a willingness to be challenged, to be held
accountable, to support others and to contribute to the community. Being part
of a Quaker meeting can feel like very hard work; there are jobs to be done,
roles to be filled, care to be given. It takes a lot just to meet the
requirements of the ‘Church Government’ sections of the Book of Disciple, and
to keep the show on the road. Within the
Religious Society of Friends membership is falling[4],
the proportion of attenders is rising and
fewer attenders are joining and heard the argument that fewer members and more
attenders in a meeting leads to fewer applications for membership. Most of us
will have seen the reality in our meetings of the committed Quakers not in
membership who give considerable time, money and service to the meeting. Questions
to consider:
1.
What does it mean to belong to the
Quaker community, and to a specific meeting or group?
2.
Are we a support group for
individuals each engaged on their own personal and private spiritual journey or
are we a faith community with a corporate life?
3.
How can we ensure that we meet the
duties laid upon us by Yearly Meeting decisions, legal requirements and good
practice without overwhelming meetings and Friends?
4.
Given the reality of falling
membership and deeply committed attenders should we bother having membership?
Is it a purely administrative function and something we can do away with as we
move into the twenty-first century when Quaker communities might become more
fluid, meeting and worshipping in different groupings and in different ways?
5.
In
Listening Spiritually Patricia Loring
writes that ‘the consequence of having no standard [for membership] is that the
meeting conforms to the vision of those it has admitted’.[5] Where do we draw the line in relation to
membership? What are our standards for admitting people to membership? If the
only apparent standard is that they want to join is that sufficient?
6.
In
what ways is saying you belong to a Quaker meeting, or you’re a member of the
Religious Society of Friends similar to or different from saying “I belong to
Greenpeace” or “I’m a member of the National Trust”?
Conclusion
The
letters page of The Friend has already seen people asking for their particular
preferences to be acknowledged in a revised Book of Discipline. That is an
understandable response and there is an extent to which each revision must
respond to these calls. However as we said earlier the process of revision
requires us to sacrifice
some of our individual ego, needs and wants in order to be part of an inclusive
Quaker community. When
potentially divisive situations arise I’m reminded of the following story from
Quaker faith & practice, about the drafting of the epistle for the 1985
World Gathering of Young Friends:
The discussion [had] changed from persons
wanting to ensure that their concerns were heard to wanting to ensure that the
concerns of others were heard and that their needs were met. We had indeed
experienced the transforming power of God’s love. Paul Anderson Quaker faith & practice 2.92
When
it comes to revising the Book of Disciple we will be able to do the same? If we
can then then this may be an enlivening and enriching process for us as a
Yearly Meeting. If we can’t I wonder whether we will we find a volume that we
can even agree on. It is also the case that any revision will result in Friends
resigning their membership. Just as we have our personal faith journeys the
Religious Society of Friends also has a corporate journey. There will be times
when those coincide and others when the corporate journey means that
individuals feel sufficiently out of step that they stand aside and go their
separate ways. While this may be sad we should not be scared of this happening
but accept it.
In
this article we have identified lots of questions that we feel need to be
explored and addressed in the revision process. To a certain extent it doesn’t
matter whether we do this as part of the revision process or as part of a
preparatory process before getting to the substance of what, for example,
chapter 12 might actually say. Of course our answers may very well be varied
and partial and provisional – for that is what the Book of Discipline is – it
is not a definitive text for all time and Friends in the future will want and
need to revise whatever text we approve. However what we can’t do is avoid or
fudge exploration of these various questions.
The
Book of Discipline sets our boundaries, it establishes where the balance
currently is in the tension between rooted and evolving and between corporate
and individual. What it is not is optional. We can’t say “I don’t like it, I’m
not going to use it”. Of course we will find parts of it that express things
closer to the way we would but the parts that challenge us also lead to growth.
It can be an uncomfortable book but that’s one of its strengths because it is
an expression of an uncomfortable faith.
[1]
Abbott, M et al
(2011) Historical Dictionary of the Friends (Quakers), Scarecrow Press, p.99
[2]
Dandelion, Pink (2008) Quakerism: A Very
Short Introduction (Oxford University Press), p.39 & p.48.
[3] National Quaker Survey 2013, www.woodbrooke.org.uk/data/files/CPQS/Initial_findings_Quaker_Survey_2013_PDF.pdf
[4] Membership within Britain Yearly
Meeting has declined on average by 167 people per year over the past ten years
www.quaker.org.uk/sites/default/files/Tabular-statement-2013-web.pdf page 11.
[5]
Patricia
Loring, Listening Spiritually Vol. 2
Corporate Spiritual Practice Among Friends. Philadelipha: Openings Press
and Quaker Press of FGC 1999: 43-44
Comments
Post a Comment