I have just returned from The Future of British Quakerism conference, organised by Quakers in Britain and Woodbrooke. There was, understandably, a lot of talk about ageing, decline and even impending ‘catastrophic collapse’. For many people, Quakerism in Britain appears to be dying, either gradually or imminently.
I am convinced that we do have a future, mainly because there are so many committed young Friends all over the country who will still be around in 30 or 40 years, and have no intention of giving up their Quaker practice and identity. But the shape of Quakerism in the future will be very different to the one we have inherited.
What we are experiencing is not death but transformation. As one Friend ministered at the conference, we are in a time of transition. Some forms are ending, and others beginning, or waiting to begin. This is a place of weakness and unknowing. It can be hard to endure the uncertainty of transition, but there are already some signs of the emerging shape of British Quakerism in the future.
It seems inevitable that in 20 years there will be far fewer Quaker meetings with their own Meeting Houses; probably only in large cities and a few prosperous towns. But there will also be a greater diversity of other kinds of Quaker community. These may include many kinds of small groups meeting at different times and intervals in community spaces, rented rooms and outdoors.
There is likely to be an even larger number of people whose most regular engagement with other Quakers is online, perhaps supplemented by retreats, camps or other in-person events. There will almost certainly be a broad range of Quaker activist groups and networks focussed on particular concerns such as the climate emergency, migration and peace. Alongside this, I anticipate a greater diversity of forms of Quaker practice, belonging and spirituality, with most Friends having a much looser connection to area meetings and Britain Yearly Meeting as a whole.
In other words it looks much more like a movement than one monolithic organisation.
In some ways this picture resembles the current landscape of western Buddhism, which is mostly practised by a thriving ecosystem of small groups in a range of rented spaces, with just a few Buddhist-owned buildings and residential centres, plus various camps and festivals. It is worth noting that this works. Against a trend of falling religious affiliation in UK society, Buddhism is continuing to grow. It has arguably also had a far greater impact on the surrounding culture than Quakers have achieved in recent decades.
Of course we can’t know anything for certain about the future of Quakerism in Britain. The point of trying to discern where we are heading is so that we can invest our energy, time and resources in what is emerging, rather than spending all our efforts on managing decline. For the possible future shape of Quakerism described here, that might involve three main priorities:
Providing a consistent way for newcomers to learn Quaker practice and spirituality.
At the moment, incredibly, we don’t do this at all. If we want new (and not so new) Quakers to be able to access the potential of the Quaker way, we need to offer them a pathway to understanding core Quaker practices. The pernicious myth that newcomers will somehow pick it all up ‘by osmosis’ has contributed to the current state of many of our meetings, where few, if any people feel confident about their Quaker practice, or able to express it to others.
An organisation may be able to limp along despite this, as long as it can persuade enough people to keep the institutional wheels turning, but a movement relies on a shared understanding of what it has to offer.
Over the years, we have developed excellent resources for this purpose such as Becoming Friends, which we have inexplicably allowed to lapse into disuse, so that most meetings are not offering any regular learning programme at all.
Supporting the ministry of young people.
The great majority of local meetings currently completely exclude children, and consequently their parents and carers as well. Our Quaker youth development workers offer year-round Quaker activities and community-building for children, young people and families. But there are currently only four areas of the country with youth development workers, on short term funding provided by a handful of area meetings. Young adult Quakers are completely absent from most local Quaker communities, which are arranged exclusively to suit the needs and interests of retired people.
The great majority of local meetings currently completely exclude children, and consequently their parents and carers as well. Our Quaker youth development workers offer year-round Quaker activities and community-building for children, young people and families. But there are currently only four areas of the country with youth development workers, on short term funding provided by a handful of area meetings. Young adult Quakers are completely absent from most local Quaker communities, which are arranged exclusively to suit the needs and interests of retired people.
A movement needs to nurture the participation and ministry of young people. We need children and families to find a sense of belonging in the Quaker community. We also urgently need the gifts and perspectives of young adult Friends. This means supporting young people to discern their gifts and leadings, and redirecting resources towards training, mentoring and empowering younger Friends.
Actively inviting people to explore the Quaker way.
A thriving Quaker movement depends on inviting people to find out what the Quaker way has to offer them. It’s very difficult to come to a party that you haven’t been invited to.
An invitation is nothing to do with pressuring people or trying to convince them of anything. Friends who think that saying ‘we don’t proselytise’ justifies keeping the Quaker way to themselves have been allowed to squash spiritual generosity for too long. This has to stop. Instead, we should be extending a continuous and generous invitation to everyone who is looking for what the Quaker way has to offer - deep spiritual encounter, an inclusive and accepting community, and mutual support in working together for a better world.
The group Discovering Quakers has recently started to do this, with a campaign of online advertising that has attracted thousands of new enquirers and potential Friends. They have now started to introduce enquirers to local meetings that have signed up to welcome them (more information here).
The future of British Quakerism is not a story of decline, but of transformation. Transformation involves giving up some things that we have worked hard to maintain and have rightly cherished. There is a real need to grieve for what has served us in the past, including beloved historic buildings and institutions. One Friend at the conference compared the elaborate committee structures of Quakers in Britain to the elegant ruins of historic monasteries such as Rievaulx Abbey. But she reminded us that the point of these structures is the life that was expressed through them. When the Spirit is leading us somewhere new, we do not serve it by clinging onto old structures, but by discerning and nurturing the new forms that enable the Spirit to move in and through us today.
Where do you see the Spirit leading us as a Quaker community in the future? How can we nurture the new forms of Quakerism that are emerging?
We either transform or we wither away. Resurrection is a real thing but the outward form has to disintegrate first. The dandelion flower turns into seeds which are spread everywhere by the wind,
ReplyDeleteTrue
DeleteTed Selker, here in Palo Alto CA: People have no idea we are meeting as we don't use meetup or facebook or lu.ma or get in the local events calendar. I am not sure we have to change who we are... except to recognize as was said beautifully above "Quaker way to themselves have been allowed to squash spiritual generosity for too long"
Delete……but what are “core Quaker practices”? And what about core Quaker BELIEF (and yes there is such a thing)? People ask “What do Quakers believe about……” and ten Quakers give eleven hugely divergent answers. And we insist that this can only be a good thing, and, despite Friends’ increasing “diversity” being accompanied by decline we see the way forward as…..more “diversity”! I don’t advocate narrowness, but any organization has boundaries. Suggesting this gets you accused of being “intolerant”. There needs to be SOME measure of consensus as to what we are, and what we are not. There is less and less.
ReplyDeleteI've written about my understanding of core Quaker practices here: https://transitionquaker.blogspot.com/2014/08/what-does-it-mean-to-be-quaker.html
DeleteI'd argue that focusing on beliefs is a misunderstanding of the Quaker tradition. In fact, most religious traditions (with the peculiar exception of Protestant Christianity) focus more on shared practices than identical beliefs.
I wholeheartedly agree with Craig's focus on Quaker practice rather than what I feel is the blind alley of 'Quaker beliefs.' My core belief is in the practice of sitting in stillness with others and seeing where the Spirit leads us. And yes, most religious traditions focus on practices.
DeleteReally good to read this. And I see it as core to what Quakers have to offer.
Absolutely agree; defining belief is a dead end. Even if you could define what are the core beliefs now, they would be far from the beliefs of the 1650s, 1750s, 1850s etc. Beliefs depend very much on the society within which they develop, but our practice of our silent gathering is still there at our centre.
DeleteI'm an 'attender' of Quaker Zoom meetings, and until a recent house move I attended a Meeting in person regularly.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me the perception from outsiders of this 'Religious Society of Friends' is 'diversity' is interpreted as 'non religious'. The reluctance to present clear objectives seen as proselytising suggests a self-righteous and unfriendly exclusivity. So neither particularly religious or friendly!
Quakerism has so much to offer , so please don't hide your light. The world needs Quakerism!
Dear Craig,
ReplyDeleteThank you for this article, and for sharing some of the thoughts generated at the Future of Quakerism conference.
I too would like to see the “Becoming Friends” reconstituted, and more easily accessible resource materials in general. A member of Oxford Meeting, I am currently based in New England, and running a prison ministry for which I found it necessary to create my own (far from perfect) literature to explain Quakerism to the men. This was time consuming, but rewarding, and it seems as if it spoke to those attending our regular Meeting for Worship, who - after our discussions - see Quakers as very ’now’ / of this moment in time, rather than a dead or dying faith.
Thanks again for the thought-provoking articles.
In Friendship,
Eamonn.
In case Friends are unaware, the original Becoming Friends study pack is available on the Quakers in Ireland website: https://quakers-in-ireland.ie/becoming-friends/.
DeleteThanks for this post Craig. I think a clarity of vision is needed, not just of what we want Quakerism to look like in the future, but in what Quakerism is, and having a consistent way of inducting people into Quakerism is a big part of that.
ReplyDeletei agree
ReplyDeleteTen years ago our very, very old Meeting house needed a new roof, and that inevitably led to further necessary work. I, and one other member of the Meeting, felt we should sell the building and use the money to buy or build a modern, easier and cheaper to manage, building in the nearby town, and do Quaker work and be seen to be doing ‘Quaker work’. But no : “We can’t sell it! It’s a listed building! It’s part of Quaker history!” etc etc…… So we spend much of our time and money keeping the building going. We do no ‘outreach’ but somehow new people find us and the Meeting isn’t shrinking - yet. Thank you for this very useful writing about the conference, Craig. I often think: ‘if only we were DOING something, rather than sitting under a new(ish) roof in a safe historical building’. A friend asked me recently if I wasn’t already a member, would I join today, and after a great deal of thought felt that I probably wouldn’t.
ReplyDeleteSadly I agree
DeleteThank you for this Craig. It echoes much of what I found in the conference. It was great to see you again as well.
ReplyDeleteI feel the need to add and emphasise that the structures we currently have and the way in which we organise ourselves are not intrinsically Quaker. They are simply how we have chosen to do things and we are free to choose to do things differently.
How we conduct ourselves is a different matter and central to this must remain the practice of discernment and the individual's submission to decisions made. This also involves understanding and acceptance of Quaker Faith and Practice, our Book of Discipline.
I can see the Local Meeting and Area Meeting models changing. They actually already have, prompted by Zoom and other creative ways of engaging and belonging but we have not fully realised this yet.
The Yearly Meeting will change structure but will remain the thing to which we ultimately belong but within this we may all belong to one or multiple other communities. I already do.
Local Meetings do need to be less isolated. They need to be more Quaker Community oriented and more willing to collaborate and share with others rather than be stubbornly independent.
Transformation and continuing revelation ..... it is what we are here for.
Hi Matt. You refer to "the individual's submission to decisions made". Without submission to collective decision-making, any Quaker community or movement will be unsustainable. But there is a problem here. Further up this thread, people have commented that we need to seek unity on the basis of shared practice not shared belief. In relation to Meeting for Worship, this probably can work. But in relation to corporate discernment at a Business Meeting (or Meeting for Worship for Church Affairs) it's more tricky. Can we agree to be bound by collective discernment when we don't have a shared understanding of what it is we are "discerning"? It seems to me there are three possible outcomes: (a) Quakers converge in their beliefs about the process of shared discernment; (b) we give up our current model of decision-making in favour of voting, and we agree to abide by the majority view; or (c) it becomes harder and harder to get everyone to abide by collective decisions, and the Society disintegrates.
DeleteHello Tim,
Delete"submission to collective decision-making" is what I was referring to when I said "the individual's submission to decisions made" and adding that our practice is that this includes decisions made in our absence.
This is of course when decisions are made through the process of discernment and not when a number of people gather and simply decide on something.
Unity is not everyone agreeing.
Part of being a Quaker is agreeing to be bound by collective discernment. Discernment is a practice not a belief and yes, if we cannot abide by collective decisions then we will disintegrate.
I don't buy this distinction between belief and practice. Imagine two people conducting a conversation online with a third person. One of them thinks the third person is a real human. The second thinks the third person is a chatbot. Both are engaged in the same practice (online conversation). But their different understandings of what they are doing are likely to mean that they will differ as to its significance and implications. When we "discern", are we trying to discern the will of God, or trying to find an outcome everyone can live with, or what? If we don't agree on this then our agreement to abide by the results of "discernment" is likely to be fragile and may very well in the long-term be unsustainable.
DeleteWe are discerning the will of God and this takes constant care and practice.
DeleteIt is hoped that this is something that everyone can accept especially if they do not agree with it.
We are not trying to find an outcome everyone can live with.
You could interpret the "will of God" as the thing that does not come from your ego but the end result should be the same.
I don't see your example of different perceptions being relevant.
Our acceptance (not agreement) of abiding by the results of discernment can be fragile.
It has served us 400 years.
It seems to me that we need to think about the future of Friends House, and our centrally employed staff. Do we still need a large flagship building in central London? Do we need fewer London-based staff, and more staff to work with local/area/regional meetings or with the emerging networks that Craig refers to? Many of the news items on the Quakers in Britain website amount to saying that Quakers agree with the position taken by a range of secular NGOs (Liberty, Amnesty, etc). Is there any benefit in this kind of activity? How much staff time does it take up? Could that time be better spent?
ReplyDeleteThe central question, it seems to me, is: what is the silence for? When we sit together, what are we doing, and what is the silence doing to us? A friend, when asked if he thought Quakerism was dying, replied that people will always need mystical religion. The question then becomes, does Quaker practice reflect this human need for silence? If it does, it will survive in some form. Taoist writings (and much else) describe a world where change is a constant. We will always be human, but our world will always change, that is its nature. Our practice has to reflect that change, as well as responding to what is essentially human. I think what people find useful in Quakerism is its acceptance of people as they are, the making space for exploration of central and urgent questions, its knowledge of community, its desire for growth and connection. Confidence comes from making use of these opportunities. There are many good, new practices out there which reflect elements of the Quaker way, and groups which are natural allies in the search for meaning and effective action. When we stop searching, we lose that connection to the spirit which we need to stay truly alive. If we are fully alive, why should we worry? There is always work to be done. The distinction between inner and outer work does not make sense: it's all one.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Craig, for your account of the conference outcomes. I was not there but entirely agree with the three main points of focus you identify as important for the future of British Quakerism, and am glad to see them also coming out of this conference. I hope British Friends will be able to move forward and develop together along these lines. Transformation, certainly! For those who turn to early Friends for revitalisation, it's (as I'm sure you know) a term to praise to see a 'movement' more than an organisation in the emerging state of affairs. That is most encouraging!
ReplyDelete