|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Meeting gathered at the appointed time Seventh-day morning, Third Month 23, 2002, and settled into worship. Clerk was Arlene Kelly, Alternate Clerks Richard Bernard and Dudley (Sandy) Heath and Recording Clerk Stephan de la Veaux.
- Minute 19: Clerk’s Welcome
Clerk welcomed Friends and introduced those on the facing bench. Friends welcomed Vernon Layton of Northern Yearly Meeting.
- Minute 20: Epistle
Thomas Swain read the epistle from Ohio Valley Yearly Meeting. The epistle spoke of the relationship of the peace within us and the testimony of peace to the outside world, acknowledging the turmoil that can reside in both, even while both are centered in the Light. It considered the idea of Meeting as a community, not simply a place where we might meet once a week for an hour.
- Minute 21: Outreach
Clerk introduced Friends serving on the Support and Outreach Standing Committee. She spoke of the disappointment some have had at the lack of decision-making at Yearly Meeting (although three major items were acted on yesterday). But the focus of this morning is another facet of our work. We will hear of the project “Making New Friends – A New Initiative for Growing PYM”. We wish to nurture the Spirit within us and others. Clerk asked all to hear this presentation as Friends of Monthly Meetings.
Mark Cary of Swarthmore Meeting described the program asking: “What would be effective as outreach?” This year is the 350th anniversary of George Fox’s preaching on Firbank Fell, the nominal genesis of the Religious Society of Friends. This project reviewed PYM’s prior outreach efforts, as well as the efforts of other churches and the results of a survey from Hartford Seminary. The group surveyed selected Meetings, getting a 40 percent response rate.
The results of the survey were wide-ranging and deep. We are no longer a birthright Society but more a community of convinced Friends. Mark reviewed the statistics on “Who are We?” It showed how we are different from other faith communities in the United States, but also pointed out the variety of religious experiences and expectations within our Society. We do appear weak on integrating attenders, and even new members, into our Meetings. The strongest correlation for satisfaction with one’s Meeting is effective Meeting for Worship. Outreach is considered the weakest of our programs. Janet Braker of Newtown Meeting summarized the highlights and presented several Queries to help us work out the implications of outreach.
Question & answer and commentary followed. One asked: What are the uses of the rather flexible word “religious”? The varieties in our beliefs may lead some to consider us irreligious. This criticism also applies to the word “prayer”. Another noted that the size of Meetings has an effect. A meeting of 200 is about the largest that can be run with only volunteers, and some consider a meeting of 75 to be about ideal. One Friend asked how many Friends move from casual to a deeper involvement? Others noted a reluctance for creating smaller “worship groups” within monthly meetings, with the monthly meeting being the “home” of these groups. Finally, is there any consideration of “inreach” in the survey?
Clerk asked Friends to recognize this gathering as an opportunity for outreach to each other, asking that all Friends be drawn into the discussion. She also asked that we not get caught up in the survey, but speak out where each of us might be experientially as well as sharing the experience of our own meetings. With that, Meeting broke. Afterwards, Clerk asked Friends to briefly share what caught their attention. Many thoughts were offered concerning many aspects of outreach, meeting dynamics and Quakerism and faith as Quakers experience it.
Clerk asked for deeper consideration of the thoughts presented. One asked if we have been thinking about outreach, but have not let it sink deep within us, beyond mere intellect. Another pointed out that we have been politely phrasing our ideas in Queries. But we know what it means to be a Quaker! We must go back and be Quakers. One Friend asked if there were any visitors present? What are their observations? We should ask them how others might be encouraged to come to Yearly Meeting. Clerk responded by noting that we have always invited and welcomed visitors, but haven’t asked them how we could encourage more visitors to Meeting. She asked how many present were at their first Yearly Meeting. About 20 percent stood; a goodly number. They were invited to relate their experiences at Yearly Meeting. One Friend wondered if visiting Quarterly Meeting and Yearly Meeting should not be required of new members, but that these new members would then be welcomed not only by their monthly meeting but also by their Quarterly Meeting and Yearly Meeting. One Friend did relate a bitter experience at the 4th and Arch Street Meeting House years back, showing just how much pain even one such experience can cause. Clerk asked what does “spiritual hospitality” mean within the context of Quaker faith?
Bonalyn Mosteller of Radnor Meeting described the “Making New Friends” initiative. This is a pilot project for two years involving four to six meetings. It uses a bottom-up approach and requires lots of energy and willingness of the entire meeting; not just the efforts or enthusiasm of a few. The project intends to use mostly existing material, but will look at new ways to use it. They will evaluate this initiative, including targets for meetings (a growth of 10% to 20% over the two years). Useful, tested ideas will be made available as soon as possible to other meetings. The project will not use any Yearly Meeting funds: a number of supporters are subsidizing the project. They would appreciate contributions made to the project. This project will coordinate efforts with the “Deepening and Strengthening Our Meetings as Faith Communities” initiative. The critical task – enhance Meeting for Worship. They also plan to help with the (hoped-for) changes in the meeting, as well as deal with potential conflict within the meeting. Bonalyn thanked the many who have worked long and hard on this initiative.
Friends offered comment. One asked why we need this initiative? Thom Jeavons spoke to this. He has seen Friends wrestle with a number of issues for six years. A key part of all these problems is numbers. Our structure assumes three times as many Friends as exist. Many Quaker groups are seeking Friends willing and able to serve; there are too few of us. We are the inheritors of a powerful, Spirit-led tradition; we are obligated to share this with others. A Friend offered thanks for the initiative, but asked more for the vision behind it. She wondered how this could heal some of the pain in the world and share some of the love. But there is nothing we cannot do if it is rightly ordered. We only need the longing.
Minutes were read, corrected and approved and announcements given. After the minutes were read, a Friend voiced concern at the potential commitment this initiative would require were it to be fully implemented. Friends voiced their appreciation for the minutes. After a brief period of worship, Meeting adjourned, to reconvene in the afternoon at 1:45 p.m.
Stephan de la Veaux, recording clerk
Last modified: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 at 08:19 AM