Yearly Meeting Gathering 2009

Video of introduction – part one

Video of introduction – part two

The aims for our session are stated on page 35 of ‘Documents in Advance’:

For a long time Friends have been concerned to recognize and celebrate the different kinds of personal relationships within our Quaker community.

In the light of our Testimony to Equality we are asked by Meeting for Sufferings to consider how we should celebrate and recognize committed relationships within our Quaker community and what revisions of Quaker faith & practice would follow from this to include same sex partnerships.

Having dwelt on this theme for more than more than a while, I came to question the fundamental tenet of the first sentence.  Are there indeed different kinds of ‘personal relationships’?  When two people meet and seek to make permanent that bond, what is the very essence of the union?  Does it depend on personal circumstances, age, gender, ethnicity, cultural background, the spirit of the age, for example?  And I was forced to conclude that it does.  When George Fox and Margaret Fell married, I am quite confident that that was a different personal relationship to that of a younger couple marrying three centuries later.  In my Area Meeting this month we appointed a meeting for worship for the celebration of marriage to be held on Saturday next.  The Friend in membership is 79 years old, and his intended slightly younger.  What is the essence of that union?

Those of us in a relationship know full well that the nature of the relationship changes over time.  When my own children ask me why we, the parents, married, I always tell them it was my hormones.  After four children, I still reckon that’s not entirely mischievous, but the nature of the relationship has changed.  When I read QFP 22.40 I see a reflection of my own current relationship with my partner: ‘Over the years her contribution to the home and life she shared with Mary was constant and faithful. It was a partnership and Jessie’s support for Mary’s dedicated work in school and in Guides seemed as unquestioning as Mary’s was as the second pair of hands in Jessie’s flower and vegetable garden.’ I realise I only need to alter the names, and the job descriptions, and that could be us – Mr and Mrs B.

One can’t help being reminded of the words of UA Fanthorpe:

There is a kind of love called maintenance
Which stores the WD40 and knows when to use it

And what was different about the relationship between Jessie and Mary?  We knew Mary well, and I can say with confidence, absolutely nothing, apart from them being of the same gender.  To themselves they were married, but to the world they were ‘companions’.  When Mary died, at the meeting for worship to celebrate her life, her sister-in-law said ‘Mary never knew the joy of marriage or children’, and nothing could have been farther from the truth.  What is true is that Jessie and Mary lacked the means of making a public act of witness of that love that bound them, in a society that at the time could accept it; and a certificate.  Now, in that same local meeting, there are a number of same-sex couples who can enjoy the benefit of a civil partnership, and a legal footing for their relationships.

On the matter of equality, we are, as Friends, quite secure.  As a society and as a community we have embraced and recognised loving relationships in a variety of forms between adults; in the case of homosexuality, some years before it became legal, and many years before it became socially acceptable.  We have long accepted, under our testimony to equality, the worth of all individuals and the value of all committed relationships.

During Quaker Week, in 2008, we proudly announced that:

One of the consequences of our equality testimony is that we welcome lesbian, gay and bisexual and transgendered men and women, and have a fundamental commitment to equality and inclusion. We affirm the love of God for all people, whatever their sexuality.

quakerweek.org.uk – 2008

I know that there are pockets of resistance – that there are Friends for whom homosexuality is immoral, unnatural, and against the teaching of the wider Christian church.  The words of  QFP 22.45 are still true now, if perhaps for fewer people:

‘The acceptance of homosexuality distresses some Friends.’

And gay and lesbian Friends are equally distressed by the attitudes of others.  In The Friend we read of a gathering in which ‘we could safely express the hurts we had experienced in Quaker or other contexts – where sometimes our lifestyles and relationships were treated as second class or worse.’

But I also know that we as Friends are willing to accept our Quaker discipline, to put corporate discernment over and above our own fears and misgivings.

So we can go forth, and be rest assured that we do ‘respect that of God in everyone though it may be expressed in unfamiliar ways or be difficult to discern’, and that God, in whatever way we use the word, does not indulge in discriminatory practices, certainly not in our community.

And in accepting gay and lesbian Friends, we have acknowledged the worth of same sex relationships, and our desire to celebrate these relationships as couples give witness to the world. To quote Harvey Gillman, writing recently in The Friend – ‘I do believe that there is an eternal verity – that of love and commitment’.  ‘… why can’t we universalise marriage as a commitment of two people of whatever sexual orientation, showing love to each other and thus mediating God’s love to the world?’

So why are we considering this issue this week, when it seems we have long ago embraced the notion that all loving relationships are equal and valid and worthy of our respect?  Simply because our current processes do not reflect our testimony to equality, that couples of opposite gender have opportunities for marriage that same sex couples do not.  As Quakers we can change some of this, but not all. But much as changed already.  In the first place, our own opinions and attitudes as Friends have clearly changed.

Quoting the Quaker Life soundings exercise:

‘There is overwhelming evidence that attitudes have changed significantly in recent years, even since our current book of discipline was published …  58 meetings thought opinions had moved; only 4 felt not.  It is clear from the responses of some meetings and individuals that taking part in this consultation exercise has enabled some participants to confront an issue which they had not previously faced up to and that they have been moved on.’

Whatever we agreed to in the early nineties, when we muttered ‘hope so’ to the content of the current Quaker Faith and Practice, we now seem to have taken to our hearts and minds, and we have indeed moved on.

Secondly, the wider society has changed.  The Civil Partnership act has been a landmark in both responding to changing attitudes, and in raising expectations. It confers on the participants rights and responsibilities identical to civil marriage.  But marriage in a secular sense, as a legal union, and not as an act of witness before God and the world. The state recognises and legitimises same sex relationships, gives those in such a relationship equal rights with those in opposite sex relationships, but does not afford them quite the same status; gay marriage is not on offer. For many gay and lesbian people, what is missing is the religious and spiritual aspect, declared before and to the world:

QFP 22.46 What seemed essential to us was the public witnessing of a commitment made before God by one’s worshipping community who then also took a responsibility to uphold it.

Hence, many Friends, in same sex relationships, have followed a civil partnership by a meeting for worship to celebrate that commitment.  And others have not, apparently happy to know they are loved, supported and upheld by their meetings, with no need of further witness.

Therefore, Friends have equal rights, in law, but not equal treatment, and within the current legal framework we know that equal treatment with Quaker marriage is not possible.  Can we, as Quakers, have something that is equal to marriage, but not the same?  Moreover, can we do so without trespassing on the feelings of those who see marriage as sacred between a man and a woman?  Is it possible to have an alternative, a gay marriage, that does not dilute the gravity felt by many of us, still, of a straight marriage.  And can we come together and say that such a union is placed in the spiritual context – ‘with divine assistance’ or ‘with God’s help’?  If and when we arrive at that place, we can then consider how as a community we record such unions, for presently only marriages are recorded in the annual returns.  To quote Quaker Life again: ‘Quaker faith and practice needs to establish right-ordering for the conduct of all meetings for worship held to celebrate committed relationships. Records of all such meetings for worship should form part of the returns to Britain Yearly Meeting.’

But if we are in so many ways united, what separates us?  There is a feeling, expressed in The Friend and elsewhere, that since this issue has been promoted as one of equality, those opposed to having same sex partnerships on an equal footing with heterosexual marriage, have refrained from speaking for fear of opposing equality and the rights of all, and of being homophobic.  And we know from the soundings exercise that a more traditional view of homosexuality is earnestly held by a number of Friends.  We need to embrace one another, to share our misgivings, objections, and reservations.  The purpose of these sessions at Yearly Meeting is to act as a threshing exercise, and I am sure we would all wish York to be a ‘safe place for difficult conversations’.

Yearly Meeting in 1994 minuted after difficulties over what should go in Quaker faith & practice on sexuality: ‘While our own individual experience does not identify with every extract, we recognise, in love, the Friend whose experience is not our own. We pray for ourselves, that we may not divide but keep together in our hearts.’

It might be very difficult for some of us, as we share our thoughts with others, possibly with diametrically opposing views.  But we do need to move on, so that we can speak and act in a way that demonstrates our commitment to equality, which we know experimentally.  We need to seek discernment together, so that we can give corporate expression to our inner experience.

Before I leave you, I would like to return to those four darling children of mine.

I found this conversation on Facebook, between number one son and his partner:

Christopher: Here I am, writing on your wall for all to see.  Love you, xx

Paul: Love you too. xx

Christopher: Thanks for making that delicious home made pizza for tea

Paul: Tiz a pleasure, didn’t come out as well as I wanted though :( It’ll be better next time :D

It lacks the eloquence of the poet, and the depth of the sage, but nevertheless, it is certainly from the heart, and not entirely different to Jessie and Mary.  And I’m sure neither of them is thinking of marriage.

Number one daughter might have been heading for a big Catholic wedding, but I’m afraid it’s off.

Number two daughter has promised her girlfriend in Australia that by the time she next comes to England gay marriage will be legal.  I hate to disappoint her.

And number three daughter – she’s a good Quaker and holding out for the right Quaker boy to have a proper Quaker wedding, followed by a bring and share.

Four young people, equal in the sight of God, with very different hopes and expectations for personal relationships.  They don’t want the same thing, but they do deserve some form of equality.

Quakers in Britain today concluded a long and profound process of discernment about the way forward for Quaker marriage and approach to same sex partnerships.

The minute recording the decision is as follows:

Minute 25, Britain Yearly Meeting 31 July 2009

Further to minute 17, a session was held on Tuesday afternoon at which speakers shared personal experiences of the celebration and recognition of their committed relationships. These Friends had felt upheld by their meetings in these relationships but regretted that whereas there was a clear, visible path to celebration and recognition for opposite sex couples, the options available for couples of the same sex were not clear and could vary widely between meetings. Friends who feel theirs to be an ordinary and private rather than an exotic and public relationship have had to be visible pioneers to get their relationship acknowledged and recorded.

This open sharing of personal experience has moved us  and added to our clear sense that, 22 years after the prospect was first raised at Meeting for Sufferings we are being led to treat same sex committed relationships in the same way as opposite sex marriages, reaffirming our central insight that marriage is the Lord’s work and we are but witnesses. The question of legal recognition by the state is secondary.

We therefore ask Meeting for Sufferings to take steps to put this leading into practice and to arrange for a draft revision of the relevant sections of Quaker faith and practice, so that same sex marriages can be prepared, celebrated, witnessed, recorded and reported to the state, as opposite sex marriages are. We also ask Meeting for Sufferings to engage with our governments to seek a change in the relevant laws so that same sex marriages notified in this way can be recognised as legally valid, without further process, in the same way as opposite sex marriages celebrated in our meetings. We will not at this time require our registering officers to act contrary to the law, but understand that the law does not preclude them from playing a central role in the celebration and recording of same sex marriages.

We have heard dissenting voices during the threshing process which has led to us this decision, and we have been reminded of the need for tenderness to those who are not with us who will find this change difficult. We also need to remember, including in our revision of Quaker faith and practice, those Friends who live singly, whether or not by choice.

We will need to explain our decision to other Christian bodies, other faith communities, and, indeed to other Yearly Meetings, and pray for a continuing loving dialogue, even with those who might disagree strongly with what we affirm as our discernment of God’s will for us at this time.

Following the decision, Martin Ward, clerk of Quakers Yearly Meeting said: “This minute is the result of a long period of consultation and what we call “threshing” in our local meetings, culminating in two gathered sessions of our Yearly Meeting. At these sessions, according to practice, we heard ministry arising out of silent worship which led us to discern the will of God for the Religious Society and record it in this minute.”

Britain Yearly Meeting – the organisational body of Quakers in Britain

Yearly Meeting in Session – the annual general meeting of the organisation, at which all members are entitled to attend – similar to the Church of England General Synod

Meeting for Sufferings – the interim executive committee of the Yearly Meeting, empowered to act and take decisions in between Yearly Meetings, and also do detailed work in smaller sub-committees

Clerk – the chairperson of a Quaker business meeting, who senses the will of the meeting and records that will in a minute.

Ministry – Quaker meetings for worship and for decision making are based on silence, out of which spoken ministry is offered by participants as they feel moved to.

Quaker faith and practice – the constitutional ‘governing document’ for Quakers in Britain containing procedures for such as Marriages and Funerals, the explanations of the organisation’s structure, and statements on faith.

Other background information

Quakers are known formally as The Religious Society of Friends.

Quakers were given the right to conduct marriages in England and Wales in 1753, but case law before that recognised the validity of Quaker marriages.

Quakers began to call for a sexual morality based on the worth of relationships in 1963 with the publication of ‘Towards a Quaker view of Sex’. Since then, Quakers have developed through tolerance to widespread acceptance of same sex partnerships, particularly since the formation of the now Quaker Lesbian and Gay Fellowship in 1973. Meeting for Sufferings minuted appreciation of gay and lesbian Quakers’ contribution in 1988.

There was no formal stage of ‘recognising’ same sex partnerships nationally as Quaker procedures allowed it to happen: there was nothing against it. The first meetings for commitment were in 1996. Since then, around twenty local meetings have celebrated same sex relationships through an official meeting for commitment.

Following the Civil Partnership Act of December 2005, same sex couples in England, Wales and Scotland, who share Quaker beliefs may opt for a blessing or commitment ceremony after entering a civil partnership.

The Civil Partnership Act allows same sex partnerships to be registered as civil partnerships in law, but such registrations cannot take place in the context of religious worship. Civil partnership is not recognised as marriage, although registered civil partners share almost the same legal rights and responsibilities as heterosexual couples.

The total number of civil partnerships formed in the UK since the Civil Partnership Act came in December 2005 is 26,787. (Office for National Statistics)

More news from British Quakers at quaker.org.uk/news-releases

An additional piece of reading in advance of the Yearly Meeting sessions on Committed Relationships:

The idea of marriage, including the closeness and wholehearted commitment which marriage  entailed,  meant that in the Bible it was used as a metaphor for the relation between God and his people Israel (in the Old Testament)  and between Christ and his people the Church (in the New). So if you were looking for a way to describe a relation to God which involved  promise made and accepted, commitment (covenant), care, patience, love, failure and forgiveness/reconciliation – you might choose the analogy of marriage. It’s a sacred, mysterious thing, says Paul.  Human marriage points to something deeper – to a kind of love between Christ and his people.

Here is the 8th century BC prophet Hosea speaking. He had once had a wife who was adulterous and now he speaks on God’s behalf about the religion of his day. His message is that God, the injured ‘husband’, is constantly trying to woo back a straying partner (the people) which goes around committing idolatry with gods (baalim) to which she hasn’t covenanted in ‘marriage.; So the Biblical picture of the God- humanity relationship is sometimes of a tender, longsuffering husband, ever reaching out to reclaim and reconcile a straying wife who forgets her marriage vows. God says-

“But now I shall woo her, lead her into the desert and speak encouraging words to her. I shall give her her vineyards again . . . there she will respond as in her youthful days, as when she came up from Egypt [i.e. the Exodus]. On that day she will call me ‘my husband’ and not ‘my Baal’ . . . you [says God to the prophet] bestow your love on a woman loved by another man, an adulteress, just as I the Lord love the Israelites, although they resort to other gods and love the raisin cakes which are offered to idols’. (Hosea 2:14-17 and 3:1)

Read the full article

“The Quaker Lesbian and Gay Fellowship held a Gathering at Edgbaston Meeting House at the end of April in preparation for Yearly Meeting Gathering. Yearly Meeting will be responding to work done by Quaker Life in 2008 on the ‘recognition of partnerships under the auspices of Britain Yearly Meeting’”.

Read the full article

“The annual meeting of Quakers is to consider whether to request legal authority to register civil partnerships in the same way as marriages.

They will also consider whether to revise Quaker Faith and Practice, the book of Christian discipline of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) in Britain, to include equal treatment of marriage and other committed partnerships”.

Read the full article

Michael Hutchinson looks at developments in Quaker thought on sexuality, ahead of Yearly Meeting Gathering’s consideration

‘We recognise that many homosexual people play a full part in the life of the Society of Friends. There are homosexual couples who consider themselves to be married and believe that this is as much a testimony of divine grace as a heterosexual marriage. They miss the public recognition of this in a religious ceremony… We have found the word “marriage” difficult but we are clear that we have a responsibility to support all members of our Meetings and to uphold them in their relationships. We can expect that some committed homosexual couples will ask their Meetings for a celebration of their commitment to each other. Meetings already have the means whereby Meetings for Worship can be held for this purpose… The acceptance of homosexuality distresses some Friends.’

Meeting for Sufferings minuted that in 1987. Twenty two years ago. Where are we now?

Perhaps a summary of what we collectively feel now about the recognition of same sex relationships under the care of the Meeting might sound similar, but the underlying context has changed.

During 2006 and 2007 many Meetings were involved in a wide soundings exercise on these issues, conducted through the Area Meeting representatives on Quaker Life Representative Council. From this came many responses from Area and Local Meetings. The minutes uniformly expressed desire that our recognition of committed relationships be based on equality and worth, but letters from some individuals indicated continued distress with this. A conference at Woodbrooke last year showed this again: the context is that Meetings generally wish to see equality in our processes and under the law, but we need to hold those with us who think differently. Some Friends may find it increasingly difficult to speak of their views in their Meetings.

Friends have the opportunity to thresh the issues at York. In the light of our testimony to equality we are asked by Meeting for Sufferings to consider how we should celebrate and recognise the range of committed relationships within our Quaker community and what revisions of Quaker faith & practice should follow to include same sex partnerships.

‘Such a revision should recognise and embrace, in the context of our testimony to equality, the openness that increasingly exists in our Yearly Meeting, the changes in the legal situation and changing attitudes throughout wider society.’

Those planning the Yearly Meeting Gathering have arranged for intervals between sessions so there is a chance to reflect. On the Monday there be a brief introduction, followed by a session on Tuesday at which a variety of speakers will share their personal experiences. Response Groups will allow Friends to explore what they bring to us. Then on Thursday there will time for discernment – a session to explore the issue and seek broad guidance on how matters might be expressed in Quaker faith & practice.

Yearly Meeting in 1994 minuted after difficulties over what should go in Quaker faith & practice on sexuality: ‘While our own individual experience does not identify with every extract, we recognise, in love, the Friend whose experience is not our own. We pray for ourselves, that we may not divide but keep together in our hearts.’ What will be minuted this time will spring from the workings of Friends together.

Reflection
For more on committed relationships, see Quaker faith & practice 22.19, 22.45 and 22.46, as well as the November 2008 minute of Meeting for Sufferings on the issue, available at http://tinyurl.com/arb6eo or from the Recording Clerk’s Office, Friends House.

Links
Meeting for Sufferings minute
Quaker faith & practice 22.19
Quaker faith & practice 22.45
Quaker faith & practice 22.46

Michael Hutchinson

(This post first appeared in the Friend; you can discuss it on the YMG forum)