Minutes of the 17 March 2008 BYM/FUM Session at Bethesda Friends Meeting
Guests:
-- John Smallwood. John is from Langley Hills Friends Meeting. John has been appointed as the BYM representative to FUM, and sits on the FUM Board in this capacity.
-- David Zarembka. David is a member of Bethesda Friends Meeting and currently works in Kenya with the African Great Lakes Initiative.
-- Gladys Kamonya. Glady is a Kenyan and is married to David Zarembka, and has been working with David in the African Great Lakes Initiative.
Facilitator: Philip Bogdonoff of the Adult Religious Education Committee facilitated and moderated this discussion.
Philip asked John to share with us his impressions of FUM. John noted that he is one of three people BYM appointed to the board of FUM. One of them has resigned. He made clear that he is only speaking for himself, not all of the BYM representatives to FUM.
John noted that the FUM board comes from a long tradition of missions overseas. Friends United Meeting began as a mission group, to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ. Friends United Meeting has historically been very active in Kenya, and currently there are a great many Quakers in Kenya, and they are all part of Friends United Meeting. They are pastoral Friends, and explicitly Christian. John found an interesting situation in Kenya. The Meetings there appoint their General Secretaries and they are more powerful there than here. They have a powerful position on the FUM Board. This Board has been together for a very long time and is largely of an older generation.
John visited Kaimosi Hospital a year ago and found it in a shambles. Friends United Meeting Quakers in Kenya had started this hospital; it was then taken over by the Kenya government, and then turned it over to Kenyan Friends, who currently are responsible for it. John noted that it was so in decay that he would never himself go there for treatment. Kenyans themselves go out of their way to get to the government hospital 40 kilometers away.
John notes that Friends United Meeting has a huge emotional connection with Kenyan Friends and with Kaimosi Hospital. Friends United Meeting Quakers brought Quaker Christianity to this area and hence there is a deep emotional connection to Kenyan Quakers and to Kaimosi Hospital. When the hospital was founded in the 30s and 40s it was the premier facility, one of the best in East Africa.
So the Friends United Meeting Board felt strongly that they could not let this hospital fail. They asked the Kenyan Yearly Meetings who control Kaimosi to let them take control. But Friends United Meeting does not have the money to do this; the decision was made in faith. In Board meetings they talk at great length about Kaimosi but John says they appear to have no clear plan on how to create a health delivery system that is self-sustaining, without the input of American money and personnel.
Gladys spoke of how she was born in Kaimosi Hospital, and also has positive memories of visiting her mother there when her mother was caring for her last born child who was sick and being treated in Kaimosi Hospital. At that time, Kaimosi Hospital was still a very good health facility. When she went to Kaimosi last year, she felt like crying; it was not the Kaimosi she remembered. She made a heartfelt request that we help Kaimosi Hospital.
David then spoke, giving some further history of Kaimosi Hospital's decline. In 1990, the Kenyan government took over the hospital and ran it into the ground. When it was in shambles, they gave it to the East Africa Yearly Meeting, which didn't have the resources to upgrade and maintain it. According to David, Friends United Meeting is a reluctant partner. Friends United Meeting has been responsible for Kaimosi for two years and has re-upped for another year. But upgrading Kaimosi is a multi-year project.
David said monies given to Friends United Meeting for Kaimosi have not always been delivered to Kaimosi (John Smallwood interjected that there is another point of view on this issue). David also said that the person appointed to run Kaimosi was dipping in the till. In May of last year he was fired, and Friends United Meeting abolished the board that had not wanted to fire him and appointed a new board. David currently serves on this new board.
The new board has hired a new head matron for the hospital who had been the head nurse at the government hospital, and whom David describes as "spectacular." She has hired her best students as nurses. Eden Grace (an FUM Quaker working in Kenya) has an adopt-a-nurse program and with funds from that has managed to add nine nurses to the Kaimosi staff.
David said East African Friends had been upset because $50,000 designated for a new roof for Kaimosi Hospital by Friends United Meeting had not been sent. But finally the money was sent and the roof has been fixed.
David observed there seems to be a disconnect between the FUM Board and the board of the hospital. The FUM Board believes they have to do everything for this hospital. But Kenya is not a poor country and the board of the hospital has already started tapping resources there.
David said the hospital potentially has the capacity for 160 beds. Currently only 30 beds are usable, and about 20 beds are currently being used. That number is gradually rising, however, as the hospital begins to improve.
The Kenyans are determined to restore the hospital. The board of the hospital is composed mostly of medical people. The other American Quaker on the board (besides David) is Bob Carter; the rest are Kenyan.
There has been a tremendous improvement in the last year both in the physical plant and in the staff, and the reputation of the hospital is increasing. There is no other hospital nearby, and most people cannot afford to travel to the hospital 40 kilometers away. Kaimosi now has plans for maternity care and for HIV care. Eden Grace and John are the Friends United Meeting people involved and responsible there.
Philip asked what is the relationship of Kenyan Friends and Friends United Meeting regarding the personnel policy.
John Smallwood said he has been deeply involved in the personnel policy with Friends United Meeting. He noted that there are very good people who think homosexuality is a sin. It's deeper than scripture; we can argue about the Bible, but the feelings run deeper. These people see the personnel policy as a compromise. They feel there should never be a homosexual working for a Christian organization. They think that to allow a homosexual personal to work for FUM as long as that person is celibate is a compromise. They experience BYM as constantly asking for more and more. They won't change.
John added that to think of this as a single issue is an error. It's far more complex; there are far more issues involved. It's not fair to look at the whole relationship through the lens of this one issue. John added that it's also a generational issue. The current leadership of FUM is dominated by older male clergymen. There's a different world going on in FUM apart from this board.
A Friend asked if they are not united, how can John say they won't change? John answered that the whole world is gradually changing on this issue. He added that as Quakers we have a belief in continuing revelation. We have to believe that worship can change us. Are we open to God changing us?
Earlier, another Friend had asked if the FUM Board follows Quaker process. John now addressed this question, noting that in theory FUM is dedicated to a united decision process which includes the Kenyans, and the clerk attempts to do this. But the North Americans have the money and have historically led the process. There is a second problem which is communication between the North Americans and the Kenyans, which has not always been easy and has made the process more difficult. Finally, he noted, the conservative Friends have more regard for hierarchy.
David Zarembka noted that in 1988, Bethesda Friends Meeting itself would have united with the personnel policy of FUM. We then spent several years meeting and talking about this issue. We changed, and ultimately generated our minute of support for same-sex marriage. Quakerism is a conservative governance; once something is in place, everyone has to agree to change it. This is why it can take so long.
David talked about other ways the personnel policy affects people, for example, Muslims or Africans with second wives.
The African Great Lakes Initiative has the same personnel policy; there is no sex outside marriage permitted by people who work for AGLI. This prevents people at the work camps from having sex with others and undermining the program. He also notes it's actually easier to have same-sex relationships in Kenya and be in the closet, because it is very common for people of the same sex (heterosexual or not) to sleep with one another. Open homosexuals are very persecuted in Kenya; the entire society is very homophobic. However, he has also seen some change in terms of Kenyans acceptance of some lesbian workers in AGLI.
David notes that if we withdraw from FUM, and some gay/lesbian Friends in Kenya need our support, they will not have it. And if we withdraw from FUM, the dialog will not continue. He notes that our (North American) society was as homophobic in the 50s as Kenyan society is now.
It was noted that within FUM, people don't tend to get appointed to the board until they are retired; hence the preponderance of older men on the board.
A Friend asked John to elaborate on the relationship between BYM and FUM (because John had earlier said this relationship should not be viewed just in terms of the disagreement over the personnel policy). John responded that it depends on the Monthly Meeting you are talking about. Baltimore Yearly Meeting still has very conservative Friends in it. BYM as a Yearly Meeting has not endorsed same-sex marriage, because there are Monthly Meetings and individuals within BYM who are much closer to Friends United Meeting. These are our cousins. It depends on your sense of family how much you want to work with your cousins.
David asked if we are willing to accommodate to the diversity of Quakers from other cultures, or be "holier-than-thou"?
It was also noted that Friends United Meeting and Friends General Conference are not analogous groups. Friends United Meeting was formed as a mission; whereas Friends General Conference was formed as a way to get Quakers together for learning and worship.
John noted that BYM's lack of financial support of FUM does not empower him in the board meetings. Why should they listen to him?
There was a question of whether BFM could send money to Kaimosi directly. David answered that yes, we can send it directly to Kaimosi, and Eden Grace will make sure it gets to the hospital.
John returned to the issue of the personnel policy, and noted that we are the minority "deviant" group in the world of Quakers. If you add Evangelical Friends, Friends United Meeting, and Conservative Friends, we are in the minority. These others are Christian, read the Bible and have more conservative views.
David added that for all of them, however, the peace testimony is central and far more important than for other Christians.
Another Friend noted that we need to look at what we hold sacred. Friends General Conference is not the business of mission work because we believe people come to God on their own. We're too close to our purity to see it clearly.
David noted that in the current state of the world, the "them" and the "us" are going to have more and more to do with one another.
Again, the question came up about what happens if we contribute directly to Kaimosi Hospital. John noted that technically, Friends United Meeting runs the Kaimosi Hospital; there is technically no separation of Kaimosi Hospital from Friends United Meeting. If you contribute directly to the missionary account of Joyce Adjluni or Eden Grace, then none of the money goes to FUM. The FUM Africa office controls the accounts for the hospital. FUM in North America sends money to the FUM Africa office. The adopt-a-nurse program is run by FUM in Africa.
The question arose as to what would happen if we separated from FUM. John said that many people in FUM would be relieved. But if we and everyone like us left there would not be a creative dialog about where to go in the future. What would happen is a serious lack of communication. It's happening everywhere, in churches everywhere, as one group splits up and the two sides stop talking to one another. John is willing to tolerate this tension. He asks, "Is this an issue worth splitting over?"
David thinks that if unprogrammed meetings pull out of FUM, FUM will collapse. They are losing members for several reasons. People are moving out of rural areas, where FUM has had many members; also, it is difficult to get pastors. In Indiana alone, FUM membership declined from 10,000 to 3,000 in the last 20 years. They are in geographic areas that are in decline.
John said that Evangelical Friends constantly criticize Friends United Meeting and draw people away. We constantly criticize FUM and draw people away. Evangelical Friends won't even talk to us. (David noted that he is finally getting some Evangelical Friends to talk to him.)
Another Friend noted he has heard that there is some diversity within North American FUM on this issue. John agreed that this is true, but that the "guys at the top" reflect the most conservative aspect of FUM. He said there are many Monthly Meetings within FUM where we would feel quite comfortable.
Close to the time we had to bring this meeting to a close, our co-clerk, Michael Morfit, made an announcement to the group. The co-clerks have received a letter from BYM with an attached minute from the Committee of Four Committees (within BYM) which they will bring to Interim Meeting on arch 29, and which recommends releasing to FUM the funds we (in BYM) have withheld. Michael described his letter in response, questioning why this was happening right before the date by which BYM had asked constituent Monthly Meetings to respond to the question of our continued relationship with FUM. He has not yet received a response. He encouraged those people going to Interim Meeting to object to the minute, not necessarily because of the content, but because the process is not in good order.
