In her comments, Lisa Stewart offers some useful questions regarding
the identity of FUM. There remain very different views of this,
sometimes coexisting in the same people, I think. Certainly what
affiliation means is key to a body like Baltimore Yearly Meeting
considering the question of its affiliation.
It doesn't seem to me the issues of same-gender relationships,
doctrinal statements or the perceived dysfunctionality of the
organizational structure are the central ones. What makes sense to
me is to focus on the purpose of the organization. It is possible to
unite around a common purpose even with significant differences on
some points. However, it seems unrealistic to expect an organization
composed of constituent bodies to work well and smoothly together if
they have very basic differences as to purpose.
So I look to the Purpose Statement originally adopted when I served
on the FUM Board, and reaffirmed fairly recently, as being
key. Could Baltimore YM wholeheartedly unite with that purpose? If
so, I think the YM could be a constructive part of FUM, and could
fruitfully engage in dialogue with other member bodies on issues like
same-gender relationships where there are such differences. However,
it is my perception that many Baltimore YM members are very uneasy
with the stated purpose of FUM. I would hope that the YM would
grapple directly with the Purpose Statement as an important factor in
considering whether it has sufficient unity with the rest of FUM on
it to merit continued affiliation.
Bill Samuel, Baltimore YM Representative to the FUM Board, 1990-93
billsamuel@verizon.net
Note:
The FUM statement of purpose is: "Friends United Meeting commits itself to energize and equip Friends through the power of the Holy Spirit to gather people into fellowships where Jesus Christ is known, loved and obeyed as Teacher and Lord."
The "Richmond Declaration of 1887" recently reaffirmed by FUM can be found at http://www.fum.org/about/declarationfaith.htm.
