Here's an excerpt pertaining to the issue of DUAL MEMBERSHIP from last month's Business Meeting's Minutes. Since it will be discussed again at Meeting for Worship for Business on Sunday, November 13th, I thought it would be helpful to allow folks to access what has already been discussed. 

At our Meeting for Worship for Business on

October 9, 2016, those present held a discussion based

on the working paper presented for consideration by

the Faith and Practice Revision Committee of New

England Yearly Meeting. Phebe McCosker, clerk of

that committee, summarized their work on this issue.

They have found membership one of the most difficult

issues to agree on, and they were unable to agree on

issues of dual membership. They have written, there-
fore, to each monthly meeting clerk, requesting us to

take up the questions of membership in the working

paper, so that the committee could have the wisdom of

monthly meetings’ deliberations on the issues. Phebe

expressed the hope, on behalf of the committee, that

the gathered body might develop a summary of the

discernment process, indicating areas of agreement. It

was hoped that we could begin with dual membership,

providing something more than a report stating: “this

many people support dual membership, this many op-
pose it, or here are the pros and cons.

Hanover Meeting, therefore, decided to spend

one-half hour in meeting for worship for business, dis-
cussing the question of dual membership. Throughout

the discussion we were supported by our prayerful

presence, Paula Rossvall.

From the beginning the emphasis in our dis-
cussion was on the quality of the involvement between

the individual with a divine leading for dual member-
ship and the meeting. Our meeting, over the years,

has come to highly value the use of our clearness

committees to help individuals resolve issues with the

meeting or within their religious life. Of course we

have always used clearness committees for member-
ship and marriage, but many felt that we have become

much more trusting of good clearness processes to

help individuals with issues in their own lives, and

with issues that involve the relationship between the

individual member or attender and the meeting.

As a result of putting more emphasis on the

clearness process, members of clearness committees

have come to understand the importance of directness

and honesty in those roles as we together seek answers

to complex questions. We have discussed the kinds

of questions we must ask, the areas of difficulty that

often arise, and the need to be slow, careful, and thor-
ough during the process, insuring that the individual

with the leading has thought through all aspects of

what different decisions would mean.

In considering dual membership, therefore,

we focused on the clearness process. Most members

expressed the belief that readiness for membership

was discerned by the quality and thoroughness of

the clearness process. Dual membership, therefore,

should be discerned the same way. We determined

that the most important question is the nature of the

commitment of the individual to the meeting. In

addition to a spiritual affinity to and faithfulness in

Quaker worship, we ask whether someone can com-
mit to the requirements of membership: attendance

at meeting and related gatherings, supporting the

meeting financially, participation in the conduct of

business, participating in fellowship, and serving the

needs of the meeting through committee work.

By focusing on the relationship between the

individual and the Meeting, as we would with anyone

involved in a clearness process for membership, we

essentially set aside the question of dual membership,

putting the spotlight on the fullness of the relation-
ship between Meeting and individual.

We also discussed the question of whether the

individual came to us already a member of another

faith community, or whether they were already a long

term Friend, who now wanted to also join another

church. There was a particular sympathy palpable in

the room for those who considered their past religion

as an important part of a racial or ethnic identity,

while finding in Quakerism the key to their current

spiritual identity. There was also a strong sense that

there were those who should be denied dual member-
ship. For example, those who wanted to pick and

choose aspects of both religions because the indi-
vidual is spiritually uncertain.

Our discernment was gathered and profound.

We found making a hard and fast rule spiritually

shallow, while working through a clearness process

would allow both the meeting and the individual to

seek truth in a deep and thorough process of discern-
ment. The consistency we seek is a thorough under-
standing of the nature of membership for all mem-
bers in every case, not external uniformity.

We all appreciated the opportunity to study

this question, as it brought us to a deeper and more

profound understand of the meaning of membership

7

in our meeting.