A note on terminology

It's not short, and there's an even longer appendix of background - detail, so here's a summary:

In their cover letter for the draft GD sent to SESAM Trustees on +2024-01-06, the QiS Coordinating Group says

Not including a story about "the body" (which I'll call "the church" for +now) is the primary source of the problems the GD presents for SESAM. Until +this is fixed I recommend that:

In what follows I'll start by identifying the problems I see with the GD, and go on to outline the kind of changes I think would improve it, to the point where SESAM would support the creation of the QiS-the-charity and would participate in QiS-the-church.

Problems with the GD -

-The church and the charity -

Making a distinction between the SCIO and the RSFS is explicitly -modelled on the distinction found in the governing document of -"Britain Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) -(Britain Yearly Meeting)" as registered with the Charity Commission -(charity no. 1127633). Britain Yearly Meeting (BYM) is (an English) -Charitable Incorporated Organisation. Its governing document defines -that lengthy name as the charity and "The Religious Society of Friends -(Quakers) in Britain" as the church.

The GD uses "Quakers in Scotland" for both of these, without +

The GD uses "Quakers in Scotland" for both the charity and the church, without ever explicitly acknowledging that they are distinct. Sometimes context makes clear which they are referring to, but not always.

There are two problems here:

@@ -74,24 +58,19 @@ describes the matter before the Meeting once as "a single Quaker body" and once as "a single Quaker charity / body"; The very limited nature of what is said, or more often implied, - about the RSFS. This is acknowledged in the quote above: "the - body is not part of what we are asking you about here". + about the church. This is acknowledged in the quote above: "[the + body] is not part of what we are asking you about here".

These problems arise in large part because, perfectly understandably, -QiS-CG evidently started with the template for governing documents for +the QiS Coordinating Group evidently started with a template for governing documents for (English/Welsh) CIOs made available by Quaker Life (https://www.quaker.org.uk/documents/cio-constitution-template-agreed-2014), which embodies the same confusion*.

Indeed SESAM-the-charity's own governing document is also based on a -similar, more recent, template for non-incorporated Area Meetings from -Quaker Life -(https://www.quaker.org.uk/documents/governing-document-for-am-cc-approved-11-2022-final), -and so also suffers from these problems.

But why are these problems, and even granted that they are, why do +

But why are these problems for SESAM, and even granted that they are, why do they need to be fixed now?

They are problems because the existing Area Meetings' responsibilities and activities as a worshiping body, governed by Meetings for Worship -for Church Affairs of their membership as set out in QF&P, are largely +for Church Affairs of their membership as set out in Quaker Faith and Practice (QF&P), are largely distinct from their responsibilities and activities as a charity, governed by trustees. The former consist of, for example, the spiritual and pastoral care of their members and their witness to their communities, grounded in our @@ -99,34 +78,62 @@ maitaining the Area Meeting's legal status and financial well-being. As for Britain Yearly Meeting, whose succinct self-characterisation recently has been "A simple church supported by a simple charity", so -it should be for Area Meetings. Quaker Faith and Practice has useful +it should be for Area Meetings. QF&P has useful guidance on this relationship throughout section 15. 15.03 is particularly relevant:

"The law may assume that authority for determining action passes to the trustees and the meeting may choose to do this. However, under Gospel Order, the ultimate authority will still lie with the gathered meeting."

This needs to be fixed now because it is laid on Area Meeting +

The reasons these problems need to be fixed now are

+ + In general, because the current lack of clarity on the governance +structure of QiS makes it impossible for the members of SESAM to know how and to what +extent they will have any say in what happens to their assets and property. + In particular, because it is laid on Area Meeting trustees to manage the assets of the Area Meeting in such a way as to support the charitable objects of the Area Meeting, and without a clear understanding of how that will continue to be true once those assets are transferred to the SCIO, they would fail in that responsibility, which the law expresses as "[they must] seek, in good faith, to ensure that the charity acts in a manner which is consistent -with its purposes".

More generally, the current lack of clarity on the governance -structure of QiS makes it impossible for the members of SESAM to know how and to what -extent they will have any say in what happens to their assets and property. -A clear separation between the RSFS and the SCIO is a simple first step towards the necessary clarification.

- * East of Scotland AM +with its purposes" + +

A clear separation between the church and the charity is a simple first step towards the necessary clarifications.

* Indeed SESAM-the-charity's own governing document is also based on a +similar, more recent, template for non-incorporated Area Meetings from +Quaker Life +(https://www.quaker.org.uk/documents/governing-document-for-am-cc-approved-11-2022-final), +and so also suffers from these problems.

East of Scotland AM and North of Scotland AM's governing documents are also based on the non-incorporated Area Meeting template. Stewardship of North of Scotland Quaker Trust is identified as a responsibility of NSAM Trustees in their Terms of Reference. West of Scotland's document is shorter, and perhaps based on an early template, compared to the -others. +others.

+ A note on terminology +

For clarity, hereafter +I'll call QiS-the-charity the SCIO, short for the (proposed) "Scottish Charitable +Incorporated Organisation" and I'll call QiS-the-church the RSFS, short +for the "Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) in Scotland".

+ Improving the GD +

+ Distinguishing the charity and the church +

The GD should make a clear distinction between the SCIO and +the RSFS, modelled on the distinction found in the governing document of +"Britain Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) +(Britain Yearly Meeting)" as registered with the Charity Commission +(charity no. 1127633). Britain Yearly Meeting (BYM) is (an English) +Charitable Incorporated Organisation. Its governing document defines +that lengthy name as the charity and "The Religious Society of Friends +(Quakers) in Britain" as the church.

The future of the Area Meeting(s)

The GD should make it explicit that in the first instance the four Area Meetings, as well as General Meeting for Scotland, will @@ -144,7 +151,7 @@ are best served in smaller constituencies that the RSFS. We understand that some Area Meetings need to unburden themselves quickly of some of their responsibilities, but we hope that they will wish to -retain some of them, particularly membership, pastoral care end +retain some of them, particularly membership, pastoral care and eldership.

Accordingly, the GD should make clear that for those things not transfered to the SCIO and/or the RSFS, Constituent @@ -165,8 +172,8 @@ RSFS very like the way in which Yearly Meeting and Meeting for Sufferings together provide governance for Britain Yearly Meeting (the church).