Mercurial > hg > rsof

--- a/QiS/What_are_QiS.xml	Fri Mar 29 20:50:45 2024 +0000
+++ b/QiS/What_are_QiS.xml	Fri Mar 29 21:17:31 2024 +0000
@@ -3,23 +3,24 @@
 <!DOCTYPE doc SYSTEM "../../../lib/xml/doc.dtd" >
 <doc>
  <head>
-  <title>SESAM and QiS</title>
+  <title>SESAM and the Quakers in Scotland proposal</title>
   <author>Henry S. Thompson</author>
   <date>29 Mar 2024</date>
+  <style>.alpha {list-style-type: lower-alpha}</style>
  </head>
  <body>
   <div>
    <title>Introduction</title>
     <p>I have struggled at the last two threshing meetings about the proposed
     governing document (the version of 2024-03-21, hereafter GD) for
-    Quakers in Scotland (QiS) to adequately convey my concerns.  In
+    Quakers in Scotland (<name>QiS</name>) to adequately convey my concerns.  In
     writing this I'm attempting to do better, not only with respect to
     what I think is wrong, but also by suggesting how it could be fixed.</p>
     <p>It's not short, and there's an even longer appendix of background
     detail, so here's a summary:</p>
     <blockquote>
      <p>SESAM Trustees should advise SESAM that SESAM <emph>should not</emph> agree to
-      joining QiS without substantial changes to the governing document,
+      joining <name>QiS</name> without substantial changes to the governing document,
       distinguishing between the charity and the church and making their
       relationship explicit, following the model of the governing document
       for Britain Yearly Meeting (the charity).</p>
@@ -27,34 +28,34 @@
       of SESAM-the-church continuing <emph>as</emph> an Area Meeting while laying
       down SESAM-the-charity, drawing on the proposed approach to
       preserving AMs in Wales. There must be clarity on SESAM-the-church's
-      status with respect to QiS-the-church and thus with respect to the
-      trustees of QiS-the-charity.</p>
+      status with respect to <name>QiS-the-church</name> and thus with respect to the
+      trustees of <name>QiS-the-charity</name>.</p>
     </blockquote>
     <p>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 join QiS-the-church.</p>
+    where SESAM would support the creation of the <name>QiS-the-charity</name> and
+    would join <name>QiS-the-church</name>.</p>
   </div>
   <div>
    <title>A note on terminology</title>
 <p>In their cover letter for the draft GD sent to SESAM Trustees on
-2024-01-06, the QiS-CG says</p>
+2024-01-06, the <name>QiS</name>-CG says</p>
 <blockquote>"The Options for Scotland group [proposes] that we form a <emph>single
    charity</emph> and that we form a <emph>single body</emph>. The idea of a single
    body clearly needs more work to discern what this might look
    like. It will take time. That idea is not part of what we are
    asking you about here." (emphasis added)</blockquote>
-<p>Above I used "QiS-the-charity" to refer to such a charity and
-"QiS-the-church" to refer to such a body.  For simplicity, hereafter
-I'll call the former "the SCIO", short for "the Scottish Charitable
-Incorporated Organisation" and the latter "the RSFS", short for "the
-Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) in Scotland".</p>
+<p>Above I used "<name>QiS-the-charity</name>" to refer to such a charity and
+"<name>QiS-the-church</name>" to refer to such a body.  For simplicity, hereafter
+I'll call the former the <name>SCIO</name>, short for the (proposed) "Scottish Charitable
+Incorporated Organisation" and the latter the <name>RSFS</name>, short
+for the "Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) in Scotland".</p>
 </div>
 <div>
 <title>Problems with the GD</title>
 <div>
 <title>The church and the charity</title>
-<p>Making a distinction between the SCIO and the RSFS is explicitly
+<p>Making a distinction between the <name>SCIO</name> and the <name>RSFS</name> 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
@@ -62,19 +63,21 @@
 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.</p>
-<p>The GD uses "Quakers in Scotland" (QiS) for both of these, without
+<p>The GD uses "Quakers in Scotland" for both of these, without
 ever explicitly acknowledging that they are distinct.  Sometimes
 context makes clear which they are referring to, but not always.</p>
 <p>There are two problems here:</p>
-<p> a) The lack of a clear distinction between the two, exemplified
+<list class="alpha" type="enum">
+ <item>The lack of a clear distinction between the two, exemplified
     further by the calling letter for GM on 6 April 2024, which
     describes the matter before the Meeting once as "a single Quaker
-    body" and once as "a single Quaker charity / body";</p>
-<p> b) 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".</p>
+    body" and once as "a single Quaker charity / body";</item>
+<item>The very limited nature of what is said, or more often implied,
+    about the <name>RSFS</name>.  This is acknowledged in the quote above: "the
+    body is not part of what we are asking you about here".</item>
+</list>
 <p>These problems arise in large part because, perfectly understandably,
-QiS-CG evidently started with the template for governing documents for
+<name>QiS</name>-CG evidently started with the 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.</p>
@@ -112,7 +115,7 @@
 trustees to manage the assets of the Area Meeting in such a was 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
+assets are transferred to the <name>SCIO</name>, 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".</p>
@@ -140,10 +143,10 @@
    discussions relating to (2)."</p>
 <p>I've searched my inbox without success for any request to "join in
 important discussions relating to (2)" until, possibly, the invitation
-from QiS-CG (2024-03-11) to two "information and discussion sessions
+from <name>QiS</name>-CG (2024-03-11) to two "information and discussion sessions
 on progress with work towards having a single body and charity for
 Quakers in Scotland".</p>
-<p>However the cover letter from QiS (2024-01-06) sent to SESAM Trustees
+<p>However the cover letter from <name>QiS</name> (2024-01-06) sent to SESAM Trustees
 says</p>
 <p>  "The Options for Scotland group [proposes] that we form a single
    charity and that we form a single body. The idea of a single body
@@ -169,7 +172,7 @@
 <p>The governing document for the latter charity
 (https://www.quaker.org.uk/documents/bym-governing-document-revised-min34-bym2014)
 begins with the following definitions:</p>
-<list>
+<list type="enum" class="alpha">
 <item>The Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) in Britain refers to
      the church in England, Scotland, Wales, the Channel Islands and
      the Isle of Man, including all its local meetings for worship and
@@ -251,7 +254,7 @@
 <p> * The Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) in Wales and the Marches
    - Cymdeithas Grefyddol y Cyfeillion (Crynwyr) yng Nghymru a’r
    Gororau [know as Cynar] is a Charitable Incorporated Organisation
-   (CIO, comparable to an SCIO).  Its constitution (Linked from
+   (CIO, comparable to an <name>SCIO</name>).  Its constitution (Linked from
    https://www.symudymlaen2.org/) says that the members of the CIO are
    "all members of the Constituent Area Meetings".  The constitution
    describes "General meetings of the members of the CIO", and