March 14, 2023
It had to happen, right?
Someone was sure to try to find out if/when Chatbot will make Quaker blogs, journals, and all other pre-AI communication as outmoded and unnecessary as, you know, Wiliam Penn, or Philadelphia.
And now it’s happened. The results are here, in full, and unexpurgated.
Well, not quite in full. Below is Part One of the initial Chatbot Quaker blog post, which goes right to the heart of the matter, or at least to the default topic for seemingly every Quaker with a public pen.
I think it now must be in every Faith and Practice, topping that redoubtable section headed “Absolutely No-Kidding, Must-Do Requirements,” that every Quaker publication, official or renegade, in print or online, is mandated to produce, in at least every even-numbered year, major content devoted to an ever-angst-inducing query, namely:
Do Quakers Have a Future?
I have read so many of these, and penned a few too, that I figure a truly complete answer in 2023 would be, in part, “Yes we do, and about half of it will be taken up with more agonizing committee palaver over whether Friends actually are having it, and if it can possibly last more than another six months or so . . . .”
But nonetheless, in properly obsequious compliance, we put the question to Chatbot, thus:
[Human Blogger to Chatbot]: Please write an 800-word article on the topic: the five most important problems now facing members of the Religious Society of Friends, also called Quakers.
After only a couple minutes of humina humina, we had the response [One note: Chatbot does not seem to be a stickler about adhering to specifications: we wanted 800 words; it brought back only 531. Perhaps it’s a message. Or maybe Chatbot is a Hicksite.]
But ever mind; now that it has purportedly applied all the universe of online information and wisdom to identifying our issues, we will, for our next dispatch, ask this new seer for more detailed solutions to these most urgent problems, and then pass along that set of responses for Friendly inspection.
In the meantime, other human readers are invited to comment, and if they’re interesting, we may quote from you all too. (Candor and wit are not discouraged. But remember, Chatbots have feelings too; or so I have been told.)
ChatBot to Friends:
The Religious Society of Friends (also known as Quakers) has undergone significant changes in the past few decades. Despite the challenges, the Quakers continue to prioritize their commitment to peace, social justice, and equality. In this article, we will outline the five most important problems currently facing members of the Religious Society of Friends.
- Declining membership: Despite the dedication of its members, the Society of Friends has experienced a significant decline in membership in recent years. According to a 2020 survey by the Friends World Committee for Consultation, membership has decreased by 30% in the past two decades. This significant shift poses a challenge in maintaining an active congregation and supporting a strong Quaker community.
- Aging membership: For those Quakers still in the community, the average age is between 50-60 years old. This aging demographic raises concern about the future leadership of the Society of Friends. As younger generations are less likely to join or participate in religious organizations, Quakers must find ways to attract and retain younger members.
- Lack of Diversity: The Society of Friends shares a history of advocating for social justice and equality. Despite these values, current membership trends show a lack of diversity within its ranks. This issue particularly affects the community’s ability to advocate and tackle justice issues with those they claim to represent.
4. Tension regarding tradition: As with any religious group, the Society of Friends faces a tension between liberal and traditional Quaker branches. These differences often involve how to build inclusive religious spaces without compromising the integrity of Quakerism. Recent changes involving electronic communication, general meeting formats, and diversity and inclusion efforts provide new challenges to the Quaker community.
5. Financial sustainability: The Society of Friends is an organization that relies heavily on donations and contributions from its members. The current trend of shrinking membership and aging demographics has made it difficult to maintain financial sustainability. The Quaker community must identify innovative funding solutions to continue supporting its work without compromising its beliefs.
Concluding Thoughts: As highlighted in this article, the Society of Friends in North America faces several core challenges that require strategic solutions. These challenges include declining membership, an aging demographic, lack of diversity, tension between tradition and innovation, and financial sustainability. Addressing these challenges requires a concerted effort by all members of the Quaker community, their academics and leaders.
The Society of Friends must leverage creative tactics such as advertising to attract younger members or utilize new technologies to meet the logistical demands of the 21st century while preserving their historic values. By staying dedicated in the pursuit of social justice, equality and peace, the Society of Friends can continue to serve as a beacon of hope in a world desperately in need of Quaker principles.
So, here we are on the brink of the Quaker AI future. Stand by for updates. . . .
Click for ChatBot Quakerism – Part 2:
(AI solutions to our too 5 problems)
OMG! the CHATbot certainly drew from the Quaker online presence to nail the 5 top concerns of the American Quakers!
So amazing, it is actually scary!
Canadian Friend Marilyn Manzer is traveling across Canada asking for an answer to this question that Chat Bot answered in a few minutes!
Advertising! Why didn’t we think of that?
LOL
“Great potlucks, no endless sermons or off-key singing, comfortable chairs instead of benches, and not jumping up and down. Bring some good company into your retirement years with a bunch of just-plain-nice Quakers.”
Aiming for the retirement crowd takes care of 2 issues at once: upping membership and lining up bequests. 🙂
Hank
Nobody mentioned the glaring missteps. The opposite of liberal is traditional Quakers? Since when? It is a common for Quaker raised people to leave Meeting for a decade or two. Anybody who relies on membership numbers from any Quaker organization is not paying attention to our lack of attention to boring details. The lack of diversity in the pews reflects badly on the effectiveness of our work for oppressed people? History fails to support this idea. Not that we have all the answers, but this article just misses the typical Quaker additude. And money is shrinking, not in my Meeting.
Wendy, Your single comment in objection to the AI article is interesting. You start well, with the “liberal” versus “traditional” error of the bot, as Quakers have some sort of special definitions in this area that I’ve never quite understood.
But then you deny the reduction in meeting attendance, which has become way worse due to the pandemic. Sure, many leave and come back, but that has little effect on average attendance size, even including the sizes of our Zoom-based meetings.
You claim that history shows no support for a lack of activism due to our being mostly privileged white people, but I can’t agree with the implications. What actually happens, I think, is that we go overboard with trying to help our suffering neighbors through lots of specific projects that don’t make a real difference to the problems of society. We may host a family in our meetinghouse, or picket a power plant, and feel good that we are at least doing something.
In this, we are like most other Christian churches who run food pantries, even those of us who are in Unprogrammed meetings concerned with freedom of sexual preference, climate change, and getting ‘minorities’ to join us, and feel special because we are not Jesus-centered. We don’t make a difference but try to compensate by sponsoring organizations like FCNL who try to influence Congress.
I’m not sure about the ‘money shrinking’ point. The meetings I’m familiar with constantly moan and groan about this supposed fact, yet giant bequests do come in from time to time to keep us above water. The bequests are largely untouched, so that we can live from the interest, like good capitalists concerned more with the long term, thus making our financial restrictions actual. I’ve never understood this attitude of generating poverty, but it does tend to encourage the bequests.