In the context of the present study, our boycotters stand firmly in the tradition of Quaker Prophets. Those with misgivings about boycotts can trace their descent from the Reconciler tradition. Each tendency has its temptations. Prophets may be inclined to see Reconcilers as lacking in clarity and less committed to a cause. Reconcilers in turn may accuse Prophets of impeding the process of conciliation. Mendl wisely emphasised the complementary nature of the two approaches:
“To be a healthy and vigorous Society we need both and the tension between them, but not their ordering in merit”.
Mendl claimed that “our personalities are probably more decisive as to which side we find ourselves on. We all have something of the visionary and realist in us, but in most the one outweighs the other”.
Is there a spiritual aspect too? Is it possible to be a Reconciler on one issue (e.g. theist/nontheist, universalist/Christ-centred) and simultaneously a Prophet on another (e.g. military drones, the arms trade).
Augustine of Hippo (or was it Richard Baxter?) exhorts us, “In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity”.
Food for thought!
 | Ponder the district of Sheik Jarrah in East Jerusalem as an instance of the Prophet/Reconciler dilemma.
|
| Boycott | Help for Palestinians | Negotiations | Nuclear-free Middle East | Time Line |
|---|