ACCOUNTING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

IN THE IONA COMMUNITY

Kerry Jacobs
&
Stephen Walker

Department of Accounting and Business Method

William Robertson Building
50 George Square
University of Edinburgh
Edinburgh EH8 9JY
Scotland
E.Mail: K.Jacobs@ed.ac.uk
Phone: 0131 650 8343

The authors acknowledge the contribution of the staff and members of the Iona Community.
This project was supported by the Moray Endowment Fund.

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the issue of accounting and accountability in the theology and practices of
an ecumenical Christian group the Iona Community. Fundamental to the existence and
operation of the Iona Community is their Rule, which requires all full-members to account to
each other for their use of money and time. This paper explores the development of that rule
and how it is practised. It examines the accounting practices of individuals in the Community
and explores the distinction between individualising and socialising accountabilities.
Findings reported conflict with Laughlins (1988) distinction between the sacred and secular
and the claim that accounting is a force of secular colonisation. In the Iona community
accounting served to support the sacred practices and spirituality of individual members
through process of socialising accountability.

ACCOUNTING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

IN THE IONA COMMUNITY
INTRODUCTION
It was in the first decade of the twentieth century that Weber suggested a relationship between
Protestantism, capitalism and bookkeeping. Since the appearance of that highly influential
work accounting researchers have seldom explored the potential linkages between Christian
religion and accounting. This is despite the fact that several historical studies in particular,
identify such a relationship (see Walker and Llewellyn, 1999). In seeking to examine
accounting as a situated practice (Hopwood, 1983), it is desirable to look more extensively at
the intersection between accounting and religion. This paper seeks to examine the practice of
accounting and accountability in the theology and among the members of an ecumenical
Christian group: The Iona Community.
The accounting literature on non-profit organisations contains a number of contributions on
accounting and accountability in churches and other religious groups but these are
surprisingly few given the social and economic significance of many of these organisations.
Generally it has been assumed that accounting practices are rather underdeveloped in
religious settings and a number of papers have critiqued the perceived absence of proper
private sector accounting practices (Zietlow, 1989). However, there have also been a number
of case-studies of the development and operation of accounting practices within a given
church or religious community which illustrate that calculative techniques were not foreign to
such organisations (Swanson and Gardner, 1986, 1988) and, in some instances, they were
highly developed (Duncan, Flesher & Stocks, 1999).
Flesher and Flesher (1979) presented a study of the Harmony Society, a communistic
religious community on the Indiana frontier (1814-1824). They suggested that the accounting
practices of the Harmonists were highly sophisticated as a result of the substantial retailing
and manufacturing operations of the Society. According to Flesher and Flesher (1979, p. 298)
the Harmonists maintained a detailed management accounting system which tracked the
performance of the different productive units and the production and consumption of
individual members of the community. While the system developed by the Harmonists was
particularly advanced, detailed accounting systems were not untypical amongst the communes
during the 1800s. Kreiser and Dare (1986) studied the accounting practices of the Shaker
community at Pleasant Hill, Kentucky, and found that the records kept were detailed and
meticulous, though they were not characterised by technical innovation.
Laughlin (1988) offers more than a purely descriptive analysis in his study of the accounting
systems of the Church of England. While he showed that accounting did play an important
role in the life of the church, Laughlin claimed that accounting and budgeting was irrelevant
to the ongoing life of the parish (p. 23) and was an unhealthy intrusion (p 23) to spiritual
values. Utilising Durkheim, Laughlin (1988) argued that accounting practices were associated
with the profane or secular as opposed to the sacred. In the Church of England considerable
effort was taken to keep the secular aspects of accounting separate from, and subservient to,
the sacred centres and activities of the Church. Booth (1993) explored similar themes in his

study of the Australian Uniting Church. His work reinforced the distinction between the
sacred activity of the Church and the secular functions of accounting and administration
which were performed by its organisation.
However, this sacred-secular distinction is not fully supported by other literature on the
development and role of accounting in religious organisations and communities. In an
extension of Kreiser and Dares study of the Shakers in Pleasant Hill, Faircloth (1988) has
suggested that there was a significant blurring between the sacred and the secular in that:
The spiritual importance they [the Shakers] attached to these affairs elevated
accounting procedures to a means of generating and maintaining consecrated property
(Faircloth, 1988, pp. 99).
It seems evident that the Shakers regarded good accounting practice as more than a secular
concern with maintaining the physical viability of the community. It was also a spiritual
concern. Faircloth (1988) suggests that temporal transactions were perceived by the Shakers
as a gospel requirement (p. 127). Based on this work Booth (1993, p. 41) noted that
accounting can be highly prominent within churches and meet little apparent resistance from
the spiritual basis of belief, yet he dismissed this conclusion on the basis that the Shakers and
the Harmony Society were very concerned with business activities and they stressed
efficiency and economy as virtues. However, Booth does not offer a convincing case for
why, in these historical studies, the sacred values of the community were not threatened by
the secular aspect of accounting and how the accounting practices served to support and
reinforce the mission and operation of the communities.
An exception to the historic case studies is the work of Duncan, Flesher and Stocks (1999).
They conducted questionnaire survey into the use of internal control and accounting practices
of 1,200 US churches across three denominations. Although they do not specifically address
the sacred / secular theme, they do make an important contribution to the debate by
suggesting that the church size and denomination is a significant factor in explaining the
application of internal controls.
In this paper we explore the relationship between accounting and the religious practices of a
contemporary Christian community. By focus ing on accounting and accountability in the
daily life of the members of the Iona Community and by also examining accounting in this
voluntary organisation, we will deconstruct the sacred-secular distinction and illustrate how,
in this case, accounting is as much a part of the sacred as of the secular, and thereby illustrate
the arbitrariness of these analytical categories.
Forms of accountability in the Iona Community are discussed in the second half of this paper
and here the work of Miller and OLeary (1987), Miller (1992) and Roberts (1996) is
pertinent. These authors show the importance of accounting technologies in creating
individual identity, or forming the self, while Llewellyn (1994) touches on the idea that
accounting acts as a tool of collective identity by defining organisational boundaries and
delineating the distinction between the member and the non-member. We concur with Munro
and Mouritson (1996) that accountability should be understood as a broad concept, one that
extends beyond formal accounts to embrace concepts of how individuals give account of and
for their daily lives and in doing so producing and reproducing their individual and collective
identities.

It is long been recognised that accountability is a contradictory and indeed contrary concept
(see Roberts, 1991). Sinclair (1995, p. 231) describes accountability as chameleon-like,
multiple, fragmented and subject to continual reconstruction. Roberts (1991, 1996) divides
the concept between an individualising and a socialising form and associates the former with
what Habermas calls purposive rational action or work. He associates the socialising form
with communicative action or interaction. Roberts (1991) relates the individualising form
of accountability to Foucaults notions of disciplinary power and argues that it is maintained
by the formal structures of organisations, of which accounting practices are a prime example.
He also suggests (Roberts, 1996) that this individualising form of accountability can be
destructive in its constructing the self as an atomised individual and obscuring the
interdependent nature of organisational life. It is this individualising aspect of accountability,
linked to the formal organisational structures, which has generally been focused on in the
accounting literature.
The socialising aspect to accountability has remained relatively unexplored. This is because
the organisational context is inevitability a commercially orientated business structure, the
embodiment of the purposive rational action. In order to examine broader aspects of
accountability, it is necessary to investigate different kinds of organisational settings (Roberts
and Scapens, 1985). The Iona Community offers a very different organisational setting. It is
almost an ideal-type of voluntary organisation, characterised by symbolic action "orientated to
achieving understanding" (Roberts, 1991, p. 360). Aspects of accountability which are
separate from an orientation towards control are likely to be evident in such an organisation.
If a role for accounting practices within a socialising accountability are to be found, it ought
to be evident in the case of the Iona Community.
This study represents the preliminary findings from a series of unstructured and
semistructured field interviews conducted with the leaders and members of the Iona
Community. The research involved participation/observation at gatherings of the Community,
investigating relevant archives and studying published and unpublished sources relating to the
Community. Manuscript records on the Iona Community are held by the National Library of
Scotland, the University of Edinburgh and by the Community itself. The methodology
employed in this study combines both an interpretative research approach (Chua, 1986) and
historical analysis. The paper begins by relating the founding and nature of the Iona
Community.
THE IONA COMMUNITY
In its most recent annual report, the Iona Community describes itself thus:
The Iona Community is an ecumenical Christian community, founded in 1938 by the
late George MacLeod of Fuinary. Gathered around the rebuilding of the ancient
monastic buildings of Iona Abbey, the Community has sought ever since the
rebuilding of the common life, bringing together work and worship, prayer and
politics, the sacred and the secular . . . The members, from many backgrounds,
countries and denominations, are committed to a rule of daily prayer and Bible study,
sharing and accounting for their use of time and money; regular meetings, and action
for justice and peace (1998).
Iona is a small island off the Ross of Mull, on the west coast of Scotland. It is most closely
associated with St Columba, who in 563 arrived from Ireland and founded a monastery there.

This monastic community was, for several centuries, the most important religious centre in
northern and western Britain. Iona monastery was a seat of learning, the source of leadership
in the early Scottish church and a base from which attempts were made to convert the Picts to
Christianity. The community on Iona was destroyed by Vikings during the 9th century. During
the medieval age an Abbey was erected on the site of the original monastic settlement which,
despite a number of restorations, was to remain in a state of disrepair into the early twentieth
century. In 1899 the Abbey Church was gifted by the Duke of Argyll to the Church of
Scotland on the understanding that the Abbey would be restored and made available for
worship by all Christian denominations.
In the summer of 1938 a group of Church of Scotland Ministers and craftsmen arrived on Iona
to rebuild the Abbey and its outbuildings. They were led by Reverend Dr George MacLeod,
Minister of Govan Old Parish Church, Glasgow. MacLeods venture was borne of his
observation during the 1930s that the Church was distant from the concerns of the
unemployed and poor in his parish (Morton, 1957, pp 4-5; Ferguson, 1988, pp. 55-59). He
considered that The real sickness is that the spiritual has become divorced from the common
life of men and got boxed up in the Sunday (Rebuilding the Common Life, 1988). MacLeod
sought ways of reviving faith by illustrating the relevance of the Christian message to the
everyday experience of the urban working (and other) classes. He considered that it was
necessary to rediscover the totality of Christian living through collectiveness, co-operation,
and a spiritual fellowship engendered by the pursuit of a common life and task (ibid.)
As an experiment in corporate living MacLeod gathered together a group of ministers and
artisans in the common life and task of rebuilding the Abbey and surrounding buildings on
Iona. He envisaged that through this shared experience with working men, the clergymen
would be better equipped for practising the ministry in the cities of Scotland (Ferguson, 1988,
p. 60). In 1944 he declared that:
The Iona Community is a body of men within the Church of Scotland, married and
unmarried, clerical and lay, brought together by their common instinct- that the special
challenge of the twentieth century to the Church is that she declare again the centrality
of the Faith to life in all its aspects (p. 138).
The rebuilding of the Abbey was completed in 1967, and although the Iona Community has
performed much work on the Scottish mainland, the island has remained the focal point for
the inspiration and renewal of its members. In 1951 the Iona Community became more
closely associated with the Church of Scotland but retained control of its own policy and
finances (Ferguson, 1988, p. 90; Morton, 1977, p. 81). In addition to the pursuit of its spiritual
causes and the ecumenical movement, the Community has a long history of political activity.
It has campaigned on the issues of poverty, unemployment, welfare reform, nuclear
disarmament, racism, and the immigration and nationality laws (Shanks, 1999, pp 166-79).
The Iona Community is a registered charity and a limited company with administrative
headquarters in Govan, Glasgow. The Community has three other principal centres. The
(restored) Abbey and MacLeod Centre are both sited on Iona and offer visitors an opportunity
to share in the common life through Christian worship, work and relaxation (The Iona
Community, leaflet). The Camas Centre on Mull is an adventure camp for young people. In
the year ended 31 December 1998 the total income of the Community was 1.3m. One half of
this was derived from sales (of goods in the Abbey Shop and Community publications
(produced by its own publishing house, Wild Goose Publications)). A further 23% of income

was earned from board and lodgings at the island centres, 11% from donations, 6% from
grants and fundraising and 10% from a variety of other sources. The Community, which seeks
to apply its resources wisely and effectively in the implementation of our vision, had net
assets of 2.3m at 31 December 1998 (Annual Report, 1998).
There are three levels of commitment to the Iona Community. Friends of the Community
make an annual donation to the Community and support its work but are not required to keep
its Rule. Associate Members participate by offering an annual donation, by keeping the
Communitys rule concerning prayer and Bible study. Associates may also keep an economic
discipline by giving 2% of their disposable income to the common fund of the Community.
They should also attend regional meetings of Associates. Full members, are former Associates
of two years standing who have attended an informal interview with the Leader of the
Community and another member and who have been admitted to, and successfully completed,
a two-year New Members Programme. In 1998 the Community comprised 225 Members,
more than 1500 Associate Members and 1700 Friends (Annual Report, 1998). Full Members,
who are committed to the Rule of the Community, are drawn from a variety of occupations
though just under one half are ministers (Shanks, 1999, pp. 60-62).
The Members meet at three plenary gatherings per annum and at a Community Week on Iona
during the summer. More regular meetings take place in local/regional Family Groups. The
yearbook and directory of the Community, Miles Christi 1999 lists twenty-eight Family
Groups of which nineteen are in Scotland and nine are in England. Family Groups are
expected to convene at least six times per annum. Their role is defined as one of friendship,
support, accountability and consultation (Role and Shape of Family Groups). The Family
Group is led by a convenor. Issues such as the attendance of Associates at Family Group
meetings and the size of the group are largely at the discretion of the group itself. In relation
to the latter issue, members are requested to give due consideration to the value of small
groups, to the requirement of accountability (best done in twos or threes), and to the
importance of flexibility to meet changing needs (ibid.).
THE RULE OF THE IONA COMMUNITY
The defining characteristic of the Iona Community is the adherence by its members to a
common rule or discipline. The current Leader of the Community has written that:
individual commitment to the Rule is the bedrock of the Communitys work and
whole existence; it is the ultimate embodiment and expression of our vision and
understanding of spirituality; it is in and through this that we seek to support,
encourage and challenge one another (Shanks, 1999, p. 65).
This section of the paper explores the emergence and current content of the Rule.
As conceived in 1938 the Iona Community was a group of young ministers and craftsmen
who gathered to explore a new form of Christian living through the rebuilding of Iona Abbey.
However, the experience of living the common life on Iona, was a temporary state given the
seasonal nature of the work and the intention that ministers would only remain on the island
for two years (Morton, 1977, p. 38). This implied a transience which was not conducive to
enduring fellowship and community:

In the first summer on Iona the pattern had been obvious and simple: the corporate
discipline of living together in one room, of common work and shared chores, of
worship twice a day, of 50 a year all found. But this lasted only for the summer.
When they scattered at the end of the summer this discipline stopped. What was to
take its place? (Morton, 1977, p. 40).
In 1939 it was decided to formulate a concept of membership founded on a common
discipline. This discipline could be adhered to wherever the individual was resident on
leaving the island of Iona and returning to the mainland:
As new members went out to work in the mission field of urban Scotland, the
Community was compelled to ask what it was that bound members to each other. Out
of these discussions emerged the beginnings of a Rule of Life for the Iona Community
(Ferguson, 1988, p. 73).
The content of the resultant Rule of the Community was largely conditioned by the
experiences of those who arrived on Iona in 1938: Inevitably there was a rule from the
beginning. But it was not stated. It was part of the business of living together, of daily
worship, of regular hours of work, of common economic problems (Morton, 1957, p. 9). The
Rule was substantially drafted by George MacLeod and embodied his demand for a pattern of
daily living which did not divorce the spiritual from the material (Morton, 1977, p. 40).
However, drafting the rule was far from simple and straight forward. The elements of the rule
were successively tried, abandoned, reshaped and affirmed in the light of experience
(Fraser, 1990, p.11). One long-time community member described the process as like a
craftsman with a bit of wood, who shapes it, who finds it is not quite right and comes back
and takes a bit more off.
For MacLeod the development and codification of a rule was part of a new obedience which
was essential to reinforcing the collective character of the Iona Community and to advancing
the movement. He argued that we must get into ranks if we are to march with resolution.
Disciple-ship demands discipline (MacLeod, 1944, p. 125). This new obedience was
generally welcomed by the community members. However, the regimentation implicit in
following a rule and the militaristic style in which this was pursued by George MacLeod did
not always find favour during the 1940s:
. . and of course there were commitments, which at that time were very, very
powerful. I don't know whether anyone of your years can think oneself into what it
was like after World War II, I'm talking about the late 40's and early 50's and this
idealism had caught teenagers like myself. We were going to build a better world, we
were going to work for peace. But George was, he had a military background from
World War I, and I think he tried to run the community like a boot-camp. (Iona 1,
Community Member).
As originally codified the Rule comprised three disciplines which related to prayer and bible
reading, the use of time and the use of money. The first of these imposed a devotional
discipline. Members were obliged to devote half an hour each morning (originally fixed at
7.30 to 8.00) to prayer and Bible reading. The object was to reaffirm the relevance of the
Christian message to daily life and the fact of Christian Holiness (MacLeod, 1944). A prayer
report card was introduced later whereby, on a monthly basis, each member disclosed to the
Leader whether he had succeeded or failed in keeping this rule (Morton, 1957, p. 10).

The discipline relating to the use of time derived from the experiences of the ministers and
artisans who commenced the rebuilding of Iona Abbey:
This obligation grew out of discussions on the abbey walls between ministers and
craftsmen. The masons taunted the ministers with working only on Sundays.
Oh no, retorted Gods anointed, we work eighteen hours a day.
When you go back to your parishes, said the craftsmen, take a note of how long
you actually work, and dont include things like reading the newspaper, and lying in
bed pretending you are meditating.
The ministers had to concede that, unlike the workmen, they didnt have to clock in
and out, and were accountable to no boss: this could easily lead to self-delusion and
indulgence . . . What was need was accountability in the proper use of time (Ferguson,
1988, p. 73).
It was also recognised that although the nature of their work differed substantially, the
community ideal would be enhanced if ministers and craftsmen laboured for the same time
(Morton, 1957, p. 10). The common use of time was monitored by the requirement that
ministers would plot their eight hours of work each morning and evaluate its achievement at
night (Coracle, March 1943, p. 5). For George MacLeod recording and monitoring the use of
time also served to assist in seeing all our work in the light of eternal things (1944). This
reasoning was later refined to encompass the importance of using ones time to ensure a
balance between work and fulfilling the wider responsibilities to the Church and the
Community (Morton, 1951, p. 24).
As with the other disciplines, the requirement to monitor the use of money and the attendant
need to control personal finances served to cement the corporate nature of the Community.
Concern for the use of money was rooted in the Christian obligation of stewardship:
The economic discipline exists as a recognition of the fact that all we have is a gift of
God and we have to use it as stewards, making modest claims upon resources in a
world in which so many are deprived (Fraser, 1990, p. 12).
In its holistic approach to spirituality the Community reaffirmed the importance of biblical
teachings on economics. These, it was considered, had been relegated by the Churches
(Morton, 1957, p. 11). For the founders of the Iona Community this was alien to the notion of
Christian fellowship, to mutual economic responsibility and served to prevent a full
understanding of the basis of modern social life (Morton, 1951, p. 29). Thus the rule was
devised to express the economic inter-dependence on which any Christian life must be built
(Morton, 1951, p. 120). Initially, this was actualised through a requirement that the members
of the Community would live on the national average income and that they would contribute a
proportion of their income to the Community. The latter would be applied for the relief of
members in difficulty and for other purposes determined by the group. Corporate
responsibility for spending money would thereby be engendered (Morton, 1951, p. 120). As
the membership of the Community increased and became more geographically dispersed and
heterogeneous, the importance of the Rule for binding the Community through a common
commitment increased (Shanks, 1999, p. 58). As the community became less directly
focused on a physical locating and a particular work, in this case the Island of Iona and the
rebuilding of the Abby, the rule, and the associated accountabilities, became a key factor in
defining and re-inforcing membership by creating the distinction between those who were and
those who were-not full members.

The rule of the Iona Community has been subject to constant scrutiny and discussion. It is
not static (Morton, 1957, p. 9). Indeed, by the 1940s its details had been altered several times
as members scrutinised its working and met to give accounts of its observance in united
session (Coracle, March 1943, p. 5; January 1947, p. 37). For example, the keeping of the
devotional discipline at a specified time of day proved difficult. As one Member observed:
You were expected to train and read the bible every day, and I think it was at that
point that we were telling George MacLeod, who was the Information Officer, founder
and leader of the community, that not everybody could fit in to that kind of straitjacket
and some of us would much rather read a whole book of the bible at a two or three
hour sitting and meditate on that, rather than do this half hour slot (Iona 1, Community
Member).
The Leader of the Community himself admitted in October 1951 that: he could not keep the
half-hour in the morning, but was learning to keep part of it-his intercessions-when engaged
in domestic duties, and part of it-his Bible reading-when travelling (Coracle, December
1951, pp. 1-3).
The current manifestation of the Rule of the Iona Community comprises the original three
disciplines plus two recent additions. This five-fold rule, which has existed for three decades,
encompasses the following elements:
1. Daily Prayer and Bible-reading
2. Sharing and accounting for the use of our money
3. Sharing and accounting for the use of our time
4. Action for Justice and Peace in society
5. Meeting with and accounting to each other
(Miles Christi, 1999, p. 22).
Parts two, three and five of the Rule thus contain explicit provisions on accounting and
accountability. The next part of this paper explores how these forms of accounting
developed, particularly focusing on the origin and development of the economic discipline.
ACCOUNTING AND THE ECONOMIC DICIPLINE
Record keeping has long featured as an important activity in the practice of the Rule of the
Iona Community. As the following proforma from the 1940s reveals, the members record of
adhering to the devotional discipline was inscribed on a monthly report card. The completed
card was forwarded to the Leader of the Community.

M.A. [name]

THE RULE OF MINISTER ASSOCIATES

REPORT CARD

January

My intention is to keep the half hour. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(must be before 12 noon)

.- Indicates success.
X. Indicates failure.
S. Indicates half-hour successfully kept; but at another time due to interruption by a call of Christian service.
D.O. Indicates Day off when half-hour has been kept at another time.
My intention is to send in this card at end of month regardless of the extent of failure.
10

1.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Sat..
M
Tu...
W
Th...
F

17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

M
Tu...
W....
Th...
F.
Sat...

Source: MacLeod, 1944, p. 134.

During the 1940s, the accounting which attended adherence to the discipline concerning the
use of time by plotting ones day and reviewing the achievement of ones objectives, was
recorded on the left hand side of the form reproduced below. The discipline of accounting for
the use of money involved detailing items of expenditure on the right hand side of this form
on a daily basis.

THE RULE OF MINISTERS IN THE COMMUNITY

MILES CHRISTI
Day . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8 a.m.
8 Hour Estimate

Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expenditure
Purpose

Amount

Source: MacLeod, 1944, p. 133.

The recording of financial information as part of the economic witness and accounting for the
use of money has proved to be the most problematical element of the Rule. The Iona
Community has struggled with the theological foundations of this discipline and with the
technical and practical aspects of its implementation (Morton, 1977, pp. 40-1; Ferguson,
1988, p. 74).
The Iona Community determined to give effect to a form of economic witness from an early
stage (Morton, 1957, p. 11). According to Morton, Behind the Communitys concern was the
conviction that the Church had become blind to the economic teaching of the Bible and that
our life is determined much more than we like to realise by economics (ibid.). However,
identifying a form of discipline which enabled the practice of mutual economic responsibility,
11

the economic interdependence of members and acceptance of the pursuit of equal access to
the fundamental requirements of life (MacLeod, 1944, p. 131), proved difficult. The
established Church offered little guidance:
The notion that Christians should actually be accountable to each other in how they
spent their money was foreign, and indeed offensive, to the Church. The Community
argued that in a world in which capitalism seemed to be accountable to no one and
caused untold damage, the Church was called upon to provide a pattern of sharing
under the sign of the lordship of Christ (Ferguson, 1988, p. 74).
At first it was considered that economic witness might be actualised by each member living
on the level of pay received by an ordinary soldier (Acc 9084/345(i)). It was not until the
arrival of Reverend Alexander (Lex) Miller as Deputy Leader of the Community in 1942
(Coracle, March 1943, January 1951; Ferguson, 1990, pp. 195, 209-10), that a more rigorous
scheme of economic discipline was devised.
The National Average
Miller introduced to the Community a scheme of economic discipline founded on The
National Average. This plan was borne of the Millers experiences while secretary of the
Student Christian Movement when he and a number of other radical theology students in New
Zealand observed the impact of the depression there during the 1930s (Morton, 1977, p. 41).
These theology students recognised the incompatibility of preaching Christian reconciliation
to a congregation of the unemployed and destitute, while the preacher himself benefited from
the fruits of the capitalist system (Coracle, March 1943). As an expression of commonality
and to bridge the gulf between the classes, the students determined to live according to the
average national income. A plan for achieving this was produced by The Shadwell Group in
England during the 1940s based on its experiences in the East-End of London (Morton, 1977,
p. 41). The blueprint was authored by Miller in the form of The National Average: A Study in
Social Discipline (Coracle, March 1943). The experiment of the Shadwell Group involved
members living according to the national average income (subject to allowances for spouse
and children). Those whose income exceeded the national average placed their surplus into a
common fund which was to be applied to relieve members on low incomes and for causes
identified by the group as worthy (Morton, 1951, p. 118).
This concern for the urban poor was in accord with the circumstances which resulted in the
foundation of the Iona Community and, in 1943, it launched an experiment for one year to
ascertain what the National Average would feel like (Coracle, March 1943). The scheme
adopted was less comprehensive than that of the Shadwell Group, particularly in the way in
which the latter utilised personal income in excess of the national average. The Communitys
variant laid greater emphasis on corporate sharing as opposed to the pursuit of justice and
equality through redistribution (ibid., 120). Members were requested to keep their personal
subsistence within The National Average (defined as 160 for a single person). Surplus
income was to be expended as the member chose provided only that he declare and openly
defend its disposal before quarterly or half-yearly meetings of the Community (MacLeod,
1944, p. 132). At these meetings members could express their view as to whether an
individuals surplus had been used in a manner which was in accord with the expression of
economic brotherhood. The member was also obliged to contribute out of his surplus to the
Community Chest. The contents of the chest would be applied to ensure that the income of

12

less wealthy members of the Community and their families would be bought up to the
national average.
The practice of this form of economic discipline laid a strong emphasis on account keeping.
MacLeod commented that: we all keep our accounts which, in completion and without
embarrassment, are from time to time open to the scrutiny and criticism of all other
individuals or families in the Community (1944, p. 132). In a report on the experimental
year with The National Average scheme it was stated that:
With one or two exceptions members of [the] Community have been careful about the
keeping of personal accounts, and it has been an immense help to have meticulous
accounts kept in several households, so that we can call on data about the working-out
of the scheme in families.
It was noted in the report that those who had failed to keep accounts comprised one or two
members who resisted the prescriptive approach to economic witness and preferred adherence
to a general understanding to regard our money as held in stewardship (Acc 9084). The
experimental year with the national average scheme also revealed differences of opinion on
the principles and working of the economic discipline according to whether the member of the
Community was married or unmarried. A number of complex questions emerged. Did the
scheme take sufficient account of the responsibilities of the married member? What
allowances should be made for dependants? Was expenditure on insurance or the private
education of a members children a legitimate charge against income? Should the scheme take
account of capital as well as a members income and expenditure? Having addressed these
complications the Community decided to continue with a refined version of The National
Average scheme of economic discipline.
During the mid to late 1940s the application of the economic rule became more structured and
a greater emphasis was placed on bookkeeping and accountability. In 1945 it was decided that
the application of the economic discipline would be enhanced by splitting the Community
into groups or cells of four members each. Each group would meet once every six months
for a full enquiry into the economic returns of its members (Acc 9084/345(i)). The Finance
Committee of the Community would provide each group with guidance on the rule, tables of
the national average (for single persons and married couples), and instructions on how to
calculate the surplus after deducting income tax and allowances for dependants (based on
cost of living scales).
Each member of the Community was required to submit a Return Form on a six monthly
basis to his family group. This form included totals of the members salary, other receipts and
benefits in kind together with details of claims on total income in the form of tax, work
expenses and special claims such as education, insurance and the cost of dependants. This
information was abstracted by each member from the detailed accounting records maintained
by him in monthly Miles Christi books, which were printed according to the proforma
illustrated in the figure above. The purpose of the group meeting was to discuss the validity of
the claims on the income of members. The Financial Comptroller of the Community offered
guidance to groups on specific types of claim such as insurance, rentals and medicine.
Expenditure on furniture, for example, was claimable provided it was for essential goods. It
was advised that 75% of garden costs could be claimed. However, Claims for holidays,
domestic help, motor cars etc., should be carefully examined (ibid.).

13

The procedure at family group meetings was as follows. The group Convenor disclosed
details of the claims made by each member. The claimant offered an explanation and
answered sufficient questions as to permit a full understanding the reasons for the claim. The
group then decided to either accept or reject the claim. The Convenor then forwarded the
Return Form to the Financial Comptroller of the Community. In 1946 the six-monthly
return was replaced by monthly cards and it was required that 10% of each members
surplus income should be contributed to a Community Chest.
In 1945 it was acknowledged that the Economic Discipline has cost us all a great deal of
time, labour and concern (ibid.). While there were indications that adherence to the
discipline encouraged fellowship and social solidarity among members all was not well. It
was reported in 1945 that some people are crying out about the unreality of the Rule, while
on the other hand, some laugh raucously . . . when reminded of their failure even to meet for
discussion. The latter behaviour was deemed a confession of the irrelevance of the
Incarnation to our Pocket-book. In response to this it was necessary to reiterate the
theological foundation of personal account-keeping. Spending five minutes a day keeping
accounts and half an hour at the end of the month completing monthly abstracts of income
and expenditure was important because:
Our need is not to reduce our examination of accounts to an occasional episode, but to
bring ourselves to such an examination of our finances as will help us to realise how
we fail to conform to the Mind of Christ in our stewardship of money (ibid.).
A Report on Economic Discipline 1945/46, prepared in June 1946 confirmed the limited
adherence of members to this aspect of the Rule of the Community. It was noted that although
thirty-two individuals were connected with the economic discipline, only seven members
(who, in total, could not boast surplus income) were fully engaged with it. Further, only three
of the eight family groups had met to discuss the annual returns of their members and no
contributions had been received to the Community Chest. This disappointing state of affairs
incited the Leader of the Community to formulate a proposal to instil a firmer commitment to
the economic discipline and its attendant accounting:
We all agree that daily account-keeping is the only possible basis of any concern about
our money, and so we undertake to keep Miles Christi. At the end of the month we
send in a note of our Income and Expenditure, and examine it in groups at the end of
each year, as at present. If our accounts are complete and reliable, we undertake to put
one tenth of our Surplus Income into the Chest. Those whose accounts are not
complete undertake to contribute to the Chest at the same rate (in proportion to
income) as those who do contribute by the one-tenth system. The Chest would be
disbursed as the Community decides.
By the late 1940s it was recognised that perfecting the economic discipline posed a
considerable challenge to the Community (Coracle, January 1947). However, this was
matched by a renewed determination to refine the application of the rule given its centrality to
the Communitys vision of an inclusive Christian obedience, the interrelationship between the
spiritual and material and its importance to encouraging fellowship and corporate
enlightenment among members (ibid.). It was later commented that No subject has been
more hotly and more lengthily discussed in the common room of Community House, Iona,
than the question of the economic discipline, because we have always known that unless we
do something here we fail on all fronts (Coracle, January 1951). The theological foundation

14

for the economic discipline was also subject to rigorous study by an Economic Commission in
1947 (also Coracle, December 1949). The upshot was the formulation of a revised scheme
for economic witness which was not based on The National Average.
An Income Tax based System
The new scheme, which was printed in The Coracle at the end of 1949, utilised the income
tax returns of members as opposed to abstracts of daily accounting records. It involved the
calculation of disposable income. The latter was defined as income less allowances, rents and
tax paid. Members were required to contribute 5% of disposable income to a Common Fund
as their economic commitment to the Community. This figure represented half of the
traditional proposed level of Christian giving and it was assumed that members would give
another 5% to the Church or a charity. The Common Fund was to be applied according to the
wishes of the members. It was considered that discussions on the use of the common fund
raises questions about our use of the remaining 95% [of disposable income] and it is there that
our real economic witness lies (Morton, 1957, p. 11). This method of calculating disposable
income found favour because of its simplicity and objectivity, and because it was considered
progressive in that those on higher incomes contributed more to the common pool (Morton,
1953).
An example of the calculation of the economic commitment is provided below.
A married man with two children Income

400.0.0

Allowances:National Insurance
Allowance for Wife
Allowance for Children
Rent
Tax paid

10.0.0
70.0.0
120.0.0
40.0.0
1.0.0

Total to be deducted

241.0.0

Residue after deduction

159.0.0
======

Upon this residue 5 per cent. should be calculated

5 per cent. of 159

7.19.0
======

(Source: Coracle, December 1949)

Following an experimental year in 1950-51, the Iona Community decided to adopt this
income tax-based scheme as its economic discipline. A similar scheme for Associates of the
Community was also devised whereby a commitment of 2.5% of disposable income was
lodged in an Associates Common Fund (Coracle, January 1951, April 1951). It should be
noted that the system based on income tax returns was not popular with all members of the
Iona Community. More radical adherents complained of its superficial and tokenist character.
The use of tax data was deemed akin to linking ourselves to the values of the Conservative
Party. It was also objected that the key aspect of economic witness was not the calculation of

15

a 5% donation but the manner in which each individual spent his remaining surplus or free
income.
Indeed the emphasis in the economic discipline on calculating a contribution to the common
pool akin to a charitable fund raised concerns that the essential purpose of the rule was being
dissipated. In May 1953 a report on the working of the discipline noted that we are in danger
of regarding the scheme merely as a means for financing various projects and of forgetting
that its main purpose is to promote our corporate and individual economic discipline. The
need to understand the economic discipline as more than an exercise in Christian generosity
was also reasserted during the 1960s (Iona News, January 1964).
By contrast with the discipline based on The National Average during the 1940s,
compliance with the income tax based-scheme was strong among the membership. It was
reported during the 1950s that the great majority of members complied with its requirements
and that only a few have done nothing. Non or limited participation of some members
during the 1960s was attributed to general slackness on the part of a few members, a natural
reluctance to part with ones money among others, difficulty in understanding the scheme, or
inability to contribute the 5% due to low income.
The Economic Discipline at Present
The contemporary manifestation of the economic discipline is substantially based on the
scheme implemented during the 1950s and the related accounting is principally conducted
through the family groups. Each member contributes 1% of his/her contribution to the
community to his/her family group, which applies it according to its own priorities. Each
group appoints its own Treasurer and maintains its own bank account (Papers of the Iona
Community). The 5% contribution of each member to the Community has been reduced to
4% and the remaining 6% of the traditional 10% tithe is applied to the Church or other
organisations. It is provided that the tithe is utilised as follows:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.

To the wider work of the Church, and to bodies concerned with promoting justice and
peace, world development, etc 6%
To the work of the Iona Community (The Community Fund) 2%
To purposes decided by the Family Group 1%
To purposes decided by the Common Fund Trustees on behalf of the Community
0.5%
To the Travel Pool 0.5% (Miles Christi, 1999).

Accounting for the economic discipline continues to be the subject of periodic review in the
Iona Community. In November 1997, following concerns about the adequacy of funds raised
from members and the need to offer more guidance on the calculation of contributions, the
Council of the Community instigated an investigation into various aspects of the economic
discipline. The remit included how Family Groups approached accounting, the identification
of good practice, and the calculation of disposable income from which the contribution of
each member was determined (Papers of the Iona Community). The results of this review
were discussed by the Council in June 1998 and resulted in a number of recommendations.
These formed the blueprint for the current arrangements concerning accounting for the
economic discipline.

16

The review emphasised that All family groups should make it a first priority to make time
for accounting (ibid). Given the diverse economic and social circumstances of the
membership, it was also deemed important to allow sufficient time for accounting. Unhurried
discussion was considered a precondition for the creation of that trust within the group which
was necessary to encourage a process of open and honest sharing, irrespective of income. It
was also recommended that family groups should fix a date by which the financial
accounting should be completed and that the completion by each member of an Economic
Discipline Form would provide a focus for discussions within the family group of the claims
on income which had been advanced by the member. The review also recommended that the
process should be better attuned to the circumstances of members on low incomes for whom a
10% commitment represented a significant use of resources relative to those with greater
income and wealth. It was also recognised that the practice of economic discipline needed to
be flexible enough to accommodate changes in the structure of the modern family. For
instance, in a dual earning household where only one spouse is a member of the Community,
should personal or household income form the basis of the calculation? Such complexities
have resulted in a greater emphasis on flexibility and for detailed accounting to be performed
within the more intimate forum of the family group. The forms distributed to members as
guidance on practising the economic discipline stress that discussion within the family
groups is vital to the accounting process and the recognition of each individuals
circumstances as unique is essential.
The procedures instituted to facilitate each individuals accounting is a matter to be
determined by each family group. However, the Community has provided a model economic
discipline form for guidance . This form contains tables for the calculation of disposable
income and the 4% commitment to the Iona Community; the disclosure of other gifts
representing the 6% contribution to the Church or charitable causes; and, details of how the
member spends his/her disposable income.
Total disposable income is calculated as net salary plus other income less the individual
members base-line commitments. Other income includes benefits in kind, pensions, interest
received, dividends received, gifts, legacies, insurance policies matured etc). Base-line
commitments, which are individually disclosed and discussed with family group members,
may be family expenses, mortgage repayments, rents, council tax, student fees, loan
repayments, insurance premiums, cost of utilities, travel expenses, food, reasonable personal
expenses etc). Interview evidence reveals that the question of what constituted a members
base-line commitment is substantially a matter of judgement and one which provokes much
discussion in the family groups. This is particularly the case in relation to items such as
moving to a large r house or the payment of private school fees. However, more important
than the purposive-rational determination of what is a legitimate base-line commitment was
the socialising process of meeting to discuss the issue and of accounting to one another:

So I worked out what my income would be over the year. And from that I deducted
the mortgage, house insurance, council tax. You cant avoid paying them and you
have got to pay the house insurance. Everything else like content insurance, you dont
necessarily have to pay. It doesnt really matter exactly what you add or you dont.
But actually having to sit down and have to account for it. And the fact that your are
sharing what you doing means that you done just do it blindly. And I think that really
is the important thing (Iona 4, Group Convenor).

17

We used to have this running jokewhen we did the economic accountability about
piano lessons for the children, that all the children did piano lessons, and we had
this annual [discussion]. is it a base line is it whatever. The family group were
actually very helpful, and it keeps coming back up. There go the *** and their piano
lessons (Iona 11, Group Convenors).

As mentioned above, members are also obliged to itemise their other givings which is
calculated as a further 6% of total disposable income. This aspect of the Rule provoked one
member of the Community to keep a full account of how she used all of her money. This was
considered necessary in order to identify whether she was complying with the 6% obligation:
I had great problems the first year I was a new member and [this] had to do with the
6% giving. The first year I did it, I ended up with less so that was obviously
something I had to deal with. Last year and this year I started off at the top with how
much I allocated to that (free donations) and I record it as I make each payment. It is
so that I know that I have paid that amount of money. It is just to show that I have
allocated what I said I would do. However, in a way, this sort of thing is pretty
straightforward. It is the other 90%, the rest of the money. Partially, this is because I
am not quite certain where all of the money goes. But also there is a discipline in
doing this every day, and sometimes I dont do it every day, and I think, whats the
psychological problem why I didnt write it down. And it is just to see what you
spend on various things (Iona 4, Community Member).
The issue of accounting for the 90% of disposable income remaining once the tithe has been
calculated has long been an issue in the Iona Community. It is now suggested that as a
separate exercise, members might produce an accounting of their Total Expenditure of Gross
Income. These are to form the basis of a discussion within family groups about how the
members use their disposable income. In this venture members are reminded that In the past,
the rule stated that Community members must account for all the money they kept for
themselves and family over and above the average national wage. If we all worked at this,
perhaps there would be more to give away. The proforma account is reproduced below:
TOTAL EXPENDITURE OF GROSS INCOME (to help with your discussion of the 90%)
You may require a larger sheet!
ITEM

PERCENTAGE

AMOUNT

Givings
Household expenditure .
Utilities..
Pensions, insurances .
Food

10%

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

TOTAL

100%

...

(Source: Economic Discipline Form, Papers of the Iona Community).

18

Once the family group has undertaken an accounting of the economic discipline of each of its
members, the member is obliged to complete an Economic Discipline Form. This details the
amount of the financial commitment of the member to the travel pool, common fund and
community fund. Together with cheques and a completed with us card, the economic
discipline form is forwarded to the Leader of the Community. The member is also requested
to write to the Leader giving a short personal assessment of how they are keeping the Rule.
The next section of the paper explores how the forms of accounting and accountability
prescribed in the Rule of the Iona Community have been, and continue to be, operationalised
and the issues which have emerged from their working.

FORMS OF ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE IONA COMMUNITY

In his recent book the Leader of the Community has asserted that it is the rule about the use of
money where the accountability works best, but even here there is considerable range of
experience, and the difficulties that arise are not to be under-estimated whether they are
problems that arise from dynamics or relationships within the group, or more practical issues
about the detailed calculations, for example, what is included and excluded; what account is
taken of the situation of an earning partner who is not a Member (Shanks, 1999, p. 67).
The whole question of an economic accountability has been both a challenging and a difficult
issue for the Iona Community. It is confronted with a dynamic tension between overly strict,
onerous and intrusive accounting practices and a set of lax and generally unchallenging
guidelines. Both historically and in contemporary practice the accountabilities associated with
the Rule are facilitated by various forms of accounting which, in the words of Roberts and
Scapens (1985), make possible and perpetuate the particular systems of accountability. It is
interesting to note, however, that as the Rule of the Community has evolved there has been a
shift away from formalised systems of accounting and a greater focus on systems of
accountability. This has been associated with a move away from an individualising
accountability focused on how a member uses her/his time and income, towards a more
socialised form of accountability, which prioritises account ing for the use of money to fellow
family group members.
The next section explores the idea, prevalent in the Iona Community, of an integrated
spirituality and the its implications for the accountabilities of the organisation and its
members.
Balancing the Organisation and the Movement
Members of the Iona Community are encouraged to explore the Rule, to contemplate its
wholeness, its dynamic character and its importance to binding the Community. The five
components of the Rule are not considered to be discrete since the Community has always
maintained that there is no division between prayer and politics, work and worship, sacred
and secular. A holistic approach is considered fundamental to our movement (Rebuilding
Our Common Life).
In 1989 the Iona Community composed a Strategic Plan for the 1990s (Annual Report, 1989).
This identified six areas of concern: Christian inter-communion; inter-faith and racism;
justice, peace and the integrity of creation; the poor and exploited; young people; and,

19

seeking to rediscover spirituality (p. 3). The latter is the focus of a book by the Leader of the
Community entitled Iona-Gods Energy. The Vision and Spirituality of the Iona Community
(Shanks, 1999). The contemporary articulation of integrated spirituality is important to
understanding the nature of accountability as practised in the Iona Community.
According to the Leader of the Community spirituality is not something that is abstract or
detached from the everyday realities of life, the range of human situations and experiences to
which it is related (Shanks, p. 6). This holistic notion of an integrated spirituality suggests no
separation of the material from the ethereal or the detachment of the sacred from the secular.
Rather these arenas are connected through daily living. Integrated spirituality undergirds the
activities of the Community (ibid., p. 43) and is pervasive in the Iona Community as both an
organisation and a movement (p. 50).
While the pervasive theme of integrated spirituality results in common forms of
accountability within the community as both an organisation and as a movement, there are
also some differences. The increasing size of the Iona Community and the attendant growth in
its bureaucracy have introduced structures for organisational accountability which are difficult
to accommodate within the original notion of community. There is however an overarching
form of communal of accountability which infuses the Iona Community as both organisation
and movement.
Individualising Accountability managing the organisation
Adherence to the founding ideals of inclusivity, integration, participation and communication
has become more challenging as the membership and scope of the Iona Community has
expanded. The primary decision making body in earlier times was the membership in plenary
session. Most managerial decisions are now taken either by the Leader of the Community, a
council, or committees with responsibilities in relation to mainland work, island activities,
finance and staffing, and publications. These set policy, subject to the consent of the
Community in plenary session. The Community currently engages 50 individuals on staff
contracts (Shanks, 1999), these are accountable for the detailed day-to-day decisions (p.
49). Within this organisation it becomes more difficult for individual Members to own
responsibility for corporate decisions (1999, p. 48).
In the context of the advancing scale of the Community there is a fear that the attendant need
to enhance the processes of organisational accountability may emasculate notions of
community: With the increase in scale and the need for consistency and accountability it is
true that there may be a danger of creating or being absorbed almost unwittingly into a world
of bureaucracy (ibid., p. 51). In effect, that work or purposive rational action would
overcome the identity forming, membership creating aspects of the socialising mutual
accountabilities. The difficulties of adhering to the concept of community within the
organisational structures of the Community and the importance of accountability in this
context has been alluded to by the Leader:
continuing attention has to be given to the importance of effective communication
lest there be any sense, on the part of individual Members, of being out of touch with
what is going on and with decisions taken. Clearly there must be a high degree of
mutual trust and the Communitys commitment to accountability is fundamental
(1999, p. 50).

20

it is necessary to ensure that the communication of information is effective not only

to keeping the organisation running as smoothly as possible but also as an expression
of mutual respect, common ownership and accountability (1999, p. 101).
The changing shape of the Community itself creates challenges too of an internal
nature. With increasing numbers of Members and Associates, across a wide
geographical spread, how do we retain our sense of belonging together? There is less
intimacy and inevitability members feel that they do not know one another as well as
may have been possible previously maintaining our sense of ownership of the work
done on the Communitys behalf becomes more difficult as movement and
organisation grow; means need to be found of ensuring that the system of
accountability continues to work satisfactorily, that the sense of mutual trust is
sustained and nourished, that information about what is happening or proposed is
communicated swiftly and effectively (p. 217).
These comments illustrate the danger that the growth in the organisation will lead to a
breakdown of both community and identity. Individual members of the Community are
conscious of the tension between the community as movement and as organisation. One
interviewee observed that:
In many ways it has changed because its been a victim of its apparent success on the
island. As a result of that growth in the number of people wanting to use that facility
and so on, weve had to move towards a parallel board like structure, just simply to
handle the business, I mean the most structural thing as Iona Community plc, which
seems to me ridiculous (Iona 7: Community Member).
In the individual practices of accountability the tension between the organisation and the
movement, between a socialialising and an individualising accountability was clearly evident.
As the leadership sought to clarify the basis of the economic discipline by preparing forms of
account, some of the family groups chose not to comply with the centrally prescribed
arrangements, while still maintaining a process of group orientated socialising accountability:
Well, I am a convenor of a group, and we decided that we would carry on doing what
we were before the form came out. Obviously each group has differences on how they
view the economic discipline. And we found that because we had such a variety of
people that it was quite useful just to look at the form and discuss what people did. I
have got quite a vocal group, who have got very decided opinions on things. And I
think that we all decided that, it was best to look at everyones situation and
everyones commitments and see what money was left over. (Iona 4, Group
Convenor)
In the context of an organisation founded on the principle of community, managerial control
is difficult to achieve. The leaders task is to perform the functions of a chief executive while
at the same time pursue the mission of the Community and co-ordinate a diffuse and disparate
membership (Shanks, 1999, pp. 51, 73). The Leader becomes a focal point of accountability
in that he is accountable to the members and the members and family groups are accountable
to him for their keeping of the rule.
Given that integrated spirituality embraces organisation and movement the fundamental
adherence by the Iona Community to accountability permeates both these aspects of the

21

Communitys work. Communal accountability as actualised in organisation emphasises free

and frequent information flows, albeit through a hierarchical structure. This is deemed to
encourage trust among the members of a dispersed community. Mutual accountability in
organisation is also deemed to exist through the obligation on the leadership to report to the
members.
Socialising Accountability finding spirituality
Integrated spirituality is rooted in the realities of the everyday and in ones living out the
faith. It is actualised for members of the Community by adherence to the Rule: Spirituality is
not a matter of private preference but of public accountability as practised . . . according to
the Community Rule (Shanks, 1999, p. 114). Given the dispersed and heterogeneous
membership of the Community it is this shared discipline (1999, p. 64) which solidifies
communal behaviour: It is our Rule that holds us together in the Community amid all our
diversity (Shanks, 1999, p. 65).
Accountability for adherence to the Rule is performed through the organisational hierarchy
when individual members submit an annual return/report to the Leader in which they confirm
that they remain with us. Personal accountability for adherence to the Rule is also practised
in the public arena of plenary meetings of the Community (of which there are three per
annum) and at Community Week on Iona during the summer. Such periodic exercises in
accountability, are by themselves, however, not in accord with the holistic nature of
spirituality as continuous and integral to the everyday: Belonging to the Iona Community
involves holding one another accountable to the fivefold Rule. If accounting becomes
threatening or guilt-making, occasional or piecemeal, or limited to private contact with the
Leader, it is failing (Rebuilding Our Common Life). This process of accountability was seen
as being essential to community membership. A key part of the training programme for new
members is to enable new members to explore rule and the concerns of the community
(Iona Community New Members Programme, August 1990). Adherence to the rule and
accounting within the community was an essential device in constructing the boundary
between the member and the non-member, in effect, the rule and the associated
accountabilities create the organisation. The central importance of the rule and the associated
accountabilities was a particular focus of the Community Week in 1999. Here a number of
the participants emphasised the strong links between accountability, membership and
community:
Without accountability there is no community. If someone doesnt account, there
must be a sanction, ultimately throwing out.
We make certain commitments and promises. Being a member we are called to keep
these.
(Community Week 1999 Papers on economic discipline, responses to discussion
points)
The primary arena for mutual accountability, of reporting ones adherence to the Rule was the
Family Group: For most people the main place of belonging together, where the spirituality
is rooted, is in the local Family Groups. This is where the mutual accounting takes place
(Shanks, 1999, p. 70). Among those interviewed for this study, the centrality of the family
group to their membership and experience of the Community was clearly apparent:

22

It is the family group that has been the closest part of the community to me. I have
been quite lucky in as much as I have been on lots of committees, convenor of council,
and stuff like that. That gives you closeness to the business of the community. The
actual being part of the community really for me is the family group and the regular
meetings and our family group . . . (Iona 5, Community Member).
Therefore, the well-being of family groups is important to facilitating the mutual
accountability process:
And the particular appeal of the Communitys Rule is the mutual accountability:
keeping the Rule is not just a matter of personal obedience, between the individual and
God, as it were; the idea is that within our local Family Groups we share our
experience and account to one another (Shanks, 1999, p. 65).
Facilitating Socialising Accountability
Given the centrality of a mutual socialising accountability, the Iona Community has been
anxious to explore the conditions under which it is facilitated. Of particular importance is the
creation of a high degree of trust among the members of the group (Shanks, 1999, p. 71).
Impediments to the achievement of this include a highly transient membership in a family
group. However, it is also recognised that the practice of accountability might be stifled in a
group which is not infused with new members. The result of a low turnover of members in a
group might be the avoidance of some of the hard questions that accounting demands (p.
72). Trust is also important to facilitating the participation of group members in mutual
accounting. This was commented on by the group convenors interviewed for this study. One
convenor observed that the operation of accountability depended on the creation of a sense of
group coherence and commitment:
You hear of family groups where maybe 50% will turn up in any one month. I would
say that there would be only one couple missing on average at most meeting. For
60%-70% of the time everybody will be at family group. It may be that we are
regarded as a social family group. The first thing that we organise is the Christmas
party and then the second thing is the summer outing and then after that we worry
about the world (Iona 5, Group Convenor).
Systems and processes of accountability which incite a cycle of failure and guilt are
considered destructive of the purpose for which they were instituted (Rebuilding the Common
Life). Socialising accountability is also deemed defective if it is not participative: The
process of being accountable, to one another and as a group, needs to be worked at. In some
groups it may be that the level of trust is not very high, or quieter members may feel silenced
by the more powerful or articulate (Rebuilding Our Common Life). Suggestions are offered
for building trust and encouraging participation. These include providing opportunities for the
Family Group to spend more time together; offering individuals more scope for sharing their
experiences, concerns, interests, spiritual resources and faith journey with the Group or a subGroup; applying techniques which encouraging listening skills, create space for contributions
from less dominant members and reinforcing the egalitarian character of the membership of
the group; appointing a soul friend or sponsor to mentor individual members, and; the
collective pursuit of action for justice and peace (Rebuilding Our Common Life).

23

It is acknowledged that the dynamics of socialising accountability varies significantly among

family groups and as part of the Communitys concern with The Rediscovery of Spirituality
each group has been requested to audit and appraise its functioning (Shanks, 1999, p. 72).
Guidance on the conduct of this audit has been provided in a manual, launched in 1997,
entitled Rebuilding Our Common Life (Annual Report, 1997, p. 12). The purposes of this
Toolkit for Exploring the Rule includes examining ways in which members might be
enabled to account corporately as well as individually and how the entity of the Family
Group can enhance its corporate accountability (Rebuilding Our Common Life). Suggestions
for the performance of a Family Group Audit is contained in the toolkit. An audit schedule
is supplied which poses a number of questions relating to accountability. Family Groups are
asked to reflect on: how the confidentiality and trust of members is enhanced as a basis for
practising accountability; the optimum size of the group or sub-group for facilitating
responsible accounting; whether the dynamics of the group is an impediment to
accountability and whether an enabler from another group or from outside would
encourage greater participation; whether the group practices accountability in relation to all
aspects of the Rule or does it restrict the scope of its accounting to exploring adherence to the
economic discipline? It is suggested that the hierarchical/personal accountability of a Member
to the Leader might be integrated with the mutual accountability practised in the Family
Groups through the individual discussing with the Group the content of the annual returns
which are forwarded to the Leader (Rebuilding Our Common Life).
Among the family groups studied there was variation in the approach to a socialising
accountability. One group rejected the practices associated with it as embarrassing and
intrusive. Others perceived that it was a positive process and appreciated the openness and
honesty associated and the discipline it imparted on their daily lives. Some of the members
interviewed suggested that the economic discipline was the easiest aspect of the rule to keep,
while the accountability for the use of time and the commitment to a regular devotional life
presented more of a challenge. One member mentioned that he had considered suspending
his membership for a time, due to the difficulties experienced in attending group meetings on
a regular basis.
CONCLUSION
While the Iona Community might be a rather unusual site for accounting research, it offers
some novel and significant insights on accounting and accountability, particularly the
distinction between individualising and socialising accountabilities. This case is markedly
different from earlier research on accounting in religious organisations where the primary
focus is on the study of the performance of the accounting function. The Iona Community, by
contrast represents a movement which has instituted systems of accounting and
accountability as part of the observance by its members of a Rule and as an integral
component of their Christian practice. Accounting is perceived as having an important role in
the construction and operation of an individuals spirituality and in their identity as a member
of the Community. It is interesting to note that, in these circumstances, the formal accounting
that characterised the earlier forms of the economic discipline were not rejected because
they were perceived as colonising or in any way antithetical to the values espoused by the
community. In fact, vigilance in the accounting prescription was perceived as a mark of an
active and worthy member of the Community who was fully attuned to its objectives. Over
time the emphasis on onerous and tedious accounting practices was supplanted by a broader,
more socialising frame of accountability which emphasised face-to-face interaction conducted
in family groups. In these forums socialising accountability was best facilitated through the

24

nurture of trust among members. This study illustrates that socialising accountability is a
disclosure accountability, based on concepts of mutual adjustment and identity creation, both
individual and collective identity. However, the individualising forms of control associated
with hierarchical structures and purposive rational action is built upon formal control
structures.
Another compelling feature of the Iona Community is the way in which, through its concept
of integrated spirituality, it perceives no separation of the sacred from the secular. Thus
members of the Community give and receive accounts in financial terms as part of their
religious observance and as a means of cementing their adherence to the collectivity. This
illustrates that accounting can support the sacred through processes of socialising
accountability. This finding contrasts with the work of Laughlin (1988) and Booth (1993).
Here the sacred-secular distinction was apparent when the focus was on the techno-rational
aspects of organisational life rather than examining both the techno-rational and the relational.
However, other forms of dualism did emerge in the case of the Iona Community. While
embracing the concept of an integrated spirituality the Community struggled with a duality
of movement and organisation, seeking to hold the collective identity as a spiritual
movement with the realities of an increasingly complex organisation. As an organisation with
attendant bureaucratic structures the Iona Community has instituted forms of vertical or
individualising accountability which may compromise its persona as a community. The
Community has been compelled to wrestle with the consequential difficulty of melding
hierarchical control with its adherence to socialising forms of accountability. This illustrates
the potential danger that hierarchical or individualising forms of accountability will supplant
the commuitarian or socialising form. Clearly further research is required to better understand
the nature and role of accounting and accountabilities in this kind of organisation.

25

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Booth, P. (1993). Accounting in churches: a research framework and agenda. Accounting,
Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 6 No.4: 37-67.
Chua, W-F (1986) Radical Developments in Accounting Thought, The Accounting Review,
Vol. 61 No 4: 601-632.
Duncan, J., Flesher, D. and M. Stocks (1999). Internal control systems in US churches: an
examination of the effects of church size and denomination on systems of internal control.
Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 12 No.2: 142-163.
Faircloth, A. (1988). The importance of accounting to the Shakers. Accounting Historians
Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, Fall 1988: 99-129.
Ferguson, R. (1988). Chasing the Wild Goose. London: Collins.
Ferguson, R. (1990). George MacLeod. Founder of the Iona Community. London: Collins.
Flesher, T. and Flesher, D. (1979). Managerial accounting in an early 19th century GermanAmerican religious commune. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 4 No. 4: 297304.
Fraser, I. (1990). Living a Countersign: from Iona to Basic Christian Communities. Glasgow:
Wild Goose Publications.
Hopwood, A. (1983). On trying to study accounting in the contexts in which it Operates.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 8 No.2/3: 287-305.
Iona News.
Kreiser, L. and P. Dare(1986) Shaker accounting records at Pleasant Hill: 1830-1850. The
Accounting Historians Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2: 19-36.
Laughlin, R. (1988). Accounting in its social context: an analysis of the accounting systems of
the Church of England. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 1 No.2: 1942.
Llewellyn, S. (1994). Managing the boundary: how accounting is implicated in maintaining
the organization. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 7 No. 4: 4-23.
MacLeod, G. (1944). We shall re-build. The work of the Iona Community on mainland and on
island.
Miller, P. (1992) Accounting and objectivity: the invention of calculating selves and
calculable spaces. Annals of Scholarship, Vol. 9 No 1/2: 61-86.
Miller, P. and T. OLeary (1987). Accounting and the construction of the governable person.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 12 No 3: 235-265.
Morton, T.R. (1951). The household of faith. An essay on the changing pattern of the churchs
life. Glasgow: The Iona Community.
Morton, T.R. (1957). What is the Iona Community. Glasgow: The Iona Community
Morton, T.R. (1977). The Iona Community. Personal impressions of the early years.
Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press.
Munro, R. and J. Mouritson (1996) Accountability: Power Ethos & The Technologies of
Managing. London: International Thompson Business Press.

26

Papers of the Iona Community, Community House, Pearce Institute, Glasgow.

Papers relating to economic discipline and witness, MacLeod of Fuinary and Iona Community
Papers, National Library of Scotland (Acc 9084/345(i)).
Rebuilding our common life. A tool kit for exploring the rule of the Iona Community.
Rebuilding the common life. Foundation documents of the Iona Community. (1988). Glasgow:
Wild Goose Publications.
Roberts, J. (1991). The possibilities of accountability Accounting, Organizations and Society,
Vol. 16 No. 4: 355-368.
Roberts, J. (1996) From discipline to dialogue: individualizing and socialising forms of
accountability. In R. Munro and J. Mouritson (eds) Accountability: Power Ethos & The
Technologies of Managing. London: International Thompson Business Press.
Roberts, J. and Scapens, R. (1985). Accounting systems and systems of accountability
understanding accounting practices in their organisational contexts. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, Vol. 10, No. 4: 443-456.
Shanks, N. (1999). Iona-Gods energy. The vision and spirituality of the Iona Community.
London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Sinclair, A. (1995) The chameleon of accountability: Forms and discourses. Accounting,
Organizations and Society. Vol. 20 No. 2/3: 219-237.
Swanson, G and J. Gardner (1986). The inception and evolution of financial reporting in the
protestant episcopal church in the United States of America. The Accounting Historians
Journal, Vol. 13 No.2: 55-63.
Swanson, G and J. Gardner (1988) Not-for-profit accounting and auditing in the early
eighteenth century: some archival evidence. The Accounting Review, Vol. 63 No. 3: 436447.
The Coracle.
The Iona Community. Annual Reports.
The Iona Community. Miles Christi (annual).
Walker, S.P. and Llewellyn, S. (1999). Accounting at Home. Some Interdisciplinary
Perspectives, unpublished paper, University of Edinburgh.
Zietlow, J. (1989) Capital and operating budgeting practices in pure nonprofit organizations.
Financial Accountability & Management. Vol. 5 No. 4: 219-232.

27