Quaker Decision Making
Oct. 19th, 2024 08:50 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
poliphilo Quakers come to decisions by "discernment"- which involves listening to the inner voice and taking due note of what everybody concerned has to say. It can take time.
We try not to argue.
And we try not to demonise any person or opinion. One of our key texts (though no Quaker text is accorded the weight of "Scripture") is this- that we should "look for that of God in everyone."
Natural leaders emerge within a Meeting but no-one is set above anyone else. Each Member's opinion counts. If there is disagreement then the matter should be set aside until a common mind can be reached. Forcing a decision through in the teeth of opposition is most unQuakerly.
When the Meeting is asked to decide whether a certain decision has its approval the proper form for showing assent is "I hope so,"- which allows for the possibility that with the best will in the world the Meeting and the individual may have got it wrong.
We try not to argue.
And we try not to demonise any person or opinion. One of our key texts (though no Quaker text is accorded the weight of "Scripture") is this- that we should "look for that of God in everyone."
Natural leaders emerge within a Meeting but no-one is set above anyone else. Each Member's opinion counts. If there is disagreement then the matter should be set aside until a common mind can be reached. Forcing a decision through in the teeth of opposition is most unQuakerly.
When the Meeting is asked to decide whether a certain decision has its approval the proper form for showing assent is "I hope so,"- which allows for the possibility that with the best will in the world the Meeting and the individual may have got it wrong.
