Message from your president
Thoughts and views FROM MY BACK PORCH 10/10/2007
My back porch is a very special place for me. Sadly, it has remained through the spring and summer something of a "catch-all" and storage area for building materials, furniture and "stuff" while we do some home renovations. Historically, and now metaphorically, My Back Porch is where I have done some good thinking, had good times and great conversation. Thus, the title for what I anticipate will be a something–between– periodic–and–occasionally–appearing column/commentary/compendium of musings from My Back Porch, or (stealing from Wallace Stevens) "the fitful tracings of my portal" Let me know what you think.SERENDIPITY DEPARTMENT
Just this evening I spoke by phone( while actually on my back porch!)with a woman interested in our brave little congregation. I hope and trust that she will attend and take the decision for membership; she has relocated from a community home to a proud UU congregation of over 1000 members(!) where she was involved in religious education (gasp!), and (pause... for the purpose of creating and building dramatic tension...) attained a M.Div degree! (double gasp!!!). She seems quite interested in making a contribution, and well experienced with much to offer to us. She asked about our congregation, which led me to ponder more her question after I put down the phone....WE ARE:
much like many other congregations
white (though most of us are, well, more like putty tinted)
retired, or just plain tired
donors to our church
from Christian homes or Christian back grounds
seekers, but not Sikhs (and no Jains, Bahais, Hindu or Bolsheviks, that I know of)
HOWEVER you categorize or name yourself, know that your church cherishes your membership!
I invited her to come to a service; join me in welcoming her.
Consensus decision-making
is a decision-making process that not only seeks the agreement of most participants, but also to resolve or mitigate the objections of the minority to achieve the most agreeable decision. Consensus is usually defined as meaning both general agreement, and the process of getting to such agreement. Consensus decision-making is thus concerned primarily with that process. While not as common as other decision-making procedures, such as majority voting, consensus is used by a wide variety of groups. Religious denominations such as the Quakers, many non-governmental organizations, and even entire nations such as the Iroquois. The Iroquois Confederacy Grand Council, the Haudenosaunee, traditionally used consensus in decision-making, potentially as early as 1142. There is ample precedent for consensus in churches. The most notable of early Western consensus practitioners are the Religious Society of Friends, or Quakers, who adopted the technique as early as the 17th century. The Anabaptists, or Mennonites, too, have a history of using consensus decision-making, and some believe Anabaptists practiced consensus as early as 1527 consensus decision-makingThe word "consensus" derives from the Latin cum meaning "with" or "together with", and sentire meaning to "think" or "feel". Thus, etymologically, "consensus" means to "think or feel together".As a decision–making process, consensus aims to be:
Inclusive
As many stakeholders as possible should be involved in the consensus decision-making process.Participatory
The consensus process should actively solicit the input and participation of all decision-makers. Co-operative: Participants in an effective consensus process should strive to reach the best possible decision for the group and all of its members, rather than opt to pursue a majority opinion, potentially to the detriment of a minority.Egalitarian
All members of a consensus decision-making body should be afforded, as much as possible, equal input into the process. All members have the opportunity to table, amend and veto or "block" proposals.Solution-oriented
An effective consensus decision-making body strives to emphasize common agreement over differences and reach effective decisions using compromise and other techniques to avoid or resolve mutually-exclusive positions within the group. The goal is "unity, not unanimity." Ensuring that group members speak only once until others are heard encourages a diversity of thought. The facilitator is understood as serving the group rather than acting as person-in-charge. Dissenters' perspectives are embraced, as dissent is seen as stimulating rather than challenging. The group as a whole is responsible for the decision and the decision belongs to the group.consensus as an alternative to voting
Proponents of consensus decision making view the traditional, majoritarian voting process as undesirable for several reasons. Voting is regarded as being competitive, rather than co-operative, framing decision-making in a win/lose dichotomy that ignores the possibility of compromise or other potential solutions. Additionally, majoritarian rule is also often viewed as disempowering or alienating, subjecting a minority to the rule of a majority position.Proponents of consensus often submit that this "tyranny of the majority" exacerbates the problem of partisanship and can reduce group cohesion and effectiveness. Lastly, advocates of consensus frequently state that a majority decision reduces the commitment of each individual decision-maker to the decision. Members of a minority position may feel less commitment to a majority decision, and even majority voters who may have taken their positions along party or bloc lines may have a sense of reduced responsibility for the ultimate decision. The result of this reduced commitment, according to many consensus proponents, is potentially less willingness to defend or act upon the decision.
For a good example of a church utilization, see: "A Manual for Meetings, Revised Edition" -- The Uniting Church http://nat.uca.org.au/regulations/2001/pdf/manual_for_meetings.pdf