Roxane Gay: the bad feminist manifesto | Global | The Guardian

Roxane Gay: the bad feminist manifesto | Global | The Guardian





Roxane Gay: the bad feminist manifesto
She wants to be independent – and taken care of. She loves rap, while finding the lyrics offensive to the core. In this extract from her latest book, a 'flawed' feminist reveals all

• Read Kira Cochrane's interview with Roxane Gay


'The more I write, the more I put myself out into the world as a bad feminist but, I hope, a good woman.' Photograph: Jennifer Silverberg for the Guardian

Shares
4,409

Comments22


Roxane Gay


Saturday 2 August 2014 18.00 AESTFirst published on Saturday 2 August 2014 18.00 AEST


Iam failing as a woman. I am failing as a feminist. To freely accept the feminist label would not be fair to good feminists. If I am, indeed, a feminist, I am a rather bad one. I am a mess of contradictions.

There are many ways in which I am doing feminism wrong, at least according to the way my perceptions of feminism have been warped by being a woman.

I want to be independent, but I want to be taken care of and have someone to come home to. I have a job I'm pretty good at. I am in charge of things. I am on committees. People respect me and take my counsel. I want to be strong and professional, but I resent how hard I have to work to be taken seriously, to receive a fraction of the consideration I might otherwise receive. Sometimes I feel an overwhelming need to cry at work, so I close my office door and lose it.

I want to be in charge, respected, in control, but I want to surrender, completely, in certain aspects of my life. Who wants to grow up?

When I drive to work, I listen to thuggish rap at a very loud volume, even though the lyrics are degrading to women and offend me to my core. The classic Ying Yang Twins song Salt Shaker? It's amazing. "Bitch you gotta shake it till your camel starts to hurt." Poetry. (I am mortified by my music choices.) I care what people think.


Pink is my favourite colour. I used to say my favourite colour was black to be cool, but it is pink – all shades of pink. If I have an accessory, it is probably pink. I read Vogue, and I'm not doing it ironically. I once live-tweeted the September issue.

I love dresses. For years I pretended I hated them, but I don't. Maxi dresses are one of the finest clothing items to become popular in recent memory. I have opinions on maxi dresses! I shave my legs! Again, this mortifies me. If I take issue with the unrealistic standards of beauty women are held to, I shouldn't have a secret fondness for fashion and smooth calves, right?

I know nothing about cars. When I take my car to the mechanic, they are speaking a foreign language. I still call my father with questions about cars, and am not terribly interested in changing any of my car-related ignorance.

Despite what people think based on my writing, I very much like men. They're interesting to me, and I mostly wish they'd be better about how they treat women so I wouldn't have to call them out so often. And still, I put up with nonsense from unsuitable men even though I know better and can do better. I love diamonds and the excess of weddings. I consider certain domestic tasks as gendered, mostly all in my favour because I don't care for chores – lawn care, bug killing and trash removal, for example, are men's work.

Sometimes – a lot of the time, honestly – I totally fake "it" because it's easier. I am a fan of orgasms, but they take time, and in many instances I don't want to spend that time. All too often I don't really like the guy enough to explain the calculus of my desire. Then I feel guilty because the sisterhood would not approve. I'm not even sure what the sisterhood is, but the idea of a sisterhood menaces me, quietly, reminding me of how bad a feminist I am.
Advertisement


I love babies, and I want to have one. I am willing to make certain compromises (not sacrifices) in order to do so – namely, maternity leave and slowing down at work to spend more time with my child, writing less, so I can be more present in my life. I worry about dying alone, unmarried and childless, because I spent so much time pursuing my career and accumulating degrees. This kind of thinking keeps me up at night, but I pretend it doesn't because I am supposed to be evolved. My success, such as it is, is supposed to be enough if I'm a good feminist. It is not enough. It is not even close. Because I have so many deeply held opinions about gender equality, I feel a lot of pressure to live up to certain ideals. I am supposed to be a good feminist who is having it all, doing it all. Really, though, I'm a woman in her 30s, struggling to accept herself and her credit score. For so long I told myself I was not this woman – utterly human and flawed. I worked overtime to be anything but this woman, and it was exhausting and unsustainable and even harder than simply embracing who I am.

Maybe I'm a bad feminist, but I am deeply committed to the issues important to the feminist movement. I have strong opinions about misogyny, institutional sexism that consistently places women at a disadvantage, the inequity in pay, the cult of beauty and thinness, the repeated attacks on reproductive freedom, violence against women, and on and on. I am as committed to fighting fiercely for equality as I am committed to disrupting the notion that there is an essential feminism.

At some point, I got it into my head that a feminist was a certain kind of woman. I bought into grossly inaccurate myths about who feminists are – militant, perfect in their politics and person, man-hating, humourless. I bought into these myths even though, intellectually, I know better. I'm not proud of this. I don't want to buy into these myths any more.

Bad feminism seems the only way I can both embrace myself as a feminist and be myself, so I write. I chatter away on Twitter about everything that makes me angry and all the small things that bring me joy. I write blogposts about the meals I cook as I try to take better care of myself, and with each new entry I realise that I'm undestroying myself after years of allowing myself to stay damaged. The more I write, the more I put myself out into the world as a bad feminist but, I hope, a good woman – I am being open about who I am and who I was and where I have faltered and who I would like to become. No matter what issues I have with feminism, I am a feminist. I cannot and will not deny the importance and absolute necessity of feminism. Like most people, I'm full of contradictions, but I also don't want to be treated like shit for being a woman. I am a bad feminist. I would rather be a bad feminist than no feminist at all.
How to be friends with another woman

1 Abandon the cultural myth that all female friendships must be bitchy, toxic or competitive. This myth is like heels and purses – pretty but designed to slowwomen down.
Photograph: Alena Silkova/Alamy

1a This is not to say women aren't bitches or toxic or competitive sometimes, but rather that these are not defining characteristics of female friendship, especially as you get older.
Advertisement


1b If you find that you are feeling bitchy, toxic or competitive towards the women who are supposed to be your closest friends, look at why and figure out how to fix it and/or find someone who can help you fix it.

2 A lot of ink is given over to mythologising female friendships as curious, fragile and always intensely fraught. Stop reading writing that encourages this mythology.

3 If you are the kind of woman who says, "I'm mostly friends with guys" and acts like you're proud of that, like that makes you closer to being a man or something, and less of a woman, as if being a woman is a bad thing, see item 1b. It's OK if most of your friends are guys, but if you champion this as a commentary on the nature of female friendships, well, soul-search a little.

3a If you feel it's hard to be friends with women, consider that maybe women aren't the problem. Maybe it's just you.

3b I used to be this kind of woman. I'm sorry to judge.

4 Sometimes, your friends will date people you cannot stand. You can either be honest about your feelings or you can lie. There are good reasons for both. Sometimes you will be the person dating someone your friends cannot stand. If your man or woman is a scrub, just own it so you and your friends can talk about more interesting things. My go-to explanation is, "I am dating an asshole because I'm lazy." You are welcome to borrow it.

5 Want nothing but the best for your friends, because when your friends are happy and successful, it's probably going to be easier for you to be happy.

5a If you're having a rough go of it, and a friend is having the best year ever, and you need to think some dark thoughts about that, do it alone, with your therapist, or in your diary, so that when you actually see your friend, you can avoid the myth discussed in item 1.

5b If you and your friend(s) are in the same field and can collaborate or help each other, do this without shame. It's not your fault your friends are awesome. Men invented nepotism and practically live by it. It's OK for women to do it, too.

5c Don't tear other women down, because even if they're not your friends, they are women and this is just as important. This is not to say you cannot criticise other women, but understand the difference between criticising constructively and tearing down cruelly.

5d Everybody gossips, so if you are going to gossip about your friends, at least make it fun and interesting. Never say, "I never lie" or, "I never gossip", because you are lying.

5e Love your friends' kids even if you don't want or like children. Just do it.

6 Tell your friends the hard truths they need to hear. They might get pissed about it, but it's probably for their own good. Once, my best friend told me to get my love life together and demanded an action plan, and it was irritating but also useful.

6a Don't be totally rude about truth-telling, and consider how much truth is needed to get the job done. Finesse goes a long way.

6b These conversations are more fun when preceded by an emphatic, "GIRL…"

7 Surround yourself with women you can get sloppy drunk with, who won't draw stupid things on your face if you pass out, and who will help you puke if you overcelebrate, and who will also tell you if you get sloppy drunk too much or behave badly when you are sloppy drunk.
Advertisement


8 Don't flirt, have sex or engage in emotional affairs with your friends' significant others. This shouldn't need to be said, but it needs to be said. That significant other is an asshole, and you don't want to be involved with an asshole who's used goods. If you want to be with an asshole, get a fresh asshole of your very own. They are abundant.

9 Don't let your friends buy ugly outfits or accessories you don't want to look at when you hang out. This is just common sense.

10 When something is wrong and you need to talk to your friends and they ask how you are, don't say, "Fine." They know you're lying and it irritates them, and a lot of time is wasted with the back-and-forth of, "Are you sure?" and, "Yes?" and, "Really?" and, "I AM FINE." Tell your lady friends the truth so you can talk it out and either sulk companionably or move on to other topics.

11 If four people are dining, split the bill evenly four ways. We are adults now. We don't need to add up what each person had any more. If you're high rolling, treat everyone and rotate who treats. If you're still in the broke stage, do what you have to do.

12 If a friend sends a crazy email needing reassurance about love, life, family or work, respond accordingly and in a timely manner, even if it is just to say, "Girl, I hear you." If a friend sends you 30 crazy emails needing reassurance about the same damned shit, be patient, because one day that's going to be you tearing up Gmail with your drama.

13 My mother's favourite saying is, "Qui se ressemble s'assemble." Whenever she didn't approve of whom I was spending time with, she'd say this ominously. It means, essentially, you are whom you surround yourself with.

• This is an edited extract from Bad Feminist: Essays, by Roxane Gay, published by Constable & Robinson at £12.99. To order a copy for £10.39, with free UK mainland p&p, go to theguardian.com/bookshop or call 0330 333 6846.
Topics

Feminism

Roxane Gay
Women
extracts

Eric Metaxas - Wikipedia

Eric Metaxas - Wikipedia



Eric Metaxas
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Eric Metaxas

Metaxas in 2012
Born 1963 (age 53–54)
Astoria, Queens, New York City, U.S.
Occupation Author, talk show host
Alma mater Yale University
Genre

Biographies
history
Christian
Website
www.ericmetaxas.com


Eric Metaxas (born 1963) is an American author, speaker, and radio host. He is known for two biographies,

• Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery about William Wilberforce and 
• Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spyabout Dietrich Bonhoeffer. 

He has also written humor, children's books, and scripts for VeggieTales. Metaxas is the founder and host of the NYC-based event series, "Socrates in the City: Conversations on the Examined Life" and the host of the nationally syndicated radio program, The Eric Metaxas Show [1]



Contents [hide]
1Biography
2Writing
3Radio show
4Other activities
5Awards
6References
7External links


Biography[edit]

Metaxas was born in New York City neighborhood of Astoria, Queens, grew up in Danbury, Connecticut and graduated from Yale University, where he edited the Yale Record, the nation's oldest college humor magazine. Metaxas lives in Manhattan with his wife and daughter.[2] He is Greek on his father's side and German on his mother's, while he was raised in a Greek Orthodox environment.[3]

Metaxas was raised in the Greek Orthodox Church and while he has not formally left it (saying he has "great respect" for it) he has attended Calvary-St. George Episcopal Church in New York since 2001.[4][5] Metaxas describes himself as a "Mere Christian" after the works of C.S. Lewis, saying his books "don't touch upon anything at all where Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians differ. They express just the basics of the faith, from a basic, ecumenical Christian viewpoint. They only talk about the Christian faith that they have agreement on."[4]

Writing[edit]

Metaxas's works If You Can Keep It: The Forgotten Promise of American Liberty and Miracles: What They Are, Why They Happen, and How They Can Change Your Life are both New York Times best selling books.[6][7]

Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy won the 2010 Evangelical Christian Publishers Association Christian Book of the Year.[8] Bonhoeffer is a New York Timesbest seller, climbing to #1 in the e-book category.[9] It also won the 2011 John C. Pollock Award for Christian Biography awarded by Beeson Divinity School and a 2011 Christopher Award.[10][11] Although the book is popular in the United States among evangelical Christians, Bonhoeffer scholars have criticized Metaxas's book as unhistorical, theologically weak, and philosophically naive. Professor of German History and Bonhoeffer scholar Richard Weikart, for example, credits his "engaging writing style," but claims Metaxas has a lack of intellectual background to interpret Bonhoeffer properly.[12] The biography has also been criticized by Bonhoeffer scholars Victoria Barnett[13] and Clifford Green.[14] However, several literary critics have praised Metaxas' work as a "weighty, riveting analysis of the life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer" and a "complete biography of a great theologian" with "liberal use of primary sources."[15][16][17]

Metaxas's biography of Wilberforce, Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery, was the companion book to the 2006 film.[18]

He has also written over thirty children's books, including It's Time to Sleep, My Loveand Squanto and the Miracle of Thanksgiving. He has written scripts for VeggieTales(even the Hamlet parody "Omelet" from "Lyle the Kindly Viking") and provided the voice of the narrator in "Esther... The Girl Who Became Queen", based on the Book of Esther.[citation needed]

Other writing has been published in the Atlantic Monthly, The New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal.[19][20]
Radio show[edit]

In April 2015, Metaxas began hosting the two-hour, daily nationally syndicated radio program broadcast from the Empire State Building in New York called "The Eric Metaxas Show". The show is syndicated by the Salem Radio Network.[21] Recent notable guests include Dinesh D'Souza, Dick Cavett, David Brooks, Kirsten Powers, Kathie Lee Gifford, Jimmie "J.J." Walker, and Andrew Garfield.[22]
Other activities[edit]

Metaxas speaking at the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference

Metaxas is the founder and host of a New York City event series called "Socrates in the City: Conversations on the Examined Life," where he interviews thinkers and writers, and is labeled as a forum on "life, God, and other small topics" in Metaxas' book about the series.[23] Dr. Francis Collins, Malcolm Gladwell, Sir John Polkinghorne, Kathleen Norris, Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, Dick Cavett, N.T. Wright, Jean Bethke Elshtain, Dame Alice von Hildebrand, Peter Hitchens and Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks have all been guests.[24]

Metaxas has been featured as a cultural commentator on CNN, MSNBC, and the Fox News Channel, most frequently on the show "Red Eye";[25] and has discussed his own books on The History Channel, C-Span's Book TV, the Glenn Beck Program, and Huckabee. He has been featured on many radio programs, including NPR's Morning Edition, Talk of the Nation, The Laura Ingraham Show, and On Being with Krista Tippett, as well as Hugh Hewitt, Bill Bennett, Kerby Anderson's Point of View, and The Alan Colmes Show.

In the late 1990s Metaxas wrote BreakPoint radio commentaries for former Nixon aide and Prison Fellowship founder Charles "Chuck" Colson. Upon Colson’s death in 2012, Metaxas, along with John Stonestreet, became the voice of "BreakPoint," which now airs weekdays on 1350 outlets across the country.[26]

On February 2, 2012, Metaxas was the keynote speaker for the 2012 National Prayer Breakfast.[27]

Metaxas has testified before Congress about the rise of anti-Semitism in the U.S. and abroad, and he spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2013 and 2014 on the issue of Religious Freedom.[28][29][30]

On March 25, 2014 Metaxas was announced as "Senior Fellow and Lecturer at Large" of The King's College in New York City.
Awards[edit]

Metaxas is the winner of several awards for his work, including the Becket Fund's Canterbury Medal in 2011 and the Human Life Review's Defender of Life Award in 2013.[31][32] Metaxas is the recipient of three honorary doctorate degrees, one from Hillsdale College, another from Liberty University, and the most recent from Sewanee: The University of the South.[33][34][35]
References[edit]

Jump up^ "Eric Metaxas Show". Retrieved 9 July 2015.
Jump up^ Harper Collins author bio
Jump up^ "Deep thrills". ericmetaxas.com. June 19, 2006. Archived from the original on September 22, 2012. Retrieved August 27, 2012.
^ Jump up to:a b Vicki J. Yiannias (August 1, 2007). "Eric Metaxas and the God Question". Greek News.
Jump up^ Sarah Pulliam Bailey (July 29, 2013). "Is Eric Metaxas the next Chuck Colson? _ UPDATED". The Washington Post. Retrieved September 13, 2017.
Jump up^ https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/2016/07/17/hardcover-nonfiction/
Jump up^ https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/2014/11/16/hardcover-nonfiction/?action=click&contentCollection=Books&referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2Fbooks%2Fbest-sellers%2F2014%2F11%2F30%2Fhardcover-nonfiction%2F&region=Header&module=ArrowNav&version=Right&pgtype=Reference
Jump up^ "Christian Book Expo 2009: Christian Book Award". Christianbookexpo.com. Retrieved July 6, 2012.
Jump up^ "The New York Times Best Sellers". The New York Times. Retrieved March 23, 2014.
Jump up^ "John C. Pollock Award for Christian Biography". Beeson Divinity School Samford University. Retrieved March 23, 2014.
Jump up^ "The Christophers". The Christophers. Retrieved March 23, 2014.
Jump up^ Richard Weikart, "Metaxas' Counterfeit Bonhoeffer: An Evangelical Critique: Review of Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy", California State University. [1]
Jump up^ "Review of Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy: A Righteous Gentile vs. the Third Reich". Journal.ambrose.edu. September 3, 2010. Archived from the original on July 20, 2012. Retrieved July 6, 2012.
Jump up^ Green, Clifford (October 5, 2010). "Hijacking Bonhoeffer". The Christian Century. Retrieved September 8, 2012.
Jump up^ "Nonfiction Book Review: Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy: A Righteous Gentile vs. the Third Reich by Eric Metaxas, Author". Publishers Weekly. Retrieved 2 October2015.
Jump up^ Klamm, Judy. "Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy by Eric Metaxas". Kansas City Public Library. Retrieved 2 October 2015.
Jump up^ "BONHOEFFER by Eric Metaxas". Kirkus Reviews. Retrieved 2 October 2015.
Jump up^ Metaxas, Eric. "Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery by Eric Metaxas". Harpercollins.com. Retrieved July 6, 2012.
Jump up^ Eric, Metaxas (February 16, 2001). "No More Pluto, No More Taupe". NYTimes.com. The New York Times. Retrieved 19 August 2015.
Jump up^ Eric, Metaxas (December 25, 2014). "Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God". WSJ. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 19 August 2015.
Jump up^ "Salem Media Group and Eric Metaxas Join Forces with a New Daily Show". PR News Wire. CAMARILLO, Calif. Retrieved 1 March 2015.
Jump up^ "Have you heard the Eric Metaxas Show? Highlights Ahead!". www.ericmetaxas.com. 13 June 2015. Retrieved 10 December 2015.
Jump up^ "Life, God, and Other Small Topics: Conversations from Socrates in the City". Retrieved August 18, 2015.
Jump up^ "Socrates in the City". Retrieved April 14, 2014.
Jump up^ "Search Results for "red eye metaxas"". Fox News. Retrieved August 18, 2015.
Jump up^ "About BreakPoint". Prison Fellowship. Retrieved November 17, 2014.
Jump up^ "Obama says faith mandates him to care for the poor". The Washington Post. May 23, 2012. Retrieved July 6, 2012.
Jump up^ "Rise of Anti-Semitism in Europe, Threat to other Faiths & Democracy Addressed at Hearing". Chris Smith. February 27, 2013. Retrieved July 22, 2014.
Jump up^ "Eric Metaxas CPAC 2013". YouTube. March 16, 2013. Retrieved July 22, 2014.
Jump up^ "CPAC 2014 - Eric Metaxas, Author". YouTube. March 7, 2014. Retrieved July 22,2014.
Jump up^ "The Canterbury Medal Dinner". The Becket Fund. 2014. Archived from the originalon July 4, 2014. Retrieved June 16, 2014.
Jump up^ "Great Defender of Life Dinner". The Human Life Review. 2014. Archived from the original on May 30, 2014. Retrieved June 16, 2014.
Jump up^ "Hillsdale". Hillsdale. 2014. Retrieved June 27, 2014.
Jump up^ "Liberty University Baccalaureate Speaker Eric Metaxas Fortifies Graduates for a Life of Faith, Receives Honorary Doctorate". PRWeb. 2014. Retrieved June 27, 2014.
Jump up^ "Easter Convocation Will Bestow Doctor of Divinity Degrees". Sewanee: The University of the South. 2015. Archived from the original on September 7, 2015. Retrieved August 18, 2015.

External links[edit]

Collective Intelligence and Quaker Practice

Collective Intelligence and Quaker Practice

te CII home // CIPolitics home

---

Collective Intelligence and Quaker Practice

The assumption is that God is present in the decision-making group and is equally accessible by every member of the group ("that of God in everyone", "the Inner Light"). The group seeks unity by seeking a decision ("sense of the meeting") which is consistent with the promptings of this Light. The unity is a unity of the heart as well as the head, and is not necessarily unanimity. Friends try to allow the Spirit to work among them and lead them to a wise decision. The group becomes wiser than the individual because it partakes of the wisdom of all its members, empowered by the Spirit.

-- Barbara Rose Caldwell http://friendscouncil.org/web/Literature/LitontheWeb/DecisionMaking.html

by Leonard Joy <leonardjoy@igc.org>


The ways in which society generally provides for collective discernment and decision making are ill designed to tap our collective intelligence and do much to explain our collective inability to discern and pursue the common good. The fact that adversarial debate is likely to fail to respect all needs and legitimate interests-and, at best, provides for compromise-is fairly readily grasped. Where not all voices are equally heard, the neglect of some concerns may be acute. And where there is no mutual caring between parts and whole there is pathology, even death.


But even when it is understood that inclusion, equal voice, and non-adversarial discourse is desirable, this understanding by itself proves inadequate to tapping the wisdom of the whole. Of recent years, considerable attention has been paid to the management of meetings and a number of different approaches to collective decision making are now available. These variously emphasize 

fostering creativity (brainstorming), 

educing the full range of participants' stories and perspectives, 

facilitation that captures and builds upon the various contributions, 

nurturing a culture o

avoidance of negativity and fault finding, 

structuring a process from brainstorming to analysis to elimination, and so on. 


Thus, we have "open space," "world café," "appreciative inquiry," "integral public practice," "dialogue," "goldfish bowl," and a host of patented techniques and checklists for running effective meetings. 


Fetzer's report Centered on the Edge, which explores the essential conditions for tapping into collective wisdom, notably draws little on these. Neither does its conclusions suggest that any of them would be found to meet all necessary conditions in which collective wisdom is arrived at. Indeed, the report could be read to suggest that these conditions still elude us.

Such a conclusion would, I believe, be unduly pessimistic. I have many experiences of sustained decision making in which, in my judgement, collective wisdom prevailed . I shall now examine the practice that supported this and consider whether its preconditions have general application. The practice in question is the Quaker practice of decision making. The fact that it is approached as "a meeting for worship for business," in particular, raises the question of its more general applicability. 


Let me anticipate and say that, approached as a meeting for discerning the common good, the practice stands up well in secular contexts.

The appended extracts from a Quaker Faith and Practice describe the practice. They also describe its mystical roots-the belief that "there is that of God in everyone," and that this can be experienced so that discourse can be "Spirit-led." This may be seen as, at best, an esoteric practice out of reach of, hardly to be seriously considered for adoption by, people generally. 


I would argue that it is too easy to be distracted by words and that the spirit of what Quakers do is eminently accessible to all. The challenge lies in leading those whose daily habit of mind and state of values development is not of the Quaker disposition and their habitual meeting behaviors not those that they need to manifest if they are to participate in the discernment of collective wisdom. 


Here the connection between individual and collective transformation, and the role of leadership, becomes apparent.


The essentials of Quaker practice, translated where necessary into secular terms, are as follows (no special order):


1. grounding of all participants in the desire for the common good
2. ensuring that all voices are heard and listened to
3. respect for all-both participants and those outside (but affected by) the decision making process
4. respect and caring for the agreed legitimate interests of all
5. maintaining community-loving relationship-as a primary concern
6. grounding of all participants in their own humanity and their experience of it during the meeting 

7. sensitivity to interdependence-open systems thinking
8. speaking out of the silence (the state of being personally grounded)


9. addressing the clerk/facilitator not one another
10. speaking simply and not repeating what has already been offered


11. contributing personal perceptions and convictions-speaking one's own truth-without advocating that all should act on it


12. the commitment to air dissent
13. not using emotion to sway others while being authentic with the expression of feeling
14. distinguishing "threshing" meetings from meetings for decision making
15. preparing factual and analytical material for assimilation prior to meetings for decision
16. the role of the clerk in offering syntheses of the "sense of the meeting" that are progressively modified until there is unity
17. the role of the clerk in resolving difficulty in coming to unity (see appended notes page)
18. decisions are made not by majority vote, nor by consensus, but by unity
19. the organizational structures that bring to bear the voices of many collectivities


The implications of these are seen as follows:


1. grounding of all participants in the desire for the common good

Quakers start their business process with a period of silent worship in which they aim to center themselves in that of God within or, in the case of universalist Quakers, in the sense of loving kindness to-and identity with-all creation, or, in the case of Buddhist Quakers, in the compassionate, non-attached, no-self. In so doing, what they all have in common is that they are putting their egos in place to serve the task rather than using the task to serve their egos. They are also opening to the awareness of the larger whole, the greater good; and they are inwardly joining together in holding the meeting community in their care.

All this derives from a culture held and evolved over the past 350 years. This is not something that can be expected from those who are not party to this culture. In many cases, however, it is possible even in a secular context to hold a few moments of silent recollection of the gravity of the business in hand and centering in the spirit which all are enjoined to hold. Even where this seems difficult to invoke, it is possible for a tone to be set at the beginning of business and for agreement to be reached that the meeting is to discern and serve the common good. For those at early stages of values development, it may not be immediately possible to aspire to more than the search for "win-win" solutions to problems. But even this may be enough to start with to engage people ultimately in an appreciation of, and desire for, the common good and to lead them, beyond tolerance of those that they would not join, to a sense of mutual appreciation and concern. And it is possible to require that the ego should serve the task and not the other way round and make people mutually accountable in this regard.

2. ensuring that all voices are heard and listened to

It is the task of the clerk-or facilitator-to ensure this. In a Quaker meeting it is understood that all voices will be heard and that there need be no competition to be allowed to speak.

3. respect for all persons-both participants and those outside (but affected by) the decision making process

This, again, is a tone that may be set and held by the facilitator given support from participants in holding one another accountable. It may be given to understand that participation is contingent upon maintaining a code of conduct whose principles may be made explicit. (See Annex.) Ability to sustain respectful behavior is likely to depend on the observance of (para 4)

4. respect and caring for the agreed legitimate interests of all

In secular situations, especially, it is important to make the legitimate interests and concerns of all parties explicit, agreed, and subject to the explicit commitment of all to uphold. The goal is to move beyond this to mutual caring, but simple acknowledgement and respect will go a long way to supporting the emergence of collective wisdom.

One implication of this is that, legitimate interests and concerns being explicit, hidden agendas become easy to name and to call into question. In a Quaker meeting, there would, should such a situation arise, be a call for silence and discernment of the presence or absence of the Spirit and a searching for a Spirit-led way ahead.

None of this should ignore or deny the necessity for trust. In situations of existing extreme distrust the possibility of progress is likely to depend on providing for accountability, generally by an external body. However, our prime concern here is our inability to be wise together even where there is no overt enmity and antagonism. Even in such situations, there may be an underlying fear of loss to be calmed. The ability of the clerk/moderator/facilitator to earn everybody's trust is essential. All must feel that their perceived legitimate interests will be heard and protected.

5. maintaining community-loving relationship-as a primary concern
In a Quaker meeting, a decision is never a victory for one view or another. A good-Spirit-led-decision is one that not only results in sound practical consequences, it is one that maintains the loving community. Even should there be those (seldom more than one or two) who cannot unite with the decision arrived at, they are nevertheless willing to stand aside trusting the wisdom of, and maintaining their love for, the meeting. The function of the clerk in ensuring the articulation of dissent, of making sure that it is fully received (and felt to be truly heard) and "labored" with, then assessing the readiness of the meeting and dissenters to move on to a minute of decision, is critical.

6. grounding of all participants in their own humanity and their experience of it during the meeting 

Quakers use silence to punctuate a meeting to allow for such grounding. In secular contexts, it is likely to fall primarily to a facilitator to be sensitive to the need for grounding and to help people to ground themselves in what they are feeling and the roots of their feeling. This reflects an underlying understanding that there are powerful and-when tested in community-reliable ways of knowing that do not depend on rationality. Helping people to tap into what they know makes particular demands on a facilitator's skill and training.

7. speaking out of the silence (the state of being personally grounded)

In a Quaker meeting, ideally at least, silence is allowed after each contribution to allow it to be fully absorbed and to allow subsequent contributions to flow from a grounded state. In my experience, this is perhaps the greatest challenge in changing the habits of secular discourse.

8. sensitivity to interdependence-open systems thinking 
A major task of a facilitator is to support open systems thinking. This implies understanding the wider context in which a concern-and the sought for response to it-arises. It requires becoming clear about the system of which the concern is the indicative state variable and the implications of interdependence for the common good, the good of the whole.

9. addressing the clerk not one another 

The effect of this is to reinforce the sense that each contribution adds a new piece or perspective to the total picture rather than canceling or trumping others' perspectives.

10. speaking simply and not repeating what has already been offered

This is about the avoidance of tricks of speech designed to bully or obfuscate with sophisticated rhetoric or to impress by weight of words. In secular situations, a facilitator may ask for brevity and avoidance of repetition and, as necessary, summarize the essence of an overblown presentation and check with its author that this was an accurate summary. While, in non-Quaker meetings, several people might feel the need to amplify and underline a contribution that they agree with, Quakers wishing so to do will respond with "That Friend speaks my mind" thus saving time and assisting the Clerk to gain the sense of the meeting.

11. contributing personal perceptions and convictions-speaking one's own truth-without advocating that all should act on it

This, again, is about contributing to a greater understanding rather that attempting to confine the understanding to one perspective. Each is seen to hold, potentially, a piece of the truth and all contributions have their place in the collective perception of the greater truth.

12. the commitment to air dissent

Unity-the essential goal-is not possible if some withhold dissent-especially if there is intent to subvert or subsequently disown a decision. Openness is essential. Truth is seen to emerge from consideration of all perspectives. Establishing this as a shared understanding and commitment requires explicit discussion where it is not to be taken for granted. The norm that solidarity is expressed by withholding dissent is turned on its head. The task of the facilitator is to make it safe for people to express dissent.

13. not using emotion to sway others while being authentic with the expression of feeling
Authenticity is key. Authentic, grounded expression comes with evidence of the emotion behind it. This is not simply appropriate and permissible, it is what has to be. But any simulation of emotion in order to affect others is entirely inadmissible and should be discouraged and discounted by the facilitator. A Quaker Clerk's call for silence after such a breach calls attention to it and puts it in perspective.

14. distinguishing "threshing" meetings from meetings for decision making
Not all meetings need be designed to arrive at decisions. Where decisions are complex or where they are likely to reveal major differences of feeling or understanding, preliminary meetings to air these differences and to hear from one another may be desirable and help the process of mutual understanding. Quakers designate such meetings as "threshing" meetings that serve to focus down on what is essential.

15. preparing factual and analytical material for assimilation prior to meetings for decision

Decisions need to be informed by data and analysis and provision is needed to prepare this and for its critical review prior to decision making.

16. the role of the clerk in offering syntheses of the "sense of the meeting" that are progressively modified until there is unity

The Quaker Clerk attempts periodically to summarize the state of the collective perception as the decision making process evolves. This is a way of testing the degree of convergence and divergence of perceptions and revealing where the picture is still less than clear. This poses no difficulty in secular situations though it not always an accepted role of meeting facilitators.

17. the role of the clerk in resolving difficulty in coming to unity 

Among Quakers, there arise situations when, having labored with dissenting Friends, there seems no immediate hope of resolution of differences. Where immediate decision is avoidable, and generally where decisions are weighty even where there is no dissent or evident unease, Quakers allow time for "seasoning" a decision to allow for further reflection and for unease to surface. But there are times when decisions need to be made and action initiated. The role of the Clerk in sensing the willingness of the meeting to proceed is critical. The guidance offered to clerks in such situations might well be adopted in secular contexts also. (For guidance offered to clerks in such situations see appended notes.)

18. decisions are made not by majority vote, nor by consensus, but by unity

Friends do not vote or act on the will of the majority. In Quaker experience, it is possible for all to unite in a decision, even when some have reservations. A united Meeting is not necessarily of one mind but it is all of one heart. (See Annex.) This may be too high an expectation in secular contexts, but a willingness to settle for compromise is antithetical to seeking wisdom. Moreover, in a secular context, it may not be easy even to secure the willingness of a minority to "stand aside." While there are those whose concerns are not reflected in a proposed decision, the work of discerning wisdom needs to continue. This is likely to hinge on securing agreement about the legitimacy or otherwise of concerns and on the consequences for sustaining community of alternative decisions. Compromise is only acceptable where legitimate concerns are otherwise irreconcilable.



19. the organizational structures that bring to bear the voices of many collectivities

It is one thing to secure the wisdom of a gathered group of people, it is another to find the collective wisdom of hundreds, thousands or millions of people. The Quaker structure of Monthly, Quarterly, Yearly meetings and General Conference and the process-by which concerns may emerge at any level and evoke the response of the whole-has proven effective in providing for inclusion and voice and the manifestation of collective intelligence. While it is true that the participants in Quaker process are self-selecting for a willingness to observe the culture, it is argued above that effective leadership can do much to promote it and to educe collective wisdom.

It should be noted that these principles do not help to resolve matters of taste. Rather they apply to matters of values. If the answer to the question, "Why should we do that?" is simply a matter of personal preference, we may not be able to come to unity.

Of course, there are other, more general, considerations to be observed for successful decision making processes. It is helpful, even essential, to structure discussion in a sequence in which aspects of concern may be considered according to some necessary critical path while expecting nothing to be resolved until the picture is whole. Both clerks and facilitators have a key role in this and in making clear what constitutes relevance at any time. At first, deliberate avoidance of structure or sense of anything being irrelevant may be the way to go. The trick then is to know when the picture is beginning to form and to help it do so.

Within the framework of principles offered here, there is a variety of devices that may be used to promote process. Some of these offer further useful principles. "Appreciative inquiry," for example, emphasizes the need to focus on what should be rather than on diagnosis of what is wrong. Others offer ways of, for example, encouraging equality of voice by separating ideas from their authors and thus avoiding bias that might come from the influence of status. Many of these might find circumstances in which their application might prove appropriate and productive within the larger framework of principles.

What is clear, however, is that the manifestation of collective intelligence in collective decision making depends on behavior exhibited outside decision making forums. The effectiveness of collective decisions depends on the actors' ability and willingness to walk the talk and to be held accountable for this. The connection between individual behavior and societal transformation becomes apparent. The collective decision and the values expressed in the process of its making also affect the individual. Individual and group/organization/society both advance and constrain one another.

---

Annex

Extracts from Faith and Practice: A Guide to Quaker Discipline in the Experience of the Pacific Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends

(1) "Meeting for Worship for Business"

"Being orderly come together proceed in the wisdom of God not in the way of the world not deciding affairs by the greater vote [but by] assenting together as one man in the spirit of truth and equity, and by the authority thereof."
-- Edward Burrough, 1662 (Abridged from Britain YM QF&P, 1995. 2.87)

There is little record of how Friends' unique practice for conducting business evolved, but there can be no doubt that it is derived directly from Friends' faith. It is guided by three core beliefs: that there is that of God in everyone, that each can experience that of God within, and that divine guidance will lead to the realization of a single shared truth.

From these beliefs it readily follows that a Friends' Meeting for Business is a Meeting for Worship in which business is conducted by seeking God's will in the decisions that are to be made. The silent worship with which the Meeting for Business both opens and closes, connects individuals to the Spirit. It prompts them to be sensitive to and grounded in the Love that binds the Meeting.

Anyone may call for silence in the course of a meeting, when resolution of a matter is proving difficult, when there is a need to reflect on what has been said, or to return the Meeting to a spirit of quiet reverence. A call for silence is always a call to worship, to focus on the guidance of the Spirit, to listen with a loving and open heart. As in other Meetings for Worship, Friends may feel moved to speak out of the silence on the matter in hand.

Friends strive to observe a discipline of plain speaking, expressing themselves simply and directly. This discipline extends to not interrupting or interjecting remarks. The occasional "That Friend speaks my mind" shows support for a viewpoint. Friends maintain order and ensure full participation by waiting to be recognized by the Clerk and usually standing to speak, addressing all comments to the Clerk and not to one another.

Although Friends study and discuss issues in advance, they should not come to Meeting for Business with minds made up. Seeking to be reverent to that of God in themselves and others, Friends should offer their personal perspectives and avoid taking fixed or adversarial positions.

Friends pay careful attention to all expressions, searching for the truth behind the words, aware that it may come from unexpected places. However, the voice of an experienced Friend is often especially valuable, providing wisdom that the Meeting needs.

Listening is at the very heart of Friends' faith and practice. By listening to the divine in ourselves and in each other, Friends are better prepared to find God's will. Friends should not listen for the most convincing argument but for the greater understanding to which each contributes and to which each may assent. A sense of the Meeting evolves from the interplay of all contributions and the skilled guidance of the Clerk. When unity is realized, the outcome is deeply satisfying. It produces a sense of the rightness of the decision and a loving connection between members.

Friends do not vote or act on the will of the majority. In Quaker experience, it is possible for all to unite in a decision, even when some have reservations. A united Meeting is not necessarily of one mind but it is all of one heart.

Unity requires active participation: where there is division over an issue, it is especially important for everybody to be heard. When Friends withhold expressions of dissent in the interest of avoiding controversy, the unity that results is spurious. The collective wisdom of the Meeting can be realized only to the extent that all participate in seeking it.

When Friends come to an issue with conflicting views, they are challenged to pool their knowledge and experience, and to experience the joy of discovering a new understanding that encompasses all of these elements in a far better form than previously imagined. This process requires love, courage, trust, and an ability to truly listen and change.

In coming to unity, Friends draw upon feelings and contemplative insight, not simply upon rational thought. Honest emotions are essential to discernment, but they should not be abused to sway the Meeting's decision. Time is also essential for "seasoning" important decisions. Sometimes decisions must be deferred for reflection and to allow residual unease to surface.
Decisions made in unity are not victories or defeats when Friends remain faithful, preserving the loving unity and higher purpose of the Meeting. Business conducted as a corporate endeavor in a Meeting for Worship enables Friends to move forward with confidence and joy.

(2) extracts from "Friends Process for Making Decisions"PRINCIPLES 

The Quaker method for reaching decisions is based on religious conviction. Friends conduct business together in the faith that there is one divine Spirit, which is accessible to all persons. When Friends wait upon, heed, and follow the Light of Truth within them, its spirit will lead to unity. This faith is the foundation for any corporate decision.

Friends do not resort to a vote to settle an issue. Friends expect to find unity. This unity transcends both consensus, which retains only the views common to all present, and compromise, which affirms none of the positions presented. Unlike a decision resting upon a majority vote, one made according to a true "sense of the Meeting" can avoid overriding an unconvinced minority. It allows unforeseen insights to emerge and it enables Friends to modify previously held opinions. They may then agree on a new and better view of the matter under consideration.

Friends begin Meetings in which decisions are to be made with a time of silent worship. In the stillness, they recall that a business or committee meeting is, in fact, a Meeting for Worship to deal with certain matters of importance. Until the Meeting can unite in a decision, the previous policy remains unchanged or no action is taken on new business, as the case may be.

Friends try to seek divine guidance at all times, to be mutually forbearing, and to be concerned for the good of the Meeting as a whole, rather than to defend a personal preference. Thus, having once expressed a view, a Friend is expected to refrain from pressing it unduly, at length or repeatedly. The grace of humor can often help to relax the tensions of a Meeting so that new light comes to it.
The authority and responsibility for decisions on the affairs of the Meeting reside with the members, and those present at a regular monthly Meeting for Worship for Business have the authority to make decisions for the Meeting. Until the Meeting can unite in a minute, the previous policy remains unchanged.

Most Meetings for Business proceed without distinction between members and non-members, and this benefits the Meeting. On occasion, a decision may call for invoking this distinction. At such times, non-members should not respond to the Clerk's call for affirmation of a proposed minute, and the Clerk may so remind the Meeting.

Friends' way of conducting business is of central importance. It is the Quaker way of living and working together. It can create and preserve the sense of fellowship in the Meeting, and from there it can spread to other groups and decisions in which individual Friends and Meetings have a part. Thus it contributes to the way of peace in the world.
-- George Selleck, New England Yearly Meeting Faith and Practice, 1966 p.116

DECISION-MAKING PRACTICE 

Friends Meetings ordinarily take care of their business at their regularly scheduled monthly Meeting for Business. However, the Clerk may call for a special session to deal with an urgent matter. Adequate notice of a Called Meeting (see Glossary) should be given, particularly if the topic is controversial.

Committee clerks and members should inform the Clerk ahead of time when they have business to come before the Meeting. As items are dealt with, the Clerk makes sure that all present have opportunity to express their views. Friends address the Clerk, not one another. Friends who stand to speak find that their ministry is more faithful, concise, and better heard. Each vocal contribution should be something that adds to the material already given.

The Meeting's work of discernment is a corporate search. The clerk does not direct the communication toward certain predetermined goals, but keeps dialogue open, promoting free and full exploration of the matter under consideration, while fostering a sense of the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The clerk is responsible for discerning and stating the sense of the Meeting and presenting a minute when unity has been reached. Members of the Meeting may sometimes assist the clerk in this. If a member believes that the clerk has incorrectly discerned the sense of the Meeting it is appropriate to speak up. Similarly, someone may propose that unity actually has been reached and suggest that a minute should be recorded.

When the wording appears satisfactory, the Clerk asks Friends if they approve the minute. If Friends approve the minute without objection, it is recorded as an action of the Meeting. If, after careful consideration, minor editorial changes appear to be needed, the Clerk should have authority to make them. Those changes should be noted at the next Business Meeting, when the minutes of the previous session are read.

If the business before the Meeting is difficult, anyone may request a pause for silent worship. This can often lead to finding a way forward. Sometimes a member with doubts about a minute favored by most of those present will voice his or her reservations but release the Meeting to move forward. This will be recorded in the minutes as "one Friend standing aside." In rare cases a member may ask to be recorded as standing aside; however this practice is best limited to occasions when that member's professional or legal status might be jeopardized by implied consent to a minute.

Another way of avoiding a deadlock is for the Clerk or another member to suggest that a matter be held over for consideration at a later time. It may be helpful for the Clerk to ask a small committee, including Friends of diverse leadings, to revise the proposal in the light of the concerns and objections, and report to the next Meeting. If the matter is urgent, the committee may retire from a given session to return to it with a revised proposal.

DEFERRING DECISIONS
Many decisions are of a routine nature and can be handled during one Meeting for Business. Business Meeting accomplishes much of its work by trusting standing and ad hoc committees to have adequately seasoned matters beforehand.

Some matters are better served by, and deserve, longer periods of deliberation. It is standard practice to hold over decisions in matters of membership, marriage and nominations for at least one month before a final decision. The extra time of seasoning allows Friends to labor together in an orderly exploration of unexpected objections and thus better to discern God's will. This is characteristic of Friends' sense of "good order." (See Glossary)

Items may be held over for later consideration, as committees or the Clerk deem necessary, and it is generally helpful to name the date when it will be reconsidered. The absence of Friends with a specific interest from Business Meeting (after notice has been given) should seldom be a factor in delaying a decision.

It is the responsibility of the Clerk to discern when it is appropriate to delay a decision or refer a matter back to a committee for further seasoning. If the Clerk has decided in advance that no decision will be made at a given session, he or she should inform the Business Meeting before discussion begins. The Clerk should also indicate the possible consequences of a delayed decision.

IN TIMES OF DIFFICULTY

Another highly important issue in arriving at a decision, and one that calls for a good deal of inner discipline and seasoning on the part of the members, is the matter of what constitutes unanimity. If it were necessary for every member to feel equally happy about the decisions reached, we should be presuming to be settling matters in an angelic colony and not among flesh and blood members of a local Quaker meeting! From the point of view of myself as a member of a meeting, the kind of unanimity that is referred to is a realization on my part that the matter has been carefully and patiently considered. I have had a chance at different stages of the process of arriving at this decision of making my point of view known to the group, of having it seriously considered and weighed. Even if the decision finally goes against what I initially proposed, I know that my contribution has helped to sift the issue, perhaps to temper it, and I may well have, as the matter has patiently taken its course, come to see it somewhat differently from the point at which I began...I have also come to realize that the group as a whole finds this resolution what seems best to them. When this point comes, if I am a seasoned Friend, I no longer oppose it...I emerge from the meeting not as a member of a bitter minority who feels he has been outflanked and rejected but rather as one who has been through the process of the decision and is willing to abide by it even though my accent would not have put it in this form.
-- Douglas Steere, The Quaker Decision Making quoted by David O. Stanfield in A Handbook for the Presiding Clerk

Sometimes Friends have business that seems to require decision, but their differences appear unresolvable. Usually no action is taken, and the matter is held over with the expectation that unity can and will be found. Deference to the objections of even one or two members demonstrates the great reluctance of the Meeting to override any of its members - especially when matters of conscience are involved. Some people mistakenly believe that this procedure provides each member with a veto. Rather, Meetings place a high value on unity.

Unity does not imply unanimity of the entire membership of a Monthly Meeting. A Meeting may proceed in the absence of, or (more rarely) over the objection of one or more Friends present while recognizing that objections may contain, or lead to, new light on the matter being considered. Friends with hesitations may choose to state that they are "standing aside" when the final decision is made, or, rarely may ask to be recorded as standing aside.

Meetings may occasionally act even over the objections of one or more Friends. Due weight should be given to the insights of any Friend long experienced in Friends meetings, whose judgment and service have been proven over considerable time. A "stop" in such a member's mind should be heeded. If, on the other hand, the one who is withholding support is known for persistently objecting, then the Clerk may call for a period of silent worship and, if so led, announce that the weight of the Meeting seems decidedly to favor the action and the proposal is approved. The same principle applies even on occasions when there is more than one objector.

One of the Clerk's more demanding responsibilities is to tell the difference between those occasions when it is right that the objector's views be heeded, and those times when the Meeting has reached unity and, despite objection, it must act. Friends seek neither unanimity (a matter of votes), nor consensus (a resolution of differing opinions). Friends seek unity in the Spirit. When the Clerk is clear that the Meeting approves an action, even in the presence of dissenting views, it is his or her obligation to articulate the sense of the Meeting in a minute and so record it unless others present also object.

Any ministry in Meeting for Business may contain elements essential to discovering a Spirit-led decision around which the Meeting may unite. This is true of the ministry of experienced Friends, newcomers, and Friends whose ministry others often find unhelpful. Before considering going forward over the objection of a Friend, the Clerk and the Business Meeting must be confident that it has labored in good faith with the objecting Friend and that the Meeting has done its best to understand the objection and that the objecting Friend has had spacious opportunities to understand the leading of the Meeting to proceed.

It is unusual for a sense of the Meeting to be achieved over one or more objections, and there are good reasons for this. The objector(s) may actually be right, or the proposed action may profoundly strain their bonds to the Meeting. Sometimes concern for their feelings may weigh heavily in favor of deferring the decision. Meetings should not ignore these features of a decision taken over objection of some Friends, although the Meeting may still have to proceed. It is important to ensure that objections have been faithfully considered, and that everyone is satisfied that this has happened.

Where there is discomfort, Oversight or Worship and Ministry Committees should act quickly to heal wounds, lest they fester and spoil the community of trust. If Friends feel that the Meeting should not have recorded a particular minute, they should bring their concern to the Worship and Ministry Committee (which has the responsibility for the care of Meeting for Business) the Clerk, or the Meeting for Business. It is important for differences to be aired and faced rather than to try to muffle views or circumvent attitudes for fear of dissent. Friends believe that truth, fully and openly sought, will carry its own conviction, and that unity will be found in truth and love.

It must always be remembered that the final decision as to whether the minute represents the sense of the meeting is the responsibility of the meeting itself, not of the clerk.
-- London Yearly Meeting, To Lima With Love, p.19

THRESHING SESSIONS

Occasionally an issue may be complex, controversial, dependent on technical details, or emotionally charged so that significantly more corporate preparation is required than can reasonably be accomplished in Meeting for Business. In such cases the Meeting should arrange a series of separate meetings. If technical details are crucial, study sessions may be in order. If matters are emotionally charged or members need to be heard in a receptive setting, Quaker dialogue or worship sharing may be helpful. If extended preliminary exploration is needed, threshing sessions may be appropriate.

Threshing sessions derive their name from the assumption that through them the chaff might be separated from the grain of truth, clearing the way for later action on the issue. However, no corporate decisions are made at such meetings.

The Clerk or moderator of a threshing session is responsible for ensuring that everyone has an opportunity to speak, drawing out the reticent and limiting redundancy. Special efforts must be made to see that Friends of all shades of opinion can and will be present. To the extent that Friends who hold a given view are absent, the usefulness of such a meeting will be impaired. Knowledgeable people should be asked to present factual or complex material and be available to answer questions. A recorder should take notes of the meeting for later reference.

CLERKS AND CLERKING

The Clerk coordinates the business of the Meeting. The Clerk sees to it that all pertinent business and concerns are presented clearly to the Monthly Meeting in good order for its deliberate consideration, united action, and appropriate execution. The following guidelines apply generally to the Clerk of any Friends Meeting or committee.

The Clerk is a member of the Meeting, who enjoys the confidence of its membership and who, in turn, respects and cherishes its individual members and attenders. He or she seeks the leading of the Spirit for corporate guidance. It is essential for the Clerk to be familiar with Faith and Practice and other Quaker literature. The Clerk should be able to comprehend readily, evaluate rightly, and state clearly and concisely an item of business or concern that comes to the Meeting. He or she should be able to listen receptively to what is said, and, through spiritual discernment, to gather the sense of the Meeting at the proper time.

The Clerk attends Meeting for Worship and keeps close to the work of committees, in all of which he or she should be considered an ex officio member. In order to be aware of the condition of the Meeting, it is essential that the Clerk attend Meetings of the Worship and Ministry and the Oversight Committees.

The Clerk presides at all Business Meetings. (An Alternate Clerk may preside when the Clerk is unable to be present.) The Clerk prepares the agenda, and encourages committee Clerks and others to provide reports, concerns, proposals, and other materials in advance. The Clerk's care in preparing the agenda, and judgment of the relative urgency of each item greatly facilitates the Meeting's business. The Clerk sees that correspondence that comes to the Meeting is not neglected.

The Clerk judges the relative urgency of items and sets the pace of the Meeting to assure full and balanced expression of the views of the members. He or she does not express personal opinions, but if an essential viewpoint has not been presented, the Clerk asks the Meeting for permission to offer it. If the Clerk is led to take a strong position on a controversial matter, the Alternate Clerk or another appropriate person is asked to preside and take the sense of the Meeting.

As actions are taken, the Clerk makes sure that assignments are clear and responsible persons and committees are notified promptly in writing. The Clerk signs all official papers and minutes, including minutes of sojourn and travel, letters of introduction and certificates of transfer or removal. If legal documents and minutes are involved, it is good practice for both the Clerk and the Recording Clerk to sign. The Clerk also endorses travel minutes and letters of introduction presented by visiting Friends.

The Clerk ensures that the activities of the Monthly Meeting are coordinated with those of its Quarterly and Yearly Meeting and that representatives to these gatherings are appointed. Reports, minutes and other concerns must be communicated to the proper officers on schedule. Business and concerns received from Quarterly and Yearly Meeting must be delivered to the proper persons and committees and to the Meeting as a whole.

How Quakers Make Decisions (It's Not Just Consensus!)

How Quakers Make Decisions (It's Not Just Consensus!)

How Quakers Make Decisions (It's Not Just Consensus!)
http://quakerspeak.com/quaker-decision-making-consensus/

This video features 

Eden Grace, Friends United Meeting’s Global Ministries Director.

--------------------
Discussion Questions:

Have you ever heard someone characterize the Quaker decision-making process as “consensus”? Do you correct them?

Eden Grace says, “We start from a really strong affirmation and presupposition that God has a will. God has a will for us as individuals. God has a will for us as a spiritual community in the Meeting, and God has a will for this world.” What do you think Eden means by this? Do you share this belief? What does it mean for your life?

Eden uses the example of community discernment over the color of a carpet as an example of a decision that seems trivial but becomes transformational. Have you had an experience of coming together with a group of people to decide something trivial and emerging transformed?

---------------
Transcript:

The way Quakers do business is a really significant part of our spirituality, our practice, our identity as Friends, and that isn’t always something that’s easy to understand upfront because I think for most Christians and most people in the world, a business meeting is sort of a tedious thing that has to be gotten through. In my understanding of Quaker spirituality and Quaker theology, a business meeting is an opportunity for sacramental encounter with God.

Sometimes people talk about how Friends make decisions by consensus.That’s a secular term that has some kind of meaning that people understand: ok, you’ve all agreed on something. But that isn’t the nature of our spiritual experience and our theological understanding of what we’re doing. We’re not looking for a place where we all agree,“alright, good enough, let’s just do that because nobody is objecting.”We are looking for obedience to the will of God.

And so we start from a really strong affirmation and presupposition that God has a will. God has a will for us as individuals. God has a will for us as a spiritual community in the Meeting, and God has a will for this world. And God wants to communicate God’s will. We don’t have to puzzle it out, it’s not that hard. You don’t have to have a PhD. to figure out the mind of God, because God by God’s nature is making that mind known to the community. All we have to do is get out of our own way.

And believe enough to be able to stick with it though all of the ways in which that process exposes our sins and weaknesses and failings to ourselves and to each other, the ways in which we can get ugly with each other. That’s a holy process. My experience has been that Friends actually really do stay in it; stick with it.

You can say, “well, God doesn’t care what color the carpet is in the fellowship hall. Why does that really matter? Why do we have to seek God’s will for color of the carpet? Let’s just choose the carpet.”

And maybe there’s a whole lot of of other issues that get raised up around the carpet that we pick for the fellowship hall. Maybe different colors have different psychological meanings in peoples’ lives and you can get into color theory, or maybe there’s off-gassing from this brand, or maybe this company uses child labor in Pakistan. A carpet decision can raise all kinds of other stuff. And maybe God does care about the carpet, because certainly God cares about the child laborers in Pakistan and God cares about the toxic waste of the carpet manufacturing processes. And God cares about us as a community walking through that process together, the spiritual fruits that can come from seeking deep unity on the choice of a carpet. It’s not about the carpet, it’s about the transformation of the world through the choice of a carpet.

So yes, we say that each and every decision facing the Meeting is a holy and sacred and sacramental opportunity. There is no secular work.

=============
Comments:

---
Joan Liversidge
06/05/2014 AT 6:27 PM

Thanks so much Eden for your deep and meaningful description of our decision making process. I so often am put in the positon of trying to explain our meeting for worship with a concern for business and your words will help me the next time I am called to that opportunity. The entire Quaker Speak has been so inspirational – and what a joy to see Friends that I know and love and meet new people in our Beloved Community. Much gratitude to Jon and Friends Journal and others who are making this possible!

---
Sam Hays
06/05/2014 AT 8:45 PM

I find secular and spiritual to be synonymous and God to be optional.

---
Tom Stanley
06/05/2014 AT 9:17 PM

Dear Friends

Thank you for showing us an insiders view of the “theological” practices of your faith traditions.
Tom Stanley

---
Chester Kirchman
06/06/2014 AT 3:08 PM

Thank you Friend Eden. Your last statement hits home with me. ‘There is no secular work.’ has been a center in my Life. All that is done by all people, is spiritually influenced. When a group does as you presented earlier, ‘alright, good enough’, they appear to be disregarding spirit within. It is similar to just accepting certain rites, rituals, and ceremonies. Some religious organizations do not believe in questioning their system. With growth in belief of a Global Consciousness, this Quaker view, you ended with, is valuable for the residents of earth.

---
Joan VanSickle Sloan
06/07/2014 AT 1:10 AM

What a simple, straight-forward way to describe Quaker meeting for worship to conduct business!

---
Hank Schutz
06/07/2014 AT 11:51 AM

I regret that I am unable to interpret or understand phrases such as “the will of god” or “god wants…” If god is the all-powerful creative deity, the words “will” and “want” have no semantic trsction for me.

---
Sam Hays
06/07/2014 AT 12:27 PM

Hank,

I sympathize with your remarks. “Theist” may not be the default position of life, with “atheist” being a diversion. “Secularist” may be the default position of life, with “Theist” being the diversion.

“God” is one metaphor for spirituality. “Weather” and “electricity” are a few of the alternative metaphors.

---
Maria Bradley
07/26/2014 AT 10:01 AM

Eden does give a beautiful, clear understanding of the Quaker way of doing business. The example of the carpet is especially useful, as it is SO often mentioned.

Joan Liversidge and Chester Kirchman add more material for contemplation, especially for this Friend who has difficulty with the concept of an anthropomorphic God – yet can find no better way to express that ineffable sense of connection that can happen in worship.

Thanks to all involved in the gift of Quakerspeak! It too is a valuable gift to Friends and seekers.