"Standing aside" does not imply consensus

 The Quaker so-called consensus process is the complete opposite of sitting and waiting for God... at least in my experience of it. The egos are flying and the pressure to have your way is immense. 

When a person stands aside, it is similar to getting out of the way of an oncoming 18-wheeler. You arent doing it because it is right, true or good... or most importantly because it is God's will. You are doing it because everyone else in the room wants things their way and you are tired of these people tearing into your subtle body with their resentment.

And it isnt just the Lake Worth meeting where this happens. Note this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/quakerism/comments/17y5bxa/i_can_give_examples_of_monthly_meetings_which/

And non-Quakers who take a rational objective evaluation of Quaker consensus critique it as follows:

https://berkeleyjournal.org/2015/05/26/the-theology-of-consensus/


 Quaker meetings have a huge uphill battle in reconciling the truth in silence (the spiritual plane) with the truth at business meetings (the material plane). And when certain Quakers are convinced that person X is God’s gift to heaven and other Quakers are convinced that person X is the spawn of Satan, then there will not be consensus on how the meeting moves forward. Oh sure, there might eventually be a decision made, especially if 10 people approve of X and 1 person disapproves. then the 1 person “stands aside” and the other 10 people get their way… effectively the same as a 10-1 vote. And now we must take a pause for what may be the greatest quote of all time:

So when the majority gets their way, it does not mean that the decision made was true, right or good.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The gangsters in the Ministry committee at Palm Beach Quakers: we do what we want and then tell you about it later. Quaker process be gone!

Summary Report of My Outburst at the Lake Worth Quaker Business Meeting on Sept 10, 2023