Home » What's Presbyterian? » Church governance structure » General Assembly 06 » About Assembly » Consensus decision making

A trial of consensus decision-making at General Assembly

Understanding Consensus

As a result of the review of the 2004 General Assembly meeting, it has been decided to trial consensus decision-making during one aspect of business at this year’s upcoming Assembly.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with consensus decision-making, it is a process of seeking the common mind of a meeting without resorting to a formal vote. It is characterised by engaging in genuine dialogue that is respectful, mutually supportive and empowering, while seeking to discern God’s will. Consensus is reached when one of the following occurs:

all those entitled to make decisions are in agreement about an outcome (unanimity)
most are in agreement and the few for whom it is not their first preference nonetheless accept that they have been fairly heard and could live with the proposed outcome, and so agree to consensus being recorded as the mind of the meeting.

Consensus procedures assume commissioners are eager to listen to insights from others that may help in the search to discern God’s will for the way forward. We hope there will be an attitude of respectful anticipation as all commissioners’ work towards the common goal. Rather than striving to succeed by “winning” a debate, commissioners are encouraged to submit to one another to find the common mind, so that God’s way may be the “winning” way.

Agreement on an outcome is not limited to approving the wording of a proposal. That may be what is agreed, but it may also be that consensus is reached about a modified proposal or in agreeing to reject a proposal or to send it back to the group presenting the issue for further work. It might be that we agree to hold a variety of positions that are not reconcilable.

By promoting collaboration, consensus procedures help the Assembly seek the mind of Christ together. Consensus encourages prayerful listening to one another and growth in understanding. It also requires discipline on the part of all the participants (and the Moderator ) as we abide by its rules. The aim is to arrive at a common mind rather than simply the will of the majority, so that we can confidently say, “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us…” (Acts 15:28 ).

Consensus decision-making assumes each commissioner has God-given gifts and insights and that all contributions are worthy of consideration and respect. As we acknowledge the Lordship of Christ in this way, we can build koinonia (fellowship), and a climate of trust is able to be developed.

In the General Assembly meeting review carried out following 2004’s gathering, there was support for the use of consensus in our Assembly decision-making. At GA06, we will trial consensus procedures as we deliberate on one issue, which will be advised at Assembly. Your feedback will be sought in a post-Assembly review to determine whether it becomes standard procedure for other church meetings.

We have modelled the consensus process we’ll be using on that which is used by the Uniting Church of Australia . More detail about the process will be included with the Assembly reports that will be mailed out in the next few weeks, and in the meantime I’ve noted below the key characteristics of the process for your information.

The Rev Pamela Tankersley
Moderator-Designate

Overview of process for making decisions by consensus

The process we will be using for making decisions by consensus is characterised by three key stages:

The information session
The deliberative session
The decision session

Each of these stages is explained in more detail below:

I) The information session

The aim is to resource the Assembly with information from the range of possible perspectives so that an informed way forward may be discerned.
This resourcing includes a written report and verbal presentation about the matter being considered.
Questions of clarification are also asked at this point.

II) The deliberative session

This part of the process includes open discussion and the development of proposals.
Open discussion is characterised by listening to the various viewpoints presented; debate around the different opinions is encouraged.
At points during open discussion, the Moderator will seek a show of voting cards (orange for support, blue for opposition) to discern what Assembly’s view is on the matter.
As discussion proceeds, the session will move to proposal development. A firm proposal may be developed for discussion and decision, or if no clear view is evident, the matter may be referred to dialogue groups for further discussion.

III) The decision session

The proposal including any amendments is written up for all to see.
A summary of arguments for and against is heard, and then the Moderator facilitates a continual process to discern the level of support (or lack of thereof) for the proposal. Commissioners show their support or opposition by a show of voting cards.
The Moderator will ask questions at various points during this process to help facilitate Assembly’s deliberations and discern whether consensus has been reached.