February 22, 2005
By Walt Wiltschek

As part of an underlying shift of culture, the World Council of Churches (WCC) central committee has adjusted its rules and adopted a consensus decision-making model. The move promises to strengthen the participation and commitment of member churches, going well beyond the original concern that started the process of change.

The former president of the Uniting Church in Australia, Rev. Dr D'Arcy Wood, recalls a rocky period in his denomination's history.

The Uniting Church began as a merger of three denominations in 1977, and "Within about 10 years, there was the beginning of some dissatisfaction with our rules for making decisions," Wood recalls. A seemingly simple process began to address this concern, but it soon grew into a much wider consideration of how decisions were made in the church.

For example, says Wood, a group addressed questions like "How do we include people and work together?" and "How do we make decisions that are reflective of the diversity of the church as much as we possibly can?"

For inspiration, the church turned to the Friends (Quakers), who have a long tradition of using consensus decision-making; to some other churches in the United States; and to Australia's aboriginal people, who do not have a parliamentary style of decision-making in their culture.

This led to a set of new rules – of what became known as the consensus model – being adopted by the Uniting Church in 1994. Wood says modifications continued long after that, however. For one thing, the aboriginal model wasn't bound by agendas and tight schedules. "We had to modify for our Western ways of doing things," he says.

The model also required a significant education process, both for the moderator (who carries a large amount of responsibility) and for all those participating in the meeting. "And the education goes on after 11 years," Wood says with a laugh.

He admits that he was a skeptic at first, especially that the process could work with large groups like synods and national conferences, but, "It has worked. My doubts have been silenced, really."

Learning by doing

When the World Council of Churches began to look at its own decision-making process, it took note of the Uniting Church's approach.

The issue arose within the WCC via the Special Commission on Orthodox Participation, which examined ways of making sure that the Orthodox voice would be heard in WCC decisions. The parliamentary system can often result in a significant minority voice still ending up on the "losing" end of a vote, so alternatives to the voting system were sought.

That commission, to which Wood was appointed, developed a paper focusing on consensus. The document progressed through the organization in numerous stages, growing in size and in reach.

Some WCC committees had essentially been using a consensus style before. Others, like the programme committee, began trying out the new model. Finally, at the current February 2005 central committee meeting, a proposal, known as Rule XIX, reached the agenda, proposing to make consensus the new rule of conduct for all WCC proceedings. Central committee members adopted this new rule on Tuesday 22 February.

General secretary Rev. Dr Samuel Kobia said in his address to the committee on 15 February that it was time to consider such a change.

"Some member churches have already found in their own internal life and witness that making decisions by consensus is a better way of reflecting the nature of the church as described in the New Testament," Kobia said. "Some other member churches argue very strongly that the WCC can bear witness today within a world which is marked by conflicts, tensions and war not only by its programmes, but also by the way it does business."

Both Kobia and Wood alerted committee members that the new way of doing business would take some adjustment.

"It's like driving a car," Wood said at the opening session, while introducing the method. "You can be given a manual and instructions how to drive, but that's quite different from actually beginning to drive. We'll be learning how to ‘drive,' by doing this week."

Kobia assured the body that concerns raised had been addressed, and that "security valves" had been put into the process to prevent a "paralysis" of business. For example, if consensus cannot be reached, but participants feel that the urgency of business requires moving forward, a business item can shift to a vote if 85 percent of them approve – a move that is expected to be rare. Some items, such as elections, finances, and constitutional changes, will still always be done by vote.

"It's not a magic wand which solves all our problems," Wood said, "but it has much potential to help the WCC."

Building a common mind

Eden Grace, a central committee member from the Religious Society of Friends – Friends United Meeting, urged participants to be flexible in trying out the new model.

"Listen to each and respond to each other in a spirit of open listening," Grace said. "We don't just accumulate more messages in favour than against. We build a common mind. It's a much more dialogical approach than we've had in the past."

That approach played out through table discussions following presentations of issues, particularly after potentially controversial ones such as human sexuality. Each central committee member received an orange card to be displayed if he or she was feeling "warmth" toward a concept or a speaker's idea, and a blue card to display if they were feeling "coolness" toward a concept or idea. Holding blue and orange up together suggests that it is time to move on.

Some who stepped to the microphones feared that it might intimidate speakers if they saw cool blue cards emerging around them. The drafters of Rule XIX admitted that the process does take some getting used to, but they also noted that the cards were not to be waved about, but rather subtly held at chest level to help the moderator discern the mood of the group.

Committee members were also repeatedly coached not to jump up and immediately rebut another speaker's opinion or to simply say again what another speaker had already said. The goal of consensus, they were told, is to build on the wisdom and insight each speaker offers to work toward a common mind – "seeking the mind of Christ."

Anne Glynn-Mackoul, an Orthodox US lawyer and central committee member who helped draft Rule XIX noted that this common mind does not necessarily mean unanimity, however.

"It can also mean most are in agreement and others allow the decision to go forward," Glynn-Mackoul said. "Or the decision-making body can agree there are various positions that can be held, or the matter can be postponed."

The WCC business committee would also be given a greater role in discernment. The committee could discuss whether an issue is too divisive even to reach the floor, perhaps handling it in a different way such as an "ecumenical conversation" for discussion, or a hearing session where no action is taken.

Yes, all this could take more time, the drafters of the consensus rule agree, and that might require bringing fewer business items to meetings. "We may need to streamline the agenda," Glynn-Mackoul said, "but I don't know that a crowded agenda is the best choice."

Many delegates will get their first taste of the consensus model at the ninth assembly in February 2006. Grace thinks that most will like it once they grow accustomed to it.

"It will be a new thing to experience the fruits of consensus in ways we have not been accustomed to using," Grace said. "Now we need to own it and experience it and discover the ways it will change us."

World Council of Churches
Walt Wiltschek is an ordained minister in the Church of the Brethren (USA) and editor of the churches' monthly magazine "Messenger."