The other day, during the time period usually reserved for Meeting for Worship, the Upper School decided who their officers and representatives would be. They didn’t vote as other schools would do; rather, they used Quaker process. They reached consensus by listening to each other and through discernment characterized by silence.
Our students met in and pretty much filled up the Meeting House. Scattered among the kids were quite a few faculty who did not participate in the discussion. The Torch clerk began by asking that the meeting begin with a moment of silence. She then asked the two individuals who were nominated for a particular position (say, Torch representative to the Board of Trustees) to leave the Meeting House so that the discussion could begin.
In each case, students who were moved to speak rose, one at a time, to share their views and opinions. This was done in an incredibly respectful way. Every nominee was praised and declared suitable. But each person who spoke also shared a view as to why a particular classmate would be their first choice. I was struck with the absence of rhetoric. Then it occurred to me; students were not speaking in a manner which would result in their being the most convincing, as if their objective was to “win” the debate. Rather, each student spoke respectfully, leaving rhetorical room for other views and opinions to be expressed including those that might run counter to their own. There was space for multiple points of view and for a sense of the meeting to develop which would not require one person or group to capitulate or retreat from a position.
Our Clerk was magnificent because she encouraged dissent and differing views, did not rush and was, frankly, inscrutable as regards her own opinions.
This was beautiful stuff and, I thought, a lesson in the potency of listening, respect and tolerance. It was not debate; it was truth seeking.