i think the point here is not blindly following the majority at all, but rather the quiet usage of the majority. in the example of Bob i do not see any blind following. rather, i see a Ni vision and Fe interaction with the congregation to move them to a place they didn't necessarily either know about or want to go, with people gradually realizing it was somewhere they didn't want to go. even accepting those rules as a parish is rather Fe - for the sake of harmony to stay with the greater church. Fi would be more likely to have the congregation discuss whether it wants an overhaul and how it should go about doing that, rather than quietly and subtlety changing things.
so that you are aware, you did seem very quick to dismiss it in this situation. it was like PeaceBaby took the time to write this enormous post and commentary and you were like, oh, no, that's just church rules. i understand now that you were still in the process of assessment, but it wasn't very clear, so that you understand why there was/is some frustration directed towards you. perhaps that has happened with other Fe examples too. Ti requires a more stringent analysis than Fi does, and it's easy for Ne to see through a lens of something being a "Fi problem", whereas a Fe/Ti user might seek greater confirmation of accuracy before being willing to use that lens.
i agree with you completely here.Taking the example of Te, I think Te sometimes misses stuff that Ti considers in depth and has put a lot of thought into. If Te users have a working model already, they are unlikely to consider something new, but unsure, even if it could have the potential to be much better. That doesn't mean that they would never consider doing something that breaks that pattern, but it's true that they would be more inclined to go with what's been proven.
I think maybe Fe is the same. They are less likely to consider a new way of going about handling people if they've found something that works for now. It's possible that Fi has a better way, but it's also possible that it won't be practical or that it may fail, so usually they go with what they know. They might occasionally seek out Fi perceptions, but it is true that they would be more inclined to habitually operate by the rules that have already been put in place. Does that seem analogous or no?