On persuasion and leadership

I am thinking that the great overlooked factor in our Church is persuasion.

I frequently engage folks who are angry because the Church in some form has or has not done this or that. All kinds of allegations because the General Assembly approved something they did not like or the Presbytery did not vote as they wished. The blame is placed there, that theydid it again.

The simple truth is this. The presentation of arguments in various governing bodies and committees frequently takes on the quality of haranguing rather than persuasion. I have seen someone stand up in front of Presbytery and read from Romans as an argument, and then be angry because they Presbytery did not do what he wanted. However true or not true the passage may have been, it is not a persuasive strategy. If the Presbytery did not do what this gent wanted, it was partly due to his failure to use his three minutes at the mike in a way calculated to persuade.

I believe that if a person wishes to stand for something, it is incumbent on her to do it effectively. Making or opposing resolutions is so important that it requires thought, planning, and determination to give the Holy Spirit a chance by presenting arguments that can break through resistance. Reading from Romans or other similar strategies just does not do it.

Since Presbyterians allow for so little executive authority, the only way for leaders to operate is by persuading groups of people in a system where everyone has the right to oppose. What it means is that leadership is effective only to the degree that he or she can convince sometimes reluctant groups to go along. No one can make Presbyterians do anything against their will. The only way to operate is to convince them.