"A Mosaic of Minor Opinion"

I mentioned Rev. Brian Howard in a post a couple of days ago. He is a minister in the ARP, but unfortunately, I did not meet him at Synod. From reading his blog, I can tell that he and I don't see eye-to-eye on every issue, but, in his latest post, he makes some great points regarding the nature of debate at the Synod level. Rev. Howard writes:

There are few "big" speeches on the floor of Synod. Rather, there is a mosaic of minor opinion and point that makes up a larger picture.

[Emphasis his]. He is absolutely correct. While I witnessed some very well-thought-out, passionate speeches from the floor of Synod about various topics and from divers viewpoints, the fact of the matter is, there weren't any "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington"-esque speeches. There were no grand "Friends, Romans, Countymen, lend me your ears..." moments. Instead, debate mostly consisted of several short, to the point speeches. A delegate (or in my case, observer) really has to pay attention to the big picture--the mosaic as Rev. Howard calls it--to get a sense of what is going on.

While I disagree with his assessment of the Synod's debate on the nominees put forward by the Board of Nominations (I believe the Synod has the right and the duty to ensure that this committee, as well as all other committees, are best serving the interests of Synod and can at any time call into question any aspect of a committee's work and it should not be considered "micro-management"), I would encourage you to read his post to help get a sense of just how Synod feels: 2010 ARP General Synod: Themes & Thoughts