Skip to main content

When to Correct Others

I came across the Beevers Grid in my recent reading of Practising Affirmation by Sam Crabtree, during his discussion of the question, "when is an issue important enough to correct?" It is usually that case that I often find myself in situations where correction is needed. I imagine we all do. For me working as an economist, correcting others is actually an active part of the job. As a writer, I also find myself engaging in debates on national issues where again I usually have to offer an opinion. In church, as part of the leadership, "correction" is one of the tasks of church leadership. They say timing and judgement is everything. And when it comes to correction, I just never know when it is the right time or situation to correct someone. Sometimes, I correct merely to  magnify my own ego. Other times people have found it is useful and productive. It was therefore a great joy to come across the Beever's Grid. A surprisingly straightforward framework of when to correct someone and when to just let it go. The grid is shown below.
The vertical axis indicates the importance of the issue being considered. The bottom reflects issues of low importance such as trying to resolve whether President Michael Sata prefers only wearing green socks. It is an issue of virtually no consequence to anyone apart from His Excellency. Moving up the axis, toward the top we reach issues that are important, issues that have life-and-death significance, perhaps for a great many people. Between the top and the bottom is an array of issues and their relative importance or unimportance.

The horizontal axis indicates my certainty that I am right. Toward the left are issues about which I don’t have the foggiest clue (what is the name of the man who made the first chocolate biscuit?) . The right are issues about which I am sure that I’m sure before Jesus, the angels, and all the witnesses that could be summoned that I am right. For example, I am sure that my late Father's middle name was Joel. But here is the thing, there are surprisingly few of these issues where I am absolutely sure. Any issue of controversy can be plotted on this matrix.

The main lesson I picked up from Beever’s Grid is that that the upper-right quadrant simultaneously contains the issues (1) that are important, and (2) for which there is virtually no possibility that I will be shown to be mistaken. My aim therefore should be to : reserve my conflict, my arguments, and my persistent corrections to that quadrant. I must also strive to keep that region small.The fruitfulness of correction tends to come from a smaller region than I usually assume. I have a tendency to default to making that region larger than is fruitful.  I am desperately asking the Lord's help in making this as reality. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I am what I am by Gloria Gaynor

Beverly Knight closed the opening ceremony of the Paralympics with what has been dubbed the signature tune of the Paralympics. I had no idea Ms Knight is still in the singing business. And clearly going by the raving reviews she will continue to be around. One media source says her performance was so electric that "there wasn’t a dry eye to be seen as she sang the lyrics to the song and people even watching at home felt the passion in her words" . The song was Gloria Gaynor's I am what I am . Clearly not written by Gloria Gaynor but certainly musically owned and popularized by her. It opens triumphantly: I am what I am / I am my own special creation / So come take a look / Give me the hook or the ovation / It's my world that I want to have a little pride in / My world and it's not a place I have to hide in / Life's not worth a damn till you can say I am what I am The words “I am what I am” echo over ten times in the song. A bold declaration that she

The Shame of Worldly Joy

Only a Christian can be joyful and wise at the same time, because all other people either rejoice about things that they should be ashamed of (Philippians 3:19) or things that will disappear. A Christian is not ashamed of his joy, because he is not joyful about something shameful. That is why the Apostle Paul in [2 Corinthians 1:12] defends his joy. He says, I don’t care if everyone knows what makes me happy, because it is the ‘testimony of my conscience.’ He means, let other people can be happy about base pleasures that they are afraid to admit; let other people rejoice in riches, fame, or popularity; they can be happy about whatever they want, but my joy is different. ‘I rejoice because of my conscience.’ A Christian has a happiness that he can stand by and prove. No one else can do that. They will feel embarrassed and guilty if their happiness is found in something that is outside of themselves. They cannot say, ‘this is what makes me happy’. But a Christian has the approval of his

Preaching to the Conscience

Preaching to the conscience means something concrete. It means explaining the listeners’  obligations to God, their failure to meet those obligations, their impotence to make up for that failure, the eternal consequences of that failure, and God’s astounding grace offered to all who will humble themselves, repent, and believe the good news.  In other words, preaching to the conscience is provocative. It seeks to disturb the comfortable and to comfort the disturbed…. The great obstacle to this kind of preaching is when  the conscience is awakened, people react. The humble repent, rejoice, and enter God’s kingdom. The proud become angry: “Who are you to tell me I am a sinner?” or “This is not the God I learned about in Sunday school.”  Men dominated by the fear of man will not preach to the conscience. If you’re seeking a reward from men as you preach the gospel, you may get it, but that’s all—you won’t get anything from God.  The world needs pastors who fear God, love sinners, and under