leadership

Our Prideful Leaders & The Crack We Give Them

Christian Buckley — Wed, 18 May 2011 16:41:09 -0700

Why is it that, for the most part, you don’t have to look any further for a great example of prideful leadership than the largest church on the block? We like to criticize our politicians and business leaders for their unchecked egos and unrestrained power, but the truth is we are growing the same kind of crop in our own backyard.

Now if you are already thinking of a way to condemn that first sentence, please take a pause and hear me out. I am not saying that all “mega” churches are being led by “mega” egos. I am also not saying that it is impossible for a large church to be properly run by a humble pastor who is being held accountable by humble men and women.

What I am saying is that pride, in its purest form, is the crack of modern Christianity – it invades, seduces, and destroys everything in its path.

What I am saying is that pride, in its purest form, rather than sex, drugs, liberalism, homosexuality, etc., etc., etc. is the great evil facing the Church in modern America and it seems like we just don’t care.

I have had the privilege and sorrow of attending, supporting, and at times helping to lead very large powerful churches in Southern California. I have seen churches grow and expand to the rafters after which buildings are built, barns are added, and egos swell. More than one of them is now collapsed and I have knowledge, which I would gladly not have, that numerous huge American churches are hanging in the same peril. At the helm of each of them is a powerful, insulated, unquestioned pastor.

Pride is leading to our destruction. What starts as pure motivation followed by response, blessing, and growth leads inevitably to power and stature. Men and women who once listened and submitted to counsel begin to shrug it off and take offense. We begin to think that we – I – know what God wants and that I am the appointed one – the anointed leader – the one that God is speaking to. We begin to believe that those that dissent are less spiritual and those that support are clear minded. Pretty soon there is no one within earshot that has any ability to bring corrective wisdom and no one within reach who can reproach.

The problem is that we like it. Big churches and big leaders get to do big things. When asked where we attend church we like to name off the big church – followed almost immediately by the famous pastor at its head. We like that it somehow reflects positively on us – like we should be applauded for being in the right place.

The problem is that we like the crack because it makes us feel good and we are more than happy to let our pastors have it as long as the good times role. But pride leads to the exclusion of accountability and the exclusion of accountability, in our lives and the lives of our leaders, ends inevitably in destruction.

But don’t take my word for it – take it from the leper, or should I say, King Uzziah. (2 Kings 15; 2 Chronicles 26)

King Uzziah took the throne of Israel at the age of sixteen and reigned as king for about fifty-two years as one of the greatest kings in the history of Israel. When he was young he sought the Lord, did right in His eyes, and listened to the counsel of the prophet Zechariah and others. Because of this, his fame spread far and wide and he was greatly helped by the Lord. But when he grew strong, he grew prideful and stopped listening to counsel. He became unfaithful to God. When he was confronted by the priests, he raged against them and the Lord because they called him out – they tried to make him accountable. The result -- he was immediately struck by leprosy. He was sent away from the temple, lost the throne to his son, and lived alone in a small house until his death. He was remembered as a leper rather than a great king.

“As long as he sought the Lord, God made him prosper. But when he was strong, he grew proud, to his destruction.”

Perhaps the single greatest moment in American history was when President Washington gave up the keys to the presidency. We didn’t want him to. Heck, we would have made him king if we could of. But Washington said no and walked away. A self imposed limit of accountability that changed the face of America forever.

The second question is this: Who are you accountable to and who is accountable to you?

And the first?

Am I really willing to choose humility and accountability over power, fame, and success if the Lord wills?

If not, we have no hope.

Everything Labeled "Emergent"

Chuck Bomar — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:05:15 -0700

We live in a world of labels and categories. Everything has to fit into something. And perhaps among the widest of these categories is the one labeled, "Emergent."

I've been told that I'm Emergent. Sometimes I'm asked, but recently a few people have just labeled me that. When this issue is brought to my attention I always respond with a question, "What is your definition of Emergent?" I had one person tell me that I'm Emergent because I used the word "journey" in a message. Another was concerned because I did an overview of a book of the Bible (Ecclesiastes) in a talk versus going verse by verse and phrase by phrase. I've had another person assume I'm Emergent because my churches website didn't have the exact words, "Triune God" anywhere on it (as if I don't believe in a "Triune" God simply because it's not explicitly articulate on a website).

Do those things really define someone as "Emergent?" If so, I think that's crazy.

I've yet to hear anyone ask me a theological question. No one has asked me what I think about a specific statement or view proposed in a book by someone that actually claims to be Emergent. I've yet to have anybody ask me my view of Scripture. And nobody has asked me my definition of "Emergent." It just seems like anything outside of anybody's personal realm of normality is to be labeled Emergent...?

My hunch is that if I were asked some of the questions above I would be more conservative than many of those asking the question. And my guess is if I asked for everyone to post their definition of what "Emergent" is we would have hundreds of different definitions. And I would assume if I asked what sort of things would "tip you off" on someone being Emergent, we would have a list thousands of ideas long.

That to say, I'd love for the label to disappear. Not because I've been labeled it by a few people, but because it's not really a label or category anymore. It seems to have simply become anything different than we're used to. But, if me at times being a little "unorthodox" in order to bring the unchanging gospel message to a lost world labels me Emergent, I guess I'll take the label. Even if I went to one of the most conservative seminaries our country has to offer...

True Leaders in an Interconnected World

bo.white — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 10:14:44 -0800

(this is part 5 of 5 of a series of posts on leadership in an interconnected world)

If you have been keeping up with the previous posts, then you'll note that Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Rosa Parks, Steven Spielberg, and William Shakespeare all contribute something to leadership in an interconnected world. To review, let me simply make 5 brief points.

In an interconnected world, leaders will have to:

1) work with people of clashing ideologies (see Lincoln in Goodwin's book Team of Rivals)
2) focus on something bigger than their job or themselves (to me Lincoln is the example again, but a case could also be made for Wilberforce)
3) utilize words carefully and understand that words do leave a legacy (see Jefferson's example)
4) know when to stay seated on principle and when to move ahead; sometimes staying still is progress (see also Rosa Parks)
5) understand who the storytellers are and how their influence shapes ideas (see how Spielberg and Shakespeare have shaped ideas)

This is, of course, not an exhaustive list, but in our interconnected, globalizing world, there are some things that cut across cultures in this list that are worth contemplating. For example, whether you live in the U.S. or in the developing world, the storytellers matter and should be noted. Also, if working with someone of another culture, what words we leave behind are important and our ability to focus on something bigger than what is directly in front of us will be useful for endurance when conflict arises. Some more good reminders can be found at a blog entitled 'What's Best Next' in this post entitled 'What do Leaders Produce?'

Of course, since we're all connected, this means that an underlying challenge for all leaders is that there will be more communication disseminated than we even realize, therefore the chance for miscommunication and misrepresentation also grows exponentially. With this in mind, perhaps time is a friend of leaders and not simply a clock, god, or tyrant. The test of time may indeed separate true leaders from counterfeits.

The Legacy of Storytellers: Quiet Leaders of Every Generation

bo.white — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:51:07 -0800

(here is part 4 of 5 on leadership in an interconnected world. This particular post is an excerpt of a longer study I have done on storytellers as heroes and the ones who shape our identity and ideals)

In a world increasingly interconnected by visual media and web technology, emerging personalities and heroic personas will often arise in the midst of stories told that withstand the test of time. We are saturated with information, what remains in our minds amidst the onslaught of email, web pages, scrolling television updates, film clips, and advertisements will be personas that we not only resonate with, but who reveals the longings deep within that shape us all. Understanding that “in a world of networks, individuals, companies, communities, consumers, activist groups, and governments all have the power to be shapers,”[1] two artists have emerged above the rest in the cinema and theatre respectively. William Shakespeare continues to be the standard by which theatre is judged hundreds of years after his death, while the films of Steven Spielberg have so captivated our culture, that he is the single biggest money making filmmaker in history. The pervasive use of English as an international language has not only served to disseminate the works of each artist, but also helped each to shape the way people see the world.

Since our own identity as English speaking people can be verbally attributed to Shakespeare and at least in part, if not more, visually attributed to Spielberg[2] (who reframed our fears of swimming as well as our curiosity in alien life forms) we do well to remember that our identities are “formed in relation to other identities,”[3] and if our political context is changing, so will our perception of the heroic.

W.E.B Dubois, reflecting upon what a black person should do with their freedom, said that new independence ushered in an era “which must mean a time of intense ethical ferment, of religious heart-searching, and intellectual unrest.”[4] And quite possibly, we are living in such times of ‘intellectual unrest,’ when the heroic is being redefined by a new nationalism and a new interpretation of our nation at the same time. Yet, we as a culture must also understand that Spielberg’s images and stories are here to stay and now serve as reference points not only in cultural literacy, but also in our own identity and personal exploration. “Few among us are qualified to testify as to whether God is dead, or alive, or wandering somewhere in exile….Some authors are indeed dead, but not William Shakespeare.”[5] And no actor will feel accomplished in the modern era without at least a working knowledge of Shakespeare. Our identity as film goers includes a literacy of Spielberg and our identity as English speaking people includes a literacy of Shakespeare.

Spielberg and Shakespeare, though, are not simply linked artistically in terms of influence, but it’s in their own search for the heroic, that also links them to one another as well as to you and to me. In Shakespeare’s The Life of Henry the Fifth, the King makes his famous battle cry speech at Agincourt, calling us to the heroic journey by imploring that “he which hath no stomach to this fight, let him depart,”[6] but we will not leave, we will press on in search of ourselves in the hope that quite possibly, other people will recall “our names, familiar…as household words,”[7] remembered as significant. Finding meaning, honor, and significance is worth fighting for and worthy of our own internal and external scars.

Maybe it’s no surprise then, that Spielberg’s most acclaimed visual production outside of the cinema borrows from King Henry’s call to arms at Agincourt where “we few, we happy few, we band of brothers,”[8] are remembered by the next generation, not because we found ‘rest’ intellectually, but because we fought side by side for what we thought was right. And in doing so, became heroic.[9]

Today, in the midst of an information age and unprecedented technological opportunities, the political context isn’t as clear domestically and the murkiness breeds a hesitant heroism that is in search of itself. We are at war, but are not sure who we are heroically rescuing and therefore, Shakespeare not only provides a refuge, but also Spielberg allows us to escape, at least until we can find some more solid footing. In the absence of a mission as clear as Saving Private Ryan, we may simply be left trying to save ourselves with trusted friends, bands of brothers, who remind us of clearer days. In our ongoing search for heroism in the 21st century, stories do shape us.

Stories have influence and storytellers can create a common language for us all if we would listen.

-bo

[1] Thomas L. Friedman: The Lexus and the Olive Tree. Anchor Books, New York City, 2000, p. 206.
[2] “At the end of the 20th century, LIFE magazine named Spielberg the most influential person of his generation.” See also www.kennedy-center.org
[3] Kathryn Woodward (ed): Identity and Difference. Sage Publications, London, 1997; p. 35.
[4] W.E.B. Dubois: The Souls of Black Folk. Bantam Books, first published in 1903, 1989 edition; p. 142.
[5] W.E.B. Dubois, p. 6.
[6] William Shakespeare: Life of King Henry the Fifth, Act 4, scene 2.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] See Spielberg’s produced mini-series ‘Band of Brothers’ and the ‘Greatest Generation’ by Tom Brokaw for further reference.

Speaking Out While Sitting Down

bo.white — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:08:56 -0800

(this is part 3 of 5 of a series dealing with leadership in an interconnected world)

In the last post, I discussed the power of words and the legacy that our words can leave behind. The example being, Thomas Jefferson, whose words have transformed our country and have often been the envy of other nations. In this piece, part of leading in the 21st century will not only be linked to skills, but also to a sense of timing as well as self awareness. And here, the example for me is Rosa Parks because she linked both timing and self awareness.

Parker Palmer in his book Let Your Life Speak speaks of Rosa Parks in the following terms:

"Rosa Parks sat down because she had reached a point where it was essential to embrace her true vocation -- not as someone who would reshape our society but as someone who would live out her full self in the world. She decided, "I will no longer act on the outside in a way that contradicts the truth that I hold deeply on the inside. I will no longer act as if I were less than the whole person I know myself inwardly to be."

Where does one get the courage to "sit down at the front of the bus" in a society that punishes anyone who decides to live divided no more? After all, conventional wisdom recommends the divided life as the safe and sane way to go: "Don't wear your heart on your sleeve." "Don't make a federal case out of it." "Don't show them the whites of your eyes." These are all the cliched ways we tell each other to keep personal truth apart from public life, lest we make ourselves vulnerable in that rough-and-tumble realm.

Where do people find the courage to live divided no more when they know they will be punished for it? The answer I have seen in the lives of people like Rosa Parks is simple: these people have transformed the notion of punishment itself. They have come to understand that no punishment anyone might inflict on them could possibly be worse than the punishment they inflict on themselves by conspiring in their own diminishment."

So, while Lincoln could bring together clashing ideologies and Jefferson could write words that will stand the test of time, Rosa Parks embodies in one defiant moment a sense of timing and self awareness. Parks didn't try to spark a movement, rather Parks grew tired of moving, when the right thing to do was stand still. The hymn writer puts it this way: "On Christ the solid rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand,". Parks stood on something solid and in her being knew that all other ground was shifting sand. And leaders in the global era will need to understand that at times, standing still amidst a changing, fast paced, 'the world is flat' environment is not only the right thing to do, but the one that leads others to do likewise. Sometimes, not accepting the status quo (which in a web based world is so often changing) is the thing that separates leaders from those who have become so used to living as sheep. So, what in your life and in my life needs to change and what needs to stay the same? In order to best answer that question, we may have to look again to Rosa Parks and simply say, 'no thank you, I think I will sit right here." And then, we stay put, until something or someone moves us. Sometimes sitting down is the best way to speak up.

-bo

Remembering the Power of Words

bo.white — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:52:02 -0800

(this is part 2 of a 5 part series on leadership and legacy)

In part one of this series, I began with Abraham Lincoln and why some of his leadership traits are not only necessary in the 21st century, but in fact, leaders like Lincoln remain elusive and rare. In this series, I am processing in my own mind, but then also building a case that if leaders are going to be effective in a globalized world, then certain traits will need to be prevalent. In looking at the legacy of Abraham Lincoln two primary traits needed for leadership in today's globalizing world stand out: 1) Lincoln's resolute focus on a higher purpose and his commitment to something greater than himself and 2) Lincoln's amazing ability to work alongside people with 'clashing ideologies' and to get people who disagreed to move in the same direction.

Now, in this installment, I want to focus in on yet another trait necessary for leadership in an interconnected world and one that has considerable relevance for bloggers and readers of blogs. Leaders in an interconnected world (particularly where English is often the primary tongue of global business, technology, and higher education) will still need to learn how to use words effectively. And perhaps, the best wordsmith in American history remains Thomas Jefferson.

Historian Stephen Ambrose, though, doesn't set up Jefferson as a great leader. In fact, he writes,

"Thomas Jefferson did not achieve greatness in his personal life. He had a slave as a mistress. He lied about it. He once tried to bribe a hostile reporter. His war record was not good. He spent much of his life in intellectual pursuits in which he excelled, and not enough in leading his fellow Americans toward great goals by example. Theodore Roosevelt called him our worst President,"
(To America, p.2)

The enigma of Jefferson doesn't stop there. Ambrose continues,

"He ignored the words of his fellow revolutionary John Adams, who said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free...Jefferson left another racial and moral problem for his successors, the treatment of the Native Americans...The author of the Declaration of Independence threw up his hands at the question of women's rights,"
(To America, p. 5)

In fact, Eric Metaxas, in his book Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery, adds that at one point Wilberforce wrote a letter to "then-president Thomas Jefferson," to plead the case for the emancipation of slaves and for Americans to stop their slave trade. Jefferson never sent an adequate reply.

But, with all of the legitimate criticism leveled at Jefferson, Stephen Ambrose concludes that "Jefferson's declaration that all men are created equal is quoted all over the world. Everyone, everywhere, knows these words," (To America, p. 7). Jefferson also wrote the documents that frame our current rights to universal education (something that eludes many citizens in many country, see also the Millenium Development goals) and Jefferson also wrote the following words: "all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, the opinions in matter of religion," protecting the freedom of faith and public worship in this country. Think about it.

Thomas Jefferson, with all of the myriad of negative qualities one could muster, drafted the documents that still undergird this entire nation. This singular man drafted the Declaration of Independence (which we fight for and of which so many nations are envious of to this day). This singular man drafted the reasoning behind why everyone in this nation has an opportunity to attend not only school, but church and because of Jefferson's words there are even faith based schools in our country. In a world that has too many web pages, too much information, and not enough contemplation, let's not forget that words really do matter and leaders in the interconnected information age should take more time to craft their literary legacy.

-bo

Learning from Lincoln: Leadership in the 21st Century

bo.white — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:35:40 -0800

This weekend, I finished reading Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, the Pulitzer Prize winning book by Doris Kearns Goodwin. I will make a confession: this book will linger with me for a long time--it's an amazing experience and if you allow yourself the time to get lost in its 19th century world for a while, this book could change your perspective on leadership in the 21st century. Growing up in Northern Illinois with regular trips to Springfield, I encountered Lincoln's heroic status at a young age and as I have grown older, I am simply more appreciative of Lincoln not simply as a leader, but also as a man.

The New York Times, in November of 2005, published the following words in regard to the book by Goodwin and more specifically in regard to Lincoln the leader:

"How did he do it? Goodwin deals with this question better than any other writer. Part of the answer lay in Lincoln's steadfastness of purpose, which inspired subordinates to overcome their petty rivalries. Part of it lay in his superb sense of timing and his sensitivity to the pulse of public opinion as he moved to bring along a divided people to the support of "a new birth of freedom." And part of it lay in Lincoln's ability to rise above personal slights, his talent for getting along with men of clashing ideologies and personalities who could not get along with each other." (the full article can be found here.

Let's reflect on the lessons as identified by this New York Times writer, but let's do so with an eye to faith and leadership in the 21st century.

1) "steadfastness of purpose"--instead of caving in to public opionion or trying to be trendy and relevant, Lincoln seemd to focus his energies on leaving a legacy. And I believe we'd do well to mimic his example.

2) "inspired subordinates to overcome their petty rivalries"--how many times have we seen teams split up or churches fall apart due to 'petty rivalries'? The phrase seems to haunt the present relationships being exhibited in Congress as well.

3) "his talent for getting along with men of clashing ideologies"--this may be one of the single most needed traits of leaders in a globalized era. Now, how will faith leaders within Christendom prioritize what's essential over and above what's not essential? Who will not only lead God's people, but who will also "get along with men of clashing ideologies," so that Christians can press forward with what's important instead of devouring one another in partisan debate?

Of course, there are many more lessons to draw and Team of Rivals is worth its own seminar or college class. For whatever reason, the world seems devoid of leaders who are willing to put a higher purpose above petty debate and rivalry. If you have a leadership role in any organization, do yourself a favor and read Goodwin's book. You won't be sorry and you may find yourself challenged to imitate Abraham Lincoln over a 100 years after his death.

-bo

The Church Cannot Die: Poetic Figures, Misunderstanding, and Reality

Nick Bogardus — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:43:34 -0700

This is taken from A.W. Tozer's book Man - The Dwelling Place of God.

Poetic Figures vs. Reality

The language of devotion has helped to create the impression that the church is supposed to be a band of warriors driving the enemy before them in plain sight and with plenty of color and drama to give a pleasing flourish to the whole thing. In our hymns and pulpit oratory we have commonly pictured the church as marching along to the sound of martial music and the plaudits of the multitude.

Of course this is but a poetic figure. The individual Christian may be likened to a soldier, but the picture of the church on earth as a conquering army is not realistic. Her true situation is more accurately portrayed as a flock of sheep in the midst of wolves, or as a company of despised pilgrims plodding toward home, or as a peculiar nation protected by the Passover blood waiting for the sound of the trumpet, or as a bride looking for the coming of her bridegroom.

Misunderstanding The Church's Role: Wincing & Sanctioning

The world is constantly lashing the church because she has no solution for the problems of society, and the religious leaders who do not know the score wince under the lash. Every once in a while some churchman in an acute attack of conscience does penance in public for Christianity's failure to furnish bold leadership for the world in this time of crisis. "We have sinned," cries the frustrated prophet. "The world looked to us for help and we have failed it."

Well, I am all for repentance if it is genuine, and I think the church has failed, not by neglecting to provide leadership but by living too much like the world. That, however, is not what the muddled churchman means when he bares his soul in public. Rather, he erroneously assumes that the church of God has been left on earth to minister good hope and cheer to the world in such quantities that it can ignore God, reject Christ, glorify fallen human flesh and pursue its selfish ends in peace. The world wants the church to add a dainty spiritual touch to its carnal schemes, and to be there to help it to its feet and put it to bed when it comes home drunk with fleshly pleasures.

Speaking In It's True Prophetic Voice

In the first place the church has received no such commission from her Lord, and in the second place the world has never shown much disposition to listen to the church when she speaks in her true prophetic voice. The attitude of the world toward the true child of God is precisely the same as that of the citizens of Vanity Fair toward Christian and his companion. "Therefore they took them and beat them, and besmeared them with dirt, and put them into the cage, that they might be made a spectacle to all men." Christian's duty was not to "provide leadership" for Vanity Fair but to keep clean from its pollution and get out of it as fast as possible. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

The Church Cannot Die

We are in real need of a reformation that will lead to revival among the churches, but the church is not dead, neither is it dying. The church cannot die.

A local church can die. This happens when all the old saints in a given place fall asleep and no young saints arise to take their place. Sometimes under these circumstances the congregation ceases to be a church, or there is no congregation left and the doors of the chapel are nailed shut. But such a condition, however deplorable, should not discourage us. The true church is the repository of the life of God among men, and if in one place the frail vessels fail, that life will break out somewhere else. Of this we may be sure.

A Plurality of Pastors

Brett Kunkle — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 00:00:00 -0700

Last week I wrote about the liabilities of the "Senior Pastor" model. The biblical text supports a model of church leadership that includes a plurality of pastor-elders, rather than a singular leader. Throughout the New Testament a pattern of plural leadership emerges:

Acts 14:23 And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed. (It is important to note that there were elders—plural form—in every church—singular form.)
Acts 15:2 And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue.
Acts 20:17 And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church.
Acts 20:28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with his own blood.
Philippians 1:1 Paul and Timothy, bond servants of Christ Jesus, to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, including the overseers and deacons.
1 Thessalonians 5:12-13 But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction, and that you esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Live in peace with one another.
1 Timothy 5:17 Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.
Titus 1:5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you might set in order what remains, and appoint elders in every city as I directed you.
James 5:14 Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.
1 Peter 5:1-3 Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed, shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight no under compulsion, but voluntarily…nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock.

The biblical evidence speaks for itself. The normative practice of leadership in the early church included a plurality of pastor-elders.

Catalyst Road Trip - Interview

brianwurzell — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 09:02:29 -0800

Catalyst Road Trip - Phoenix, AZ from brianwurzell on Vimeo

Also, see previous blog on CATALYST ROAD TRIP - CLICK HERE