Category Archives: article

A Call For A New Kind of Leadership Book

I hope you will allow me a few moments for a bit of a rant and then a plea.

The Rant
I have done a lot of reading on leadership over the last year and specifically the last two weeks for a pastoral leadership course I am taking. I am not a huge fan of leadership books because instead of feeling encouraged and inspired, I usually end up feeling depressed and beaten down. Maybe you have experienced something similar and without getting into detailed critiques of modern leadership books (I will post some reviews of the books I read soon), I want to express something that I feel is lacking on the subject. There is a saturation of material written (more than you ever need to read) on the success stories of leaders, who in mythical and legendary fashion are portrayed as impenetrable to lapses in judgment, bad decisions and mistakes. In many cases, they are gloried in leadership literature to the place where they are no longer even real. Maybe that is the nature of history, when we either forget someone’s flaws because they did great things or we forget the good because of a mistake they made.

The problem is that whenever we view leaders (anyone for that matter) like this, they end up losing their humanity and thus their reality. We then begin to compare the worst of our leadership with the best of someone’s falsely perceived leadership prowess. Consequently, it leads to everyday leaders ending up feeling like failures. Instead, why can’t we read and understand leadership realistically and truthfully and as a result with hope, inspiration and honesty.

The Plea
Therefore, I plea…I beg…someone to write a book about the real, unpolished and non-airbrushed view of leadership in a way that is honest and hopeful. To write stories like Moody, who was told at the beginning of his ministry not to preach because his public speaking skills were so bad. Or, stories like Billy Graham who was told by Bob Jones of Bob Jones University that he would never amount to anything. These stories for me don’t make Moody or Graham any less of a leader. In fact, these stories and perspectives allow me to actually engage them and their lives on a deeper level because they become more real…more honest…more human. In many ways, it provides me hope and the ability to see my ministry with new perspective. This doesn’t mean I think we need to avoid the great parts of these amazing leaders but in the pursuit of understanding what makes them tick, we can’t avoid or ignore their flaws.

Like the new DOVE commercials and their campaign for “Real Beauty” that celebrates real women instead of the plastic surgery altered and digitally “enhanced” women that have created a false ideal, I would argue we need a similar movement with pastoral leadership. We need a new perspective for “Real Leadership” that, to use the DOVE phrase: “Loves the [leadership] skin we are in.”

Thus, I am asking someone to write one of the following books:

  • Real Leadership
  • The Human Face of Leadership
  • Leaders Unmasked
  • Leaders Demythologized
  • A Realistic and Honest Look at Great Leaders

The Response
If you agree or disagree with me, let me know. If you feel you would appreciate a new kind of leadership book please join your voice with mine in calling for a new kind of leadership conversation.

Seperating Questions

Stemming from a conversation I had this last week, I wanted to write something about how we evaluate what we do in the local church. But before I do that, I want to say up front that I am sensitive to the struggles of the local parish and pastors whose immediate situations are so great, that survival is success in itself.

Recently, I have been fascinated with the fact that as we plan, dream and evaluate programs and/or ministries in the church we often ask what seems to be the wrong set of questions. We get caught up with questions like: “does it work?” or “is it effective?” or even “how many people are coming and responding?” I am not saying that these questions are not good, appropriate or helpful but are they the only questions to ask? In fact, are they even the most important questions?

I believe the most important, and often forgotten, questions to ask are: “Is what we are doing right and good?” “It is fair and just?” “Is it done out of selfless love?” I think ministries can be “effective,” “efficient” and even produce “results” but in the end can also be wrong and lack goodness. For example, someone can come and share the gospel message and manipulate people in their delivery to the place where they produce results, but is it right, just,and good? Someone can manipulate people to give money in church and it can produce results, but is it good? We can view our pastors as directors and CEO’s that run great business models, producing results, but it it good and right?

I wonder, in our ministries, do we have room for things that are good but don’t produce what we would consider successful results? Are we prepared to do things that are inefficient, simply because they are right, just and good?

I think at times our pride gets caught up in the results and consequently, we assume that the number of people who come to church, receive Christ or are baptized equates success in the church. However, maybe we are not asking all the right questions.

The problem is that the question of something being right, good and just is more difficult and illusive. How do you evaluate if something good? It is much easier to evaluate based on numbers and objective data like attendance or dollars. Additionally, the question of whether something is good can also be manipulated and taken as a form of pride. For example, churches who aren’t growing can manipulate this concept to defend their situation and say that they are not growing because they are good and right.

Instead, I believe these two questions must go hand-in hand. I believe the gospel is compelling and churches need to be intensely creative but can’t, in doing so, avoid the question whether or not what they are doing is right and good.

We need to be prepared, at times, to do things that may not produce “results” or be “efficient.” We need to be prepared to do them simply because they are right, just and good. I think these two kinds of questions can co-exist but “effective” and “efficient” can never take president, or silence the voice of something being good, right and just.

I think this way of evaluation would help to remove the trappings of success and replace it with honoring those who are committed to serving God regardless of their situation. By doing this, I think it would help to honor our quiet and hidden heroes of the faith who, as pastors, don’t have mega-churches, don’t write books and don’t have speaking tours, but serve their communities faithfully.

Inclusion To Life

Laurie (my wife) and I had the opportunity to attend a five-weekend leadership retreat centering on advocacy for children with disabilities. Although there is much to say about the experience, I wanted to share a thought expressed by one of our speakers that I am still working through and thinking on. It is an argument and discussion point that I hadn’t heard before but one I found extremely compelling.

We were discussing the growing acknowledgment in our society, on different levels, to the need, benefit and health of including people with disabilities into every aspect of our society. Although there are many different definitions of “inclusion” and what it means, the base principle applies to each: that each human being, regardless of their ability, potential or limitations, should be provided equal opportunity to be included in our society on every level. I am becoming more and more aware of how, as a society, and frankly even as the Church, we haven’t embraced this principle and in fact, by our words and actions, devalue people of different abilities – but that is a post for a different day.

The argument the speaker presented was kind of an aside in the presentation but struck home with me as an incongruent piece of a changing societal norm. In a culture that is, on the whole, positively progressing in how it treats people with disabilities and including them more and more areas of societal life, there is one aspect that seems strangely counter-progressive. In this increasingly inclusive world, we concomitantly see a health system and growing ethical system that has embraced the practice of encouraging and performing abortions for those families who, in their prenatal care, are discovered to be carrying a child with some diagnosed disability. The reason often presented is that having a child with a disability would be a to great a burden on the family, the person who has the disability and of course our economically struggling health system to carry the baby to term. However, if, as a culture, we are progressively embracing inclusion of people with disabilities in our schools, workplaces, community areas and churches, wouldn’t it seem like the place inclusion should begin is the equal right to be included in birth.

It is an unjust paradox that a culture would positively shift to the see people with disabilities through their potential, and concurrently not see their right to live or even suggest/lobby for/argue for their prenatal death.

As a parent of a child with a disability who is actively trying to change culture so that it sees our son for his potential rather than his limitations (as we would all like to see seen), the infuriating irony is that individuals, like our son, are increasingly welcomed in schools, community events but sadly and despairingly, not into life outside the womb as doctors and health care professionals encourage parents to abort their children because of their potential and perceived overwhelming burden.

This can’t be right and I, for one, am committed to changing our society.

Some thoughts on the future of the Church

I have been reflecting about the church lately – its past, present and potential future(s). It is one of those topics that has dominated my reflections for a number of years but has surged to the surface through recent podcasts, readings, discussions, blogs, etc.

What frequently annoys me are individuals who continually complain about the church, it’s past and present, without offering solutions or at least thoughts on it’s potential future. I also have to admit that I have done just that in the past because, basically, it is easy to do and doesn’t involve a lot of risk. That being said, I don’t have all the answers, I may not even have any answers but I do have some thoughts that I want to begin sharing.

Therefore, I thought I would begin to offer some of my reflections about the future of the Church in postmodern North America (Church as being defined as the Universal Church rather any specific Local Church). I thought I would attempt that by finishing the following sentence:

I think the North American Church, in order to effectively engage our culture must…

…begin to define itself not by it’s physical structure, but by it being a community of Jesus followers. If you do a Google image search on the word “Church,” you get a multitude of church-building pictures. Is that the Church? I think we need to redefine it through our methodology and our theology to be what it was meant to be: a community of believers.

…redefine success in the Church. God working in the Church is not evidenced by square footage of the physical building, number of staff members, number of buildings, flashiness of logos or web pages but in what God is doing in people’s lives. Let’s face it, we can get a crowd a lot of different ways, but God is more interested in changing people’s lives – bring healing, hope and freedom.

…rethink the role of Pastor. I don’t think the Pastor should be seen as the CEO who runs the business of the church. Instead I think the Pastor is the primary servant leader who shepherds the church into its God honoring future through prayer. Related to this is the fact that I don’t believe the Pastor is the sole receiver of the church’s vision but the leader who helps the community of faith discover it together.

…”invert the church.” This is a phrase I began using about a year ago to refer to the fact that we have looked at evangelism as drawing people into the church to hear the gospel. Instead, I think the church must enter the world and in many ways, earn the right to be heard. We need to realize again that the Great Commission is the mission of the church. Going further, the Great Commission is not just a corporate thing the church does though its programs but through real people’s lives. We need to “go into the world” again instead of just inviting people to come to church to hear the Good News. We have compartmentalized our lives so well that, as Christians, we see it as something separate. Instead, I believe we need to reintegrate our faith into every aspect of our lives which would consequently have us share our faith with those around us.

…recognize that church was meant to be messy. Why do the majority of Elder’s/Leadership Meetings focus on budget, facility issues, etc. and not on questions like: “Why are people not coming to know Christ through our ministry?” or “Would the community we are located in notice if this local church didn’t exist tomorrow?” or “How do we deal with X situation in X’s life, giving guidance when Scripture seems less than clear on it?” Although these questions seem hard to answer, they are the questions we need to begin asking.

…honestly evaluate itself and be self-critical at times. If I ever pastor a large church with a large multiple staff, I think I would seriously encourage the church to look at hiring an in-house scholar whose ministry would revolve partially around teaching, but also a major part of his/her role would be critiquing what the church is doing from a philosophical and theological point of view as well as contributing to the realm of scholarship from a local church perspective. I, too often, see churches dive into a direction, program or vision without really critically and honestly thinking about the theological or philosophical implications (both long and short term ones) and think we need to begin really thinking about the implications before making these important decisions.

…seek to work cooperatively. We have embraced a fortified attitude in church, that often for very weird reasons, doesn’t look at working with other ministries. We see people of different denominations through their differences first rather than our commonality – we have to reverse this. I know that at times and with some organizations there will be irreconcilable differences but I think, too often, we have focused on these differences at the expense of seeing God at work.

…see each member of the church as an ambassador of the Gospel in their world of influence. It is interesting that often the only community service/ministry that seems to count in the church is that which is done by the church as a corporate program. What if, instead, we commission people for the places they are already serving in, seeing the work they are already apart of as part of the larger ministry of the Church because it is done by an extension of the church – the community of faith.

…help people discover their ancient roots and learn from the past, seeing it as important rather than obsolete. In many ways, we have rejected ancient forms of Christian spirituality because they are old. Like an old B/W TV that is tossed with the garbage because it isn’t new, we have abandoned so many of the practices of the Church that have served it well.

…call people to deep reflection on their beliefs. We have too often not educated but instead have indoctrinated. This works at first but its eventual outcomes are like painting your vehicle with water based kids paint that when the rain comes will be washed away and most likely damaged. We must help people know why they believe rather than just what to believe.

…embrace and work through the hard questions rather than avoid them or create simple and thus unsatisfying answers.

…be inclusive to all, seeing the important contribution that everyone makes to church regardless of their physical or intellectual situations… seeing possibilities rather than limitations. In the world of inclusion for people with disabilities I find it deeply sad that the church isn’t the one leading the way?

These are a few of the thoughts I have had. This is a fluid process and one that I have been and will continue to work through now and into the future. I have incredible hope for the Church and the world and know that the Good News of Jesus is relevant in every culture, language and time in history and the mission of the Church has stayed the same through it all… I desire to be faithful to both.

Also note that these are not about a specific local church but about the church in general in North America and my ideas and opinions concerning them.

Cafeteria Christianity

I think every Christian individual, church or institution is guilty of Cafeteria Christianity in some way, shape or form. We like to pick and choose the convenient theology, Bible passages or rationales for our “faith matrixes.” We all have a tendency to read Scripture in order to see our preconceived ideas, understandings and constructs strengthened and fortified. We pick and choose what is convenient or even, dare I say, what works in our limited experience. But can there be times where what works, what tastes good in the cafeteria line up, is not actually what’s good for you? And maybe, just maybe, in a theological and even practical way, down right bad for you?

I remember when I was in college, living on campus and eating in the cafeteria, there was a popular phrase that enter our vernacular. This colloquialism was widespread because it was true: “The Freshmen 15.” It meant that it was common for freshmen to gain 15 pounds in their first year. Although there were choices in the cafeteria line, everyone regularly choose ample portions of fries, pop, ice cream, etc. with each meal. Although there were healthy choices available, few people choose them and went for the easy but not so healthy options.

I think the same is true in Christianity. We choose what we like, what works for our lives, what brings comfort, what bring security (even political security), what brings our definition of success, what puts and keeps people in the pew, what validates our worldview or theology and what simply answers our big questions. But, in the end, we have to ask the question: Am I choosing what is easy and comfortable or could what is easy and comfortable, actually be bad for me?

I am not saying that everything we choose is bad. I think, for example, the current trend to care about justice issues in the evangelical church is good but dare I ask: Do we truly care for the oppressed or do we just like the idea of it because it is trendy to do so, it eases our consciences or maybe just because it is different? In essence, are we pursuing justice, which is biblical, with the right motives? If not, maybe we end up at a good destination but forget that the journey is part of what we are called to as well. As Jesus continually reminded people, it is our heart that truly matters.

Now think of your individual beliefs about God and the Church. In this realm the same temptation applies. I think we can often take the intellectual easy-way-out in the theological buffet. As a result, we like feel-good theology, feel-good teaching, prosperity gospel, and even “escapism eschatology.”

As well, continuing with the cafeteria analogy, I think there are times when we make healthy chooses but do so selectively, often ignore the inconvenient. We accept Jesus’ teachings when they affirm our actions and behavior and ignore the rest that may be good but are hard and costly. So we just pass them by in the cafeteria line, picking and choosing the doctrines and way of life that make us comfortable.

I wonder, however, if the abundant life Jesus taught about consists of a well-balanced diet; a diet that is more than just a buffet of ideas leading to eventual obesity, but integrated with exercise as our faith and beliefs are lived out and practiced in our individual lives.

Maybe we need to stop frequenting the fast-food diet choices and start to engage a fuller theology and life-style, with deeper authentic questions. If life’s biggest questions are something that stir deep in our souls, causing our lives to be consumed with the hunger for its answer, then the answer that is truly satisfying can’t be as simple as a “Happy Meal” that is franchised. Instead, it would be more complex and beautiful, causing, in the end, a satisfaction that can’t be manufactured, measured or franchised.

So, I invite us to rethink our lives, the church and our spirituality, seeking a fuller, healthier, and well-rounded diet.

It will be hard, costly and inconvenient, but aren’t the best things in life?