The Prince Became a Pauper

This upcoming Easter Sunday celebrates the center of the Christian belief, the death and resurrection of Jesus. However, this week also has another holiday of great importance, namely Passover. The feast of Passover is a Jewish holiday that celebrates the deliverance that God provides for the Israelite people. For Christians, the holiday is sometimes observed in remembrance of the “last supper”. According to the gospel accounts of Jesus' days before His death, He celebrated Passover with His disciples the night He was betrayed. At Passover, Jesus did something that was radically countercultural for the time: He washed His disciples feet. In the Jewish culture, washing someone's feet was something that the women (Jewish Encyclopedia) or servants (Jackson) did. Not the host, and certainly not a rabbi! Jesus was setting a standard for the future leaders under Him. The leaders are to be the servants.

(Taken from treehugger.com)

In 1964, businessman Robert K. Greenleaf published an essay titled "The Servant as a Leader," in which he argued that the most effective way to lead was to be a servant (Greenleaf.org). That is, the person who is most interesting in serving and caring for a group should be the one who leads it. Servant leadership is an inverted business model. The traditional view of leadership within a company might resemble the comic strip Dilbert. The employees working for a boss, the boss's job is to manage and direct what they need to be doing, and then taking credit for what they do. The inverted model of leadership suggests that the boss's job is to work for his employees that they can do their job more effectively. The boss still leads and manages, but acts as a steward of the work that goes on, instead of a director. This inverted model that Greenleaf championed was not a brand new idea, but rather the same thing that Jesus taught, the we have to serve first, lead second.

Yet, one has to ask the question: is this a practical leadership model? While in our ivory towers of philosophical musing, have we overlooked reality? Groups need leaders so that there can be consistent direction and purpose. The leader takes responsibility for those under them, and guides them to a purpose. Can a leader really do this and still serve their followers? Not everyone thinks so. According to Nathan Colquhoun, servant leadership doesn't work because the title leader, or the position of leadership, is directly opposed to serving. He argues that Jesus did not teach His disciples to be servant leaders, just servants. He says: "Our problem is that we have way too many people thinking they are leaders and not servants. Servant-leadership doesn’t count. There is no such thing. Just be a servant. Let the leadership lingo slip from your language. If people end up following you, don’t focus on that, just keep serving."

While Colquhoun has a valid point, our focus should not be on title, I disagree with his dichotomy of leadership and servanthood. To ignore the responsibility of leadership in the name of service is just as bad as not serving those whom one is leading. As I shared in a blog post a few weeks ago, leadership is a huge responsibility, and if a leader fails to recognize their position, they are in danger of neglecting their duty as a leader. It is not the title that makes the leader, however, with or without a title, the responsibility of a leader must be recognized. It seems that leadership and servant-ship have a "yin-yang" relationship. Almost like Jesus knew what He was talking about.

To answer the earlier question; does servant leadership work? According to the Navy SEALs, yes. Former Navy SEAL and author Brent Gleeson noted, that Navy SEALs understand servant leadership and can do it effectively because:

...a SEAL is trained to lead and to follow. Team leaders are strong and bold, and have the ability to make hard decisions under the most extreme conditions imaginable. But they also encourage their team members to step up, share the power, and not hesitate to take care of business without waiting for further instruction.

If the Navy SEALs, (who are essentially the Rangers of the North of the real world), along with Greenleaf, and Jesus, believe in and practice servant leadership, shouldn't we?

When Jesus washed His disciple's feet, the sheer level of humility and servanthood was far greater and grander than most CEOs or even Navy SEALs could ever imagine. The bible teaches that Jesus was not merely a nice guy, but rather God Himself, who lowered Himself to be a human. At Passover, as they celebrated and remembered the provision of God for the Israelites, Jesus was preparing to be a provision for the whole world. The betrayal, beatings, and then the brutal crucifixion all were acts of sacrificial servant leadership. If the ruler of all reality became a lowly servant for the people who killed Him, what right do modern Christian leaders have to not serve?

Colquhoun, Nathan, "Servant Leadership Doesn't Work", nathancolquhoun.com, Sep. 16, 2010, web. Mar. 27 2013
Gleeson, Brent. "Servant First, Leader Second", inc.com, Feb. 1 2013. web. Mar. 27 2013
Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, "About the Robert K. Greenleaf Center", greenleaf.org, n.d., web. Mar. 26 2013
Jackson, Wayne, "Did Jesus Institute Ceremonial Foot Washing?", ChristianCourier.com, 2013, web. Mar. 26 2013
Jewish Encyclopedia, "Foot Washing", JewishEncyclopedia.com, 1906, web. Mar. 26 2013

...Fear my power, Green Lantern's light!

I'm a pretty huge comic book nerd. In recent months I've started following Green Lantern. In the Green Lantern series, there are magical rings throughout which are powered by certain emotions. Green rings are powered by willpower, red rings are powered by rage, and so on. The rings choose people based on their strength in the respective emotion.The only problem is that a single individual cannot use two rings as once. Each lantern must focus and control their specific emotion, and use it to save the galaxy. There are also talking squirrels, emotional entities, and blood magic, but that's another subject for another day. In short, I believe that church leaders share some distinct similarities with the Green Lanterns.

When it comes to Christian leadership, most of the focus is placed on pastors, teachers, or public speakers. Yet, I would say there are three (very) broad categories of leaders in the church. As Mark Driscoll would put it, there are prophets, priests, and kings. The three titles come from the offices of leadership that Jesus has. Jesus is a prophet, that is, He speaks from God to the people. Jesus is a priest, which meant that He speaks for the people to God. Finally, Jesus is a king, who has authority over the church. Within the church, there are three different types of leaders that make up the leadership of church. I like to think of these three as different "power rings", that each leader can wield. So, what does it look like?

Prophet

Prophets in the traditional sense are those who give divine revelation (Webster). Prophets in the Old Testament often warned about impending destruction, but also instructed the people, and gave wisdom. In the modern day, the church identifies 'prophets' as those gifted in teaching, preaching, and discerning. A prophet is not confined to the walls of the church, but apply to teachers at a college, people on debate teams, or even some politicians! A prophet style leader can be found in the secular world with a PR director, or any spokesmen for a company. The prophet's focus is instruction and truth, loving to read long books or articles on a seemingly insignificant topic in order to better understand it. Prophets are fueled by knowledge, but often can become self-righteous and prideful.

Priest

The concept of priest is perhaps the most alien to our modern culture of the three. A priest was in charge of worshiping God in the temple, bring the concerns of the people before God, and caring for the people's spiritual needs. Modern priests are not exactly living in elaborate temples killing animals and then cooking them as a form of worship (at least, I hope not). Instead, modern priests are found living in run down areas of town, showing God’s love for the broken, and feeding the poor. A priest leads the local people of God to love and care for the needs of the world around them. In a modern business, I supposed that a priest might be found leading the human resources department. These priests are fueled by compassion, but can ditch truth along the way of helping people.

King

A "king" leader is much more administratively focused. Kings like using graphs, charts, and large text files full of information. Kings set up systems to keep things running, lay down a long term plan, and organize whatever they're leading effectively. In the business world, a king might be a CFO or CEO. Last week, I did my taxes for the first time, thankfully, I didn't do it alone. A friend of a friend was a tax expert, and helped my mother and I file our taxes. What was incredulous to me was the absolute joy she found in doing taxes. She had a head for numbers, and was definitely a king style leader. Kings like her are fueled by structure and order, but can get so trapped in it that the world breaks down when things don't go according to plans.

As we've seen, each of the three have strengths and weaknesses. Now, a church, a business, or just a club might be able to handle things on their own with just one of these types of people. Likewise, in the green lantern universe, the Green Lanterns generally handle things themselves. This was the status quo for many years, the Green Lanterns being the space police and stopping ne'er-do-wells. Recently however, a new series has launched. "Green Lantern: New Guardians", which has a team of different colored lanterns, green, red, blue and more. Like the horrible cliche of every superhero team's origin story: they realize that only together can they stop their foes! I think it's about time that the church form's their own "New Guardians". Church leaders all have short comings, and can't master all three rings. What leaders can do is focus on what they're good at, and work along side of other leaders who are gifted in the same areas. Together, church can be compassionate, while not neglecting truth, structured, with grace for the craziness of life, and wise, without being hypocritical. The church can't do it perfectly on it's own, thankfully, there is a man out there who broke the rules, mastered all three, and now leads the church. Jesus is the ultimate lantern.

Personal Application: find out which of these three I am, and how I can bring others along side of me.

Also, this chart gives a good idea of what each of the three are.

"Prophet", Merriam-Webster.com, 2013, Web. Mar. 20 2013

Weighty Leadership

Over the past eight weeks, I've primarily focused on reasons why one should be a leader. I have also discussed fairly non-controversial topics. Today, I wanted to break that cycle by talking about why someone should not be a leader. (I'll address the non-controversial cycle later.) The focus of today blog will be fairly religious in nature, however I will attempt to explain any Christian jargon to the best of my ability. I am not trying to dissuade anyone from becoming a leader, however my intent is to show the grave responsibility that comes with this wonderful gift of leadership.

An early Christian named James wrote to fellow Christians with a warning: "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers and sisters, because you know we will be judged more strictly" (James 3:1). James believed that leaders were being held to a higher standard than normal people. Why is this? Uncle Ben said it right: "With great power comes great responsibility". I believe that leaders are under this harsher judgment for three reasons:

1. The leader is affected by the followers

Be it in Nazi Germany, the Vatican, or even the secret service, leaders must answer for the actions of those under them. In an earlier blog post about failure I mentioned the Penn State scandal, where the former president of the school was charged for not doing anything about the sex-abuse. Though the president of the school did not commit the sex-abuse, he was held responsible for the abuser's actions along with his own. Of course, if the former president of Penn State had not known about the sex-abuse, he would not have been held to such a high standard. However, part of his responsibility was to know, and to be aware of what was happening in his school. Be it a president, pastor or CEO, the actions of the followers affect the leaders.

2. The leader’s public actions affects the followers

I was on a trip in Alaska with some other Christians, and we were putting on an event for the children of some local native American tribes. In preparation for this event, I was told something that still affects the way I lead today. My team leader warned me: "the children will be watching you, and what you watch. You need to watch what they need to be watching". Who I focused on, the children would focus on, because I was setting the example for the others to follow. Where leaders go, others follow. The past two leaders of our country have led us through a war and into a recession. This is not to comment on the good or bad nature of where we're at, but simply that the responsibility of the president is to lead, for better or worse.

3. Leading is a gift, given by God.

I voted in the last election. I'll be honest, the guy I voted for didn't win, but I really didn't care. This was not because I don't have opinions on what politicians should or shouldn't do with the nation; rather, as a Christian, I understand a principle about leadership and authority that governs my understanding of the world. Paul makes an observation in Romans 13:1, "...there is no authority except from God...". For Christians, any position of leadership that is given to anyone is ultimately because God gives it. This means that every CEO, every pastor, even every general manager of a convenience store has been given their position, not just by human superiors, but by God Himself.

Now, the question that pops into my head at this point is this: How could Paul possibly say that about leaders with such horrible people like Hitler, Stalin or even Nero, the emperor who martyred Paul? This is where James 3:1 comes again into play. Just as all leaders are given a position, they are held accountable for what they did with that position. While an irresponsible manager may avoid answering to HR, and a greedy CEO may not answer to his board of directors, eventually, all will have to answer to an ultimate manager. Even a mass murder like Hitler cannot escape it. According to the Christian worldview, every leader will be held accountable for what they did as a leader.  

To bring it back to the original point, why shouldn't someone be a leader? A leader is responsible for their actions, the actions of those under them, and they will have to face evaluation for it. Christian leaders have to recognize that their words, actions, and even private thoughts are all being assessed by the giver of their position. Being a leader means accountability, accountability to a perfect leader, who has to be just. Should no one be a leader then? Of course not! However, leaders must understand the responsibility and accountability of their position. If someone is not prepared to take on this responsibility and answer for it, they should not be a leader. Leadership is a gift we cannot treat lightly.

Daddy, how are leaders made?

Today I happened to watch one of the ads that played during the Super Bowl, (for the first time as I don't watch sports), about a child asking his father where babies came from. The ad reminded me of a question I ask myself, where do leaders come from? Certainly Shakespeare was right to say that "some are born great, some achieve greatness and others have greatness thrust upon them." However with leaders, Christians in particular, there is an aspect of leadership which comes from the work of mentors. These mentors are leaders who take time to grow other leaders. They do this by what I’ll call “impartation.”

Impartation, according to Webster means either "to give, convey or grant from...a store" or "to communicate knowledge." When I talk about impartation in relationship to Christian leadership, it has a more spiritual significance to it. Christian impartation is both an intellectual and spiritual gift, given by a mentor. These impartations are things like: understanding how leadership is to be done, how to handle the various struggles that a leader can encounter, and how to mentor other leaders. The spiritual aspect is a giving of what the church calls "spiritual gifts" which are God given abilities or expertise that help the Christian to do what they are called to do. These gifts can include teaching, preaching, administration, compassion and other talents or abilities. Now, for those who aren't too religious and reading this, please don't be too put off by the metaphysical nature of this. The spiritual aspect of impartation may be uniquely Christian, but this intellectual impartation is something that every leader should receive. A mentor’s impartation is the means by which good leaders are made great leaders.

How does a good mentor make this good leader? It starts with the example that they set. In creative writing we are told "show, don't tell." A good writer describes the scene for the reader, instead of just giving them bland facts. Instead of just writing a book or preaching a sermon, a good mentor shows parts of leadership like getting vision and dealing with failure by actually doing it. Next, a mentor listens to their mentee, allowing for the mentee to express his or her's ideas, concerns and problems. I have had opportunities to mentor quite a few young men, and more often than not, what they need isn't my advice, but rather my quietness as they work through the problem. Finally, a mentor gives the mentee a place to work. A mentor in my life, who continues to be an inspiration, was a guy named Jason. Jason led the youth at my church, and as a gangly, geeky 15 year old, (I haven't changed much), he took the time to mentor me. Jason let me lead a small guy's bible study and gave me the rein to take it where I wanted. He continued to watch out for me, and give me advice when I needed it, but allowed me to lead in a safe environment.

A great example of mentor impartation is in a guy named Timothy. Timothy was a timid young guy who wanted to lead the church. Unfortunately, he was not experienced in leading, and not particularly gifted at it. Thankfully, there was a guy named Paul, who became a sort of spiritual father to Timothy. Paul brought Timothy around with him as he taught, mentored and preached (Acts 16:1-5). Paul listened to timothy, and sent him letters full of advice which still set an example for Christian leadership. Lastly, Paul gave Timothy a place to lead. Paul brought Timothy to a town called Ephesus and put him in a place of leadership there. There were other solid leaders there who would help Timothy to lead the people, and Paul saw that Timothy had the strength of character to handle the work. Timothy then went on to mentor other leaders, and the cycle repeated itself.

These mentors who make leaders are part of an ongoing process that continues today. This is not restricted to the church, but to the whole world. The more I study leadership, the more I am convinced that leaders are not simple born in greatness, but molded, crafted and forged. Even Alexander the Great, a man who fits the definition of a man born to lead, had a mentor, Aristotle (Melchert, 157). The impartation of a good mentor into a leader's life can result in great leader. Jason imparted to me the ability to lead, and the knowledge of how to do it. My goal is to impart that knowledge, along with any more I learn along the way, to another. I do this so that they can do something even greater. In short, good mentors make great leaders, great leaders are great mentors and make even greater leaders.

For personal application, this week I am going to identify at least five people whom I am currently mentoring, (intentionally or not), and find ways to better encourage them in their giftings, be it in leadership or other places.

Melchert, Norman. "The Great Conversation", Boston, Ma: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. 2002. Print.

24 > 168

Do you know there are 168 hours in a week? Now, does it actually feel like that? If you answered no, you're not the only one. I am currently taking 16 credits at NOVA, and 2 extra with a Tuesday night theology class. I also prepare for and lead two to three groups a week. When I'm not doing schoolwork, I'm doing more schoolwork. I'm writing this after an eight hours at NOVA, with more schoolwork to do after this. When do we get to slow down? I often joke that I'll sleep when I'm dead, and sometimes, I think there might be more truth to that than I'd like. There is always something to be done, always something we could be doing with our time, why in the world should a leader stop?

Back in Genesis, we read that God creates the world in 6 days. That's a lot more work in 6 days than I have done in six years, but since He's God, we understand that there was no actual effort in doing any of it. Now we read in Genesis 2:1-3 that God decides after six days of work, to stop. The actual verb in the Hebrew we use for rest is, shabath, which means "to cease"(Strong's). This idea of ceasing is not that God stopped doing things, but rather he stopped doing that work, and turned to something else. The idea is that we work for six days, and on the seventh, do something different. God seemed to think it was important for Himself to rest.

In the book of Exodus, the fourth commandment given in the famous ten commandments passage, was to obey the Sabbath (Exo 20:8-11). The Sabbath was of such importance to the Jewish people that some of them began setting up some extreme rules for what one couldn't do on the Sabbath. One couldn't even carry a mattress on the Sabbath, because it was considered too much work (John 5:10). This idea carried on into Christian history, notably with the puritans, some of whom wouldn't even shave on the Sabbath (Shulevitz).

Taking time to rest is not just a Christian idea, but seen by many as beneficial. Judith Shulevitz, a Jewish writer for the New York Times, explained in her article "Bring Back The Sabbath" that the very notion of a day of rest is foundational to America society (Shulevitz). Even non-religious leaders recognize the importance of taking a break. Stefan Sagmeister, a designer in New York, spoke at a TED conference about how taking a year long break every seven years positively changed the efficiency and passion with which he did business.

Now, one might ask, "Sure Colin, rest is important, but this is a leadership blog. Why emphasis this for a leader?" I'm glad you asked. Leaders especially need to be reminded to rest, or to take a Sabbath, because of the standards we tend to set for ourselves. Gordon MacDonald lists some of the myths that leaders begin to believe about this aspect of leadership, including: "A leader must be constantly available for all emergencies" or, "rest, recreation and leisure are second-class uses of time" (MacDonald, 86-87). I have found myself feeling ashamed for not working or not always being available, and I don't think I'm the only one.

Yet, leaders see a rather different example from Jesus. Though Jesus constantly had crowds to heal, disciples to teach, and religious people to silence, he still found time to get alone. (John 6:15, Luke 9:18, Luke 5:16) If Jesus Christ, religious and non-religious leaders, Jews, Christians and God Himself all took time to rest. How much more so, should an average leader? I may be taking 18 credits this semester, and by now, I should have had copious amounts of mental or emotional breakdowns. However, this idea of a Sabbath helps to stop that. At 11:59pm Saturday night, all my weekly activities stop. I do no homework, reading, or even check my email all of Sunday. To be honest, it's a challenge not to do any work, stressful to try to get stuff down before or after Sunday, and so much more wonderful than I can explain. Sunday is when I get recharged and refocused for the week. It is where I meet Jesus in beautiful rest. The sabbath is the foundation of a healthy leader. Twenty-four hours that set the standard for the other 144.

Strong's "Sabbath" Strong's Hebrew Lexicon, 1890. Web.

Shulevitz, Judith. "Bring Back the Sabbath", New York Times. Mar. 03, 2003. Web. Feb. 20, 2013. 

MacDonald, Gordon. Building Below The Waterline. Peabody, Hendrickson Publishers Marketing, 2011. Print.

Two Good Christian Leadership Blogs

Over the past few weeks, I've been almost overwhelmed with the amount of blogs there are out there on Christian leadership. One site, ChurchLeaders.com is just about collecting articles from various Christian leaders from around the web. However, there is a small disconnect within the Christian blogosphere (yes, that's a real word). We have many great megachurch leaders, like Perry Noble, or Steven Furtick (though his 'blog' is a little more twitter focused), and James Macdonald. Most megachurch 'blogs' have very little community attached to them, some do not even allow comments from readers. On the other end of the spectrum, there are numerous pastors, teachers, and average joes who are blogging about Christian leadership. So what am I reading? Right now, there are two I have kept coming back to.

The first is The Resurgence, a ministry group based out of Mars Hill church. This blog is contributed to by several megachurch pastors, including Mark Driscoll, Matt Chandler, and John Piper (Whom I may have a man crush on. Just sayin'). It has a constant stream of articles usually on topics related to practical leadership in the church. The downside to this blog is there is very little communication between the writers and readers. There is no way to comment on the various posts given. This limits the blog a great deal.

The second blog that I continue to read is a blog called HeartHeadHand. David Murray is a professor at the Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary. Murray posts daily with different insights or book reviews. His focus is usually on leadership, but also includes intellectual or theological questions beyond just leaders. Murray also includes media, with podcasts and instructional videos related to leading and or pastoring. The comment section may not be filled with hundreds of replies, but communication between Murray and the community happens.

Overall, I hope that gives you some clues as to where you can go to check out much better writers with much more experience on this topic. Churchleaders.com also will have good links to different blogs. I have an analysis paper due at the end of the semester related to the Christian blogosphere, and I believe I will use these two blogs.

Failure is not (just) for Failures.

Can I be honest with you? I am a perfectionist. An extreme perfectionist. I hate failing; I hate doing anything "unprofessionally". The worst part is, I think I'm pretty good at it most of the time. I am a straight-A student, a quick learner, and somewhat obsessive. I get upset if I get a grade lower than A in any class, I am devastated whenever I lose at a game. Unfortunately, as I have learned repeatedly including this past week, I will fail. So, what should be the leader's response to failure?

The first step is to admit you've failed. In the midst of the Penn State scandal, it was revealed that the president of the college had known about the sex-abuse and had not done anything about it. How many great leaders have discovered something has failed under their leadership, and not hidden it? When these things remain hidden, the problem will only get worse. The problems grows until eventually, as the former Penn State president learned, it gets out on it's own. The only effective way to deal with failure is to be open and honest about it. Perhaps this is why such great leaders in the old testament like David, Daniel and Nehemiah all took time to confess their personal failures or "sins", or those of their people (2 Sam 12:13, Neh 1:6, Dan 9:1-19). They recognized that the only way for a leader, and those under the leader, to move past failure was to admit it publicly, namely to God.

The second step is to identify why you failed. Do you know what happens after an airplane crashes? After the commotion, cameras and chaos, a special team arrives. This is a team of experts who comb through the wreckage, bit by bit, to find out what happened. This team, called the "Go Team" has the job of finding what caused the crash, so that something like that cannot happen again. This same process must be put forth in the life of a leader. If you failed, you need to go through the circumstances that lead to the failure, the reason for the failure, and possible ways to prevent it.

Once you've identified why you crashed, you must learn from your failure. When I think of someone who learns from failure, I remember a little girl named Hadley. My family has been babysitting Hadley since she was only a few months old (she's now two years old). Hadley was an ambitious child. She set her mind on learning to walk. She kept trying, over and over, and kept falling. As leaders, we are not perfect. We will fail. But Hadley? She kept trying, kept working, and now walks with me through the neighborhood whenever I babysit her. Likewise, we leaders must learn from our failures, to find what works and what does not.

This does not only apply to our personal failures, but to the failures of other leaders. I have had the opportunity of watching some leaders in my life deal with some huge failures. Not only do I see what not to do, but also how they deal with failure. I am humbled and amazed by leaders who learn from their mistakes. A youth pastor that I look up to refused to drive alone with a member of the opposite sex. Why? Because he had seen where other leaders had fallen short, where "crashes" had occurred, and refused to let that happen. He not only learned from his own failures, but from other leader's failures as well.

In summery, a leader has to realize they will fail. In fact, failure might be a good thing for leaders, if they handle it rightly. We need to bring it to light, so that there is accountability and honesty. We should send in our "Go Teams" and find out what went wrong. Then, we have to keep going, and learn from the failures. This will not just help us in the short term, but make us better leaders in the long term.

I lead a bible study monday nights, and last week, some people got honest with me about how I was not doing the job I was supposed to. This was a shock to my system. The more I investigated, I found that they were correct. Last monday night, I got before the whole group and confessed that I had failed. It was painful, and very uncomfortable for me. I then went on to explain that I would do my best to do the job I needed to do. Do you know what happened? We went on to have probably the best night that we've ever had. I realized why I had failed, and I now have a better idea of what to do to prevent it. Failure is not just for failures, but for leaders too. You will never be a good leader, until you're a good fail-er.