Blogotional: Christ and Leadership

Wednesday, June 04, 2008

Christ and Leadership

Jollyblogger links enthusiastically to a post on, what is a well-worn idea on this blog, the fact that Jesus was not a leader in the sense that we typically think of it. David's choice in pull quote from the piece sets the stage well:

That Jesus was a failed leader both by example and by teaching is something we already know—at least unconsciously. Jesus taught that the first shall be last; take up your cross and follow me; to be a minister or to be great in the eyes of God is to be a servant. His teaching on leadership was upside-down and backwards. Indeed, it was no leadership teaching at all. We all know that, but we easily try to fix Jesus’ teachings or put the prefix servant in front of the word leadership. But the effort falls short.

But it is the concluding paragraph of the post is where I think the meat really lies:

Legacy is what matters. Obviously no one will every match Jesus in the realm of legacy. But as we contemplate our pilgrimage in life, we must get over the self-serving concept of leadership and set our hearts and minds on legacy.

Have you ever thought about how short-sighted the "leadership" idea is. It is concerned only with the here-and-now, not eternity.

Now, before I get to far into all of this, any time I have this discussion with professional ministry types, they are quick to grant that Jesus was no leader - but the apostles are a different story. I think even that misunderstands things a bit. The apostles were organizers, but I see no evidence that they were institutionalizers. I think this points out one of the key differences between leadership and legacy to borrow a phrase from the post I am commenting on here.

ANYTIME you have numbers of people, organization is required. Organization is required simply to harness the energy of the group. The apostles worked to harness the energies of the new converts to serve those converts, who would in turn, go out and make more converts. This was the legacy the apostles sought to create - that legacy was the perpetuation of the gospel.

But somewhere in the ensuing centuries, instituionalizers ignored the legacy and grew simply to preserve the group. Which is why Christ's "lack of leadership" (I would prefer the term "alternative style of leadership," but...) is so important. And by the way, when you consider that all the apostles died in martyrdom or exile, one would have to conclude that they were less than successful "leaders" as well, despite their organizational efforts. Their legacy, a legacy of sacrifice, was certainly in line with Christ's.

Once again I return to the fact that Christianity is truly radical stuff. It turns our understandings on their head. In this instance,we have to learn to think well beyond our sensical capability. You see when we "lead" today, we led not for today but for eternity, we must think far beyond that which we can experience.

And when we take that eternal perspective, we must see that while the gospel is triumphant, triumph is achieved only through apparent failure. Whether it be Christ on the cross or the apostles in martyrdom, they triumphed not because they were great leaders, but because they were great Christians. God delivered the triumph.

The apparent failure is indeed part and parcel of the gospel.

Gal 2:20 - "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the {life} which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me. [emphasis added]