Situation and Scope

This student has recently assumed a new position as Regional Minister for the

Great Lakes Association of the North American Baptist Conference. There are 28

churches in the region which recently started a leadership development movement called

Leading Edge. Leaders are nurtured over a three year period in three phases known as

Emerging (year one), Equipping (year two) and Enriching (year three). The emerging

phase focuses on character and spiritual formation of the inner person. The equipping

phase deals with development of important leader skill sets and technical competencies

with hands-on experience. The enriching phase is devoted to mentoring and investing

oneself in other emerging leaders.

The regional leadership team has asked me to lead a retreat in September of 2007

for sixty persons (or so) who are enrolled in the emerging phase. This paper will therefore

reflect on the theological foundations of leadership with special attention to preparing the

soil of the leader’s inner life – the identity, values, integrity, moral choices, priorities,

along with an awareness of testing points and understanding God’s workings in the

formation, of a leader. The “how-to’s” and operational aspects of leadership are beyond

the scope of this paper. My hope is to use the material

contained in this paper for the upcoming retreat presentations.

What is leadership and how important is it really?

When someone comments, “What we really need is more leadership or better

leadership,” more likely than not, those listening nod in ready agreement. The unspoken

assumption is that we all know what leadership is and how it can solve our problems. But

what is leadership really? And is it the answer we think it is to the challenges we face?

There seems to be an insatiable appetite to learn more about this fascinating subject (we

have leadership seminars, conferences, books, tapes, and coaches) and a naïve belief that

the latest theory is going to lead to breakthrough solutions for leaders and organizations.

This writer is convinced that leadership is an important part of God’s design for humanity

but it must be properly understood against the backdrop of His being, the story of His

people, and the Kingdom principles revealed in Scripture.

Clearly there are many ways to define or describe leadership and the act of leading.

Notice some similarities as well as the different nuances in this sampling of definitions:

“The leader is one who mobilizes others toward a goal shared by leader
and
followers.” – Gary Wills

“A leader is a person who has an unusual degree of power to project on

other people his or her shadow, or his or her light.” – Parker Palmer

“Leadership is influence.” – John Maxwell

“A leader is a person with God-given capacity and a God-given

responsibility, who is influencing a specific group of God’s people,
toward God’s purposes for that group.” -- J. Robert Clinton

“Leadership is the capacity to translate vision into reality.”

– Warren G. Bennis

2
 “Leadership is authentic self-expression that gives value.”
– Kevin Cashman

Peter Drucker, the father of modern management, was once asked if the great

leaders of history shared any common characteristics. After five minutes of thought, Dr.

Drucker responded that there was only one shared commonality in the lives of all great

leaders… they had followers. Hesitant to question the master himself, we must still ask, “Is

there such thing as a leaderless group?” There have been orchestra ensemble groups that

function very well without a leader and produce beautiful music. I just read about an

investment firm that operates and makes decisions without any person or persons being

designated the leaders. Drucker’s statement does raise the issue of followership and what

role followers might have in leadership. Are followers necessary? If so, what role do they

play? How should followers be viewed by, and what kind of relationship should they have

with, those in leadership?

Wilfred Drath in his book, The Deep Blue Sea: Rethinking the Source of Leadership

steers away from a cookie cutter definition of leadership stating that it really depends on

the stated or (perhaps more often) unstated agreement of all those involved as to what

constitutes leadership in that particular environment or context:

“…leadership is not something out there in the world that

we come to know because it impresses itself on our minds,
it is something we create with our minds by agreeing with
other people that these thoughts, words, and actions—and
not some others—will be known as leadership.” (pp. 4-5)

Drath gives us much to ponder especially as he illustrates this statement with the three

principles of personal dominance, interpersonal influence, and relational dialogue. But

still we look for handles on leadership that can be transferred from one situation to another,

3
some constants if you will. In this paper, we try to lay out some biblical guideposts for

leadership. This writer has a bias that we (in Christian organizations) can learn much about

leadership from organizational and business studies, psychology and sociology, etc. but we

must test everything against the grid of Scripture (i.e., what is revealed to us in it about the

character, ways, and will of God). As far as leaders/ leadership providing all we need – the

illusive pathway to prosperity and blessing for the church (or any organization) – we would

be well advised to pause for deeper reflection:

“God is the key to growth in the church and nothing else…

We need leadership, the church needs leaders. But we must
keep straight in our hearts and minds the true nature of the
issues. Where God is exalted and trusted above all others,
there, in that context, humble leaders can serve with blessing
to the good of all of us and the glory of God.
Leaders must be a tool in the hands of God not a substitute
for Him.” (Saffold, What’s Wrong with Leadership?, p. 18)

There are many people today who look to leadership as a panacea for all the ills of

organizations and society. Even after the rise and fall of Kennedy’s “Camelot” decades

ago, this is perhaps more true than ever. When those kinds of expectations are placed

upon leaders and leadership, it is a guaranteed setup for disappointment. But there is a

kind of servant leadership modeled by Jesus Christ done in community that without a lot

of hype and fanfare produces fruit both now and for eternity to the glory of God.

Discussion Exercise: What is your definition of leadership? As you look at these

definitions, what do you like or not like? Would you add anything or take away anything?

Doctrine of the Trinity and Creation: God’s Design for Community

Where to start? As one seeks to develop a theology of leadership, the doctrines of

the Trinity and Creation need to be thoroughly reflected upon, because they shed

incredible light on God’s design and model for leadership in His world. Therefore, in

4
this paper laying out a biblical foundation for leadership, we will attempt to carefully

consider the bearing and implications of these doctrines on the subject.

This writer has never been so aware of the depth and breadth of the subject of

leadership. We all must choose a starting point and it is good to be aware of one’s

assumptions and presuppositions, to name and embrace them. This paper takes God and

His revelation (recorded in Scripture) of how things came into being as the starting point.

Richard Swinburne, a philosopher in the 20th century, has stated that a great question

every worldview must answer is, “Why does something exist rather than nothing?”

Those who ascribe to Naturalism as their belief system do not allow for an

explanation of “the beginning” of the world as we know it apart from what can be seen or

examined empirically. This philosophy, and its derivative streams of thought, is based on

the worldview that all happenings within the natural world should only be explained by

what can be observed in the natural order of things, that is, without any reference to

God or the supernatural. Therefore, as Saffold articulates, within this framework of

investigation and explanation of the origins and meaning of our existence…

“The activities of the Creator God are not taken into account,
neither are His explanations of how His world functions nor His
warnings about what can go wrong when human beings do not
respect His principles.” (Buckets, Blind Men and Tigers, p. 8)

The writer of Hebrews states it this way, “By faith we understand that the

universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what

was visible” (Heb. 11:3). So, while Saffold sees that good insights can arise from

interpretation of data and research done using the methods prescribed by Naturalism, he

warns against the dire consequences of being blind to its tenets and philosophical

underpinnings, “There is no fact more basic, no truth so far reaching, no bit of

5
information with larger implications than the fact that the entire natural world was

created by God. Failing to take this fully into account has profound consequences” (Ibid).

Chuck Colson spells out what is at stake in the worldview one chooses to embrace:

“Every worldview has to begin somewhere – God or matter,

take your choice. Everything else flows from that initial choice.
Belief in creation is the foundation of the entire Christian world-
view. For if God created all of finite reality, then every aspect of
that reality (including leadership) must be subject to him and his
truth. Everything finds its meaning in relation to God. No part of
life can be sliced off and made independent from Christian truth.
Because creation includes the whole scope of finite reality, the
Christian worldview must be equally comprehensive, cover every
aspect of our lives, our thinking, our choices…everything rises or
falls on the doctrine of creation.” (italics added)
(How Now Shall We Live?, p. 96)

Well, the opening chapter(s) of the Bible – the book of Genesis – gives the basis

for the Judeo-Christian worldview and, for our purposes specifically, a Christian view of

leadership. In fact, seven words in the very first verse are staggering in proportion and

implication, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” It is perhaps the

single most controversial and important statement ever recorded – written against the

backdrop of the Ancient Near East, where a number of myths about how creation took

place had evolved in Mesopotamia down in Egypt.

Most of these myths shared a belief that the universe was filled with many gods

and all these gods were limited in power and morally quite fallible – very petty and

jealous with each other. The result was that people lived in fear and superstition. They

worshiped objects like the sun, moon, and stars believing these heavenly bodies actually

had influence over the affairs of human beings. Some went as far as engaging in the

practice of human sacrifice to try to appease the gods and manipulate their behavior.

Needless to say, there was a low view of human beings inherent in these beliefs and

6
practices. In fact, human beings were called “lackeys of the gods” that did the work the

gods did not want to do. Not surprisingly, human beings struggled against each other just

like their gods did. They were a reflection of their gods and life was not about a fight for

dominance – violence and elimination of the “weak” (e.g., infanticide) were common

practices (Ortberg, God’s Greatest Dream).

Life was seen as an endless cycle in the philosophy and religion of the ancient

world with no sense of ultimate destiny that history was moving toward. In addition,

there was no ultimate authority at work in life. Life was short, cheap, brutal, and without

grounds for meaning or hope. And into this horribly destructive belief system, against

this world view, the writer of Genesis sits before a blank scroll, and he writes in a single

sentence: "In the beginning God" – a transcendent, all-powerful, eternal, personal being –

"created the heavens and the earth." This is a revolutionary statement and gives us

direction to our search for meaning in how we got here in the first place and why we find

ourselves on this planet.

Before probing deeper into the creation of the world and human beings in the

image of God (imageo dei) and the implications of that for leadership, I want to back up

and consider the nature of this God who created it all. The text expands this way:

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now
the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface
of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light." (Gen. 1: 1-3)

Some scholars find in these verses a hint of the doctrine of the Trinity – the

Triune God. In verse one, there is the work of the Father in creation, the first person of

the Trinity, who created all things. He is called in James 1: 17, "the Father of every

good and perfect gift," the Creator/Originator. In verse two, it is the Spirit of God

7
hovering over the waters. Rabbis have noted this same language is used in Genesis

pertaining to birds and their flight. The same imagery is used in the New Testament to

describe the Spirit of God who descends as a dove and hovers over Jesus at the time of

his baptism (Matt. 3:16). Could Genesis 1:2 be a reference to the Holy Spirit, the

second member of the Trinity? Verse three shows God creating by speaking, by his

word. The opening words of the Gospel of John concerning Jesus may be intentionally

framed to echo Genesis 1:3: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with

God, and the Word was God in the beginning." And "The Word became flesh and dwelt

among us (John 1:14)." Who was the Word? That's Jesus, God the Son, the third

member of the Trinity.

So, in the very first three verses of the Old Testament, we have what might be a

first indicator of the existence of the Trinity – God, the Father, God the Spirit, and God

the Son (the Word). Of course, by the time Scripture is finished it becomes real clear

that there is an eternal God who existed in eternity before time as we know it began.

The teaching of the Bible is that God exists before time, in the Trinity, in an unceasing

state of love and joy and delight. Unlike the stories of pagan myths in that day, the God

of the Bible does not create because he is lonely or bored or needs help getting his work

done. Between the three persons of the Trinity there is beautiful community – authentic

love, tremendous passion and pure goodness beyond compare. There is trust and perfect

cooperation – creating, maintaining and nurturing together (class notes).

Discussion Exercise: Through Scripture and what it reveals to us about the Trinity, how
would you describe the relationships between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, especially as
it pertains to leadership in the godhead? Record everything that comes to mind as you
think about the implications of this doctrine.

As a result of the community the Trinity enjoyed, not out of a sense of

8
neediness, God created man and woman. Ortberg captures this beautifully, “Out of the

richness of his magnificent being, out of the fullness of the community of Trinity, God

says, ‘This idea of community, this joy of fellowship is so surely good, let's broaden the

circle. Let's create human beings not as God, but in our own image and let's invite

human beings to bask in the fellowship of the Trinity.” He goes on to say:

“I think one of the most remarkable statements in all of Scripture

is the prayer Jesus prays to the Father. God the Son, the Word,
prays to God the Father in John 17:21 when he says about you
and I, human beings, ‘May they be in us.’ God, who exists in the
richness of Trinitarian love, from before the beginning of time,
says, ‘This idea of community is so good, is so rich, is so beautiful,
let's create human beings and invite them in.’" (Ibid)
Why do we exist? Scripture says we exist because God so delights in the goodness of

community that he wants to expand it a billion times over. Dallas Willard eloquently

captures the sacredness of relationships: “God's aim in human history is the creation

of an inclusive community of loving persons, with himself included as its primary

sustainer and most glorious inhabitant.”

So God creates this wonderful place of beauty, wonder and grandeur for

human beings, His community, to inhabit. But, it’s important to note here that there is

an infinite difference – an infinite gap – between God, the Creator, and the creation.

When this distinction escapes us, and when leaders fail to acknowledge the proper

order of things, trouble ensues. Human beings have stumbled at this point since

ancient times. The Apostle Paul comes to the heart of the problem that arises, “Men

worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator” (Rom. 1:25). The sun

and moon were worshiped as deities – and people would even pray and offer

sacrifices to them. Genesis (chap. 1) makes it clear that they were created by God.

Their functions are assigned to them by an all-powerful God who is fully capable of

9
generating light without any help from them at all. The message of Genesis, so

obvious we can so easily look right past it, is: “Don’t worship the created stuff rather

than the Creator.” The Hebrew people never used the word "nature." They only used

the word "creation." They didn't have a word for "nature," because they understood the

world does not exist on its own "naturally." In the 21st century, we can scoff at the

primitive pagan practices of worshiping nature and then turn around and fall into the

same traps in different forms. Today, the temptation is to give our allegiance,

devotion, and passion to material or manufactured goods (Materialism). The hazard

for a leader is to get caught up in the trappings of success (where more is never

enough) and misguided ambition (we’ll take this up later) – and for created things to

become the dominating, controlling force in his or her life. The message here needs

to be real clear: “Don’t worship creation. Don’t give your life to stuff.” The purpose

of creation is to help us see how good and beautiful God is and to be a reflection of

His character and His ways to us. Why does the awe-inspiring glory of creation move

us so deeply? It’s because God’s creation reflects His nature and character to us.

There are phrases repeated over and over again in the first chapter of Genesis:

“And God said, ‘Let there be …’ and it was so.” The rhythm of the language used

conveys God’s power. Theologians point out that God created from nothing (Latin,

ex nihilo). He simply spoke and the worlds came into being by the sheer power of His

Word. That sets Him apart. The ability of human beings to create is limited to what

already exists. Do human beings have that ability to just say, “Let there be…” and

make it happen? In our bodies, we have just a shadow of that kind of power. We can

say to our hand, “Lift up” and the hand lifts up. God has given us a tiny bit of the

kind of power he possesses. But, He has that power over the entire universe.

10
Sometimes leaders get a taste of power and get addicted to a thirst for it. We use the

term “power hungry” to describe them. Again, this hunger can easily derail a leader

when he or she focuses on the power itself rather than staying in humble, dependent

relationship with, and upon, the Power-giver. Ironically, leaders who become

obsessed with power, eventually find themselves detached from the true power

source and devoid of dynamic energy and strength. For every gift of God in creation,

there is the potential to distort it and to use it in the wrong way for evil purposes.

God’s power is always used for good purposes. The other phrase that keeps

recurring is “And God saw that it was good” and “very good.” The goodness of the

creation is a reminder of the goodness of the Creator. Over and over again, He says,

“It’s good, it’s good, it’s good.” God’s power can never be separated from a moral

component. His skill is extraordinarily excellent, but it is always directed by His

ethical being. Dr. Stephen Graves elucidates this great foundational truth in this

extended statement:

“God’s excellence is more than just exceptional execution.

It’s not just perfect performance. The excellence of His
skills, His capabilities, and His attributes does not consist
merely in their superior quality or lack of defect. Excellence
always has a moral dimension. It is consummate capability
allied with moral beauty and goodness.

Every one of God’s actions is a conscious consent to goodness

Psalm 145:17 explains, ‘The LORD is righteous in all His ways.’
Every aspect of who He is and every one of His works – all are
in perfect harmony. They are perfect in their moral coordination.
Everything about Him works perfectly together for the good of
all. God’s skill is the cosmic symphony of His love in action.

God is, therefore, the archetype of skill. His ‘excellency’ is

paradigmtic. It was fundamental to understanding all other truth.
This is especially true when it comes to how we think about our
(leadership). God made creation by the pattern of His own character.

11
 He is the template by which the rest of the cosmos was cut. God’s
excellence is woven into the fabric of the world around us…

Excellence in our work matters because God made us in His

image. Human beings carry the imageo dei in a way that the rest
of creation does not. While the remainder of nature fulfills its role
by created instinct, we have the capacity to voluntarily appreciate
and imitate God’s excellence” (Life@Work (vol.1), p. 136).

A couple more aspects of human beings emerge from the Creation account

that are foundational to a establishing a theology of leadership. First of all, we are

very humble, finite, limited, fragile creatures. We are not gods. The creation of

human beings stands out from the rest of creation where God simply spoke “and it

was so.” In Genesis 2:7 it says that God reaches down and forms man out of the dust.

Committal words spoken at a cemetery often include the phrase, “Ashes to ashes,

dust to dust.” Erma Bombeck said she wanted her tombstone to read, "Big deal, I'm

used to dust." But, for a leader, this is a great place to drive down a theological stake,

“God fashioned me/us from dust. That’s where I come from. Humble beginnings to

say the least.” And yet (and here’s the second great truth), we are the climax of

creation because it says in Genesis 1:27 that, “we are made in the image of God.” The

writer of Genesis does not spell out precisely what it is that defines the image of God.

Certainly it involves the fact that we are moral agents who can think and choose –

that we have the freedom and capacity to effect the future through our choices. We

have the freedom to choose – to help or hurt, build up or tear down, wound or heal.

It’s a terrifying privilege and a huge responsibility. In class, Dr. Saffold mentioned

three qualities of the image of God: knowledge – knowing God through relationship

with Him (Col. 3:9-10), holiness – having character like His (Eph. 4:22-24), and

righteousness – doing things the way He does them. In his article, The King’s Last

12
Words, he elaborates on this final attribute:

“Leaders take a stand for righteousness. They rule always

with reverence and respect for God. Godly leaders are judged
not by the power, boldness, or cleverness of their decisions but
by the effects of their leadership on others. They never seek to
raise up themselves but use themselves to raise up others, even
as the sunrise drives away the dark and dread of night. A godly
leader’s actions bring refreshment, renewed energy, vision, and
encouragement. Godly leadership is elevating, nurturing, caring,
renewing, life giving.” (Saffold, p. 5)

In Genesis 1:27, we find the reality of community (which we saw in the doctrine

of God Himself – existing between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) clearly imbedded

in essence of the imageo dei, “In the image of God he created them; male and female he

created them.” Male and female – human beings have the capacity for community like

unto God Himself. We are co-bearers of the divine image (more on this to come).

And then God does another wonderful thing: He gives people work to do, "The

Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it

(Gen. 2:15)." Why didn't God make the garden self-weeding? He could have done that.

Essentially, God left creation with work still to be done – unfinished business as it were.

Why does he do that? Because he made human beings with this need to contribute, to

add value to this earth, to make a difference, to work. So, He invites us to partner with

him, to be co-regents with him, "Rule, have dominion or subdue” (Gen. 1:28f.) meaning

not “dominate” but cause it to “fulfill its creative potential.” He gives amazing dignity

to these creatures made from the dust. God Himself is extending an invitation, "I want

you to co-rule the earth (to be rule-sharers, Kingdom-sharers) with me.” This is one

reason that if leadership is perverted, it's so destructive – because every human being

was made to be a co-regent with God – to rule together with God. But God didn't just

13
make us to work. Look at Genesis 2:18 for a moment. All along this refrain has kept

repeating: "And God saw that it was good." But now in 2:18, God says, "It is not good."

What's not good? "It is not good for the man to be alone." Adam needs a companion, a

community. So God creates woman – she’s called a “helper” (Gen. 2:18).

When she is called helper, it does not mean that she’s like his go-fer or junior

assistant. The word "helper" in the Old Testament most often is used to refer to God. The

idea behind her being Adam's helper is that his fundamental task is the creation of

community, and he couldn't do this on his own, so he's given a woman. “And the two

shall become one." This is the major theme as you go through the Bible; the community –

living, serving, leading as one to bring about God’s purposes in harmony and beauty.

God exists as Trinity--one plus one plus one, but that equals one. And then he creates

human beings in his image—male and female—one plus one and they become one. God's

math is really easy. The answer is always one. God created people--l2 tribes--but they're

to be one (John Ortberg, God’s Greatest Dream). "How good and pleasant it is when

brothers and sisters dwell together in unity (Psalm 133:1)." The task is committed to the

man and woman together and can only be carried out together. Saffold notes that from the

doctrine of creation we receive the principle that everyone is called to practice leadership

within the context of loving relationships.

Of course, Genesis 3 record the account of the Fall – human beings using their

freedom to choose to willfully defy God and rebel out of a desire to become like (little)

gods. The action is motivated out of pride and mistrusting God and His word – and the

result is a break in, and with, community for the very first time. Adam and Eve hide from

God and the unabashed intimacy with Him has been breached and flows freely no longer.

14
It has been replaced by fear and insecurity which spin off compensating behaviors to

protect ourselves such as posturing, power plays, and “protecting our own turf. Good

things happen for leaders who honestly face their fears and become transparent in

revealing them. Dan Allender states this counterintuitive truth: “What happens when we

begin to name our cowardice and admit our inclination to hide? Paradoxically, when we

muster the courage to name our fears, we gain greater confidence [within ourselves] and

far greater trust from others (Leading with a Limp, p. 5).” But, ever since sin entered the

picture, there has been a struggle to live in community with God and one another. And, if

leadership is only done through the web of loving relationships, this presents a profound

dilemma and challenge to any community … to any who desire to lead according to

God’s design and purposes. Saffold states it strongly, “Apart from the web of loving

relationships, there is no community worthy of God’s name. Apart from this web, there is

no possibility of bringing glory to God (The Godly Leadership Community, p. 7).” Enter

into the story, Jesus Christ, who came not only to model what it is to live in unbroken

fellowship with God, but died to forgive sin and grant the possibility of, along with the

power to achieve, restored relationships – new community with Him and one another.

Saffold again observes, “In going to the cross…it was not (Jesus) purpose to redeem a

disconnected collection of people but rather to create an entire community of followers.,

bonded to him and linked to one another. Jesus died to create a community, and this

community was not an extra, added element in His plan but the very essence of it (Ibid, p.

1).” Christ restores not only broken relationships with God but the possibility of “doing”

leadership in community as He designed it in the beginning.

Discussion Exercise: Now that we’ve looked at God’s design from the beginning, let’s
revisit the task of defining leadership. Critique this definition from Dr. Guy Saffold,

15
“Leadership is taking the initiative to know God, to reflect His holy character, and
through loving relationships to draw others together to pursue His righteous purposes.”
(The Godly Leadership Community, p. 7)

Leadership (in a Ministry Context): The Call

As we move into the specifics of the theology of Christian leadership, the starting

questions are, “What constitutes a ‘a call’ to lead?” and “How can a person discern

whether he or she has been ‘called’ to leadership?” These questions are particularly

pertinent to emerging leaders who wonder, “Is this really for me? Am I cut out for this?”

To cloud the issue, discerning one’s call is more of an art than a science. As you look at

men and women in the Bible who were leaders, their “call” became clear to them in a

variety of ways.

Os Guinness in his book, The Call, refers to a distinction made in classical

theology between two main types of calling — a primary calling to salvation, and

secondary callings to specific roles and tasks within the kingdom of God. The primary

calling is the same for all Christians: God calls them out of the darkness of a sin-

dominated life into the light of a Christ-dominated life. But they also have multiple

secondary callings (eg., to parenthood, the fellowship of a local church, community

involvement or leadership) that are unique to the individual and grow out of that larger

primary calling. These secondary callings grow out of a desire to be a part of what God’s

doing in the world – to respond to His invitation to work on His agenda, using the talents

he or she has been given in ways that eternally significant.

Steven Graves notes three different factors to consider in one’s call: 1) unique

talents and skills (if you can hit a 97-mile-per-hour fastball, you may have a clue to your

calling), 2) those called by a path (Prince Charles has a pretty good idea of where his path

16
is taking him), and 3) listening to inner desires (Life@Work (vol. 2), p. 83). Christians

are often suspicious of this third dimension: DESIRE. While it’s true that misguided

desires lead us down a wrong path, it’s equally true that right desires are signposts to the

right path. “Delight yourself also in the LORD and He will give you the desires of your

heart” (Psalm 37:4, NKJV). Saint Augustine said the same thing in a different way,

“Love God, and do as you please.” If your desires are in harmony with God’s desires for

you, why wouldn’t you trust your desires and follow them? One thing we can say for

sure: There is a discernment process that can be complicated but is very important and

cannot be avoided.

Sometimes the call is manifested in an inner sense of holy discontent with the

status quo and God stirs within a person to do something about it. Nehemiah is a good

example of a man who found himself in a very comfortable position but God brought

information to him that troubled his spirit concerning the state of ruin in Jerusalem. From

that moment on, there was a deep call within him – first to prayer, and then to action.

God got his attention by troubling his inner waters and he could not shake the sense of

calling upon his life to lead the Israelites in the rebuilding project of huge proportions.

Tim Elmore lists four different biblical types of “call to leadership” in the book

Portrait of a Leader (p. 6):

1. Thunderbolt: It’s unmistakable. Paul experienced this call as he was on

the road to Damascus. God spoke, the bright light shone, and Paul’s life
was changed forever. Elmore states, “These calls often occur at a crisis
event in a moment or season of our life when we suddenly know what to
do.” (Moses would be another example).

2. Walking through open doors: This call comes over time. It is a

progressive revelation, one step at a time. Esther, the Queen of Persia,
simply made wise, God-honoring decisions that eventually saved her
fellow Jews from annihilation. She simply responded with obedience in

17
 situations and took steps of opportunity along the way. Elmore writes,
“They didn’t seem big at the time … and her call didn’t make sense until
it all came together in the end.”

3. Call from birth: Those who know their calling ever since they can
remember. They might not even have responded to the call, but they know
they have been called. When Jeremiah was only a young man, God called
and informed him that he was going to tear down nations and set up other
nations. Jeremiah told God that he was too young for the work. Yet God
reassured, “Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my
spokesman to the world (Jeremiah 1:5, NLT).” (John the Baptist could
also be considered an example here).

4. Growing Awareness: Elmore says that this call comes early but only in a
very general way. Those who have a growing awareness of their calling
begin to understand that something is happening and start sifting through
it very early on in life. Even though they know “something’s there,” they
don’t fully comprehend what God is doing until they are mature. Unlike
walking through open doors, when his call came, Joseph understood the
“big picture” up front, as a teenager (his life began with a leadership
dream and early sense of call), what he didn’t understand (and what had to
be filled in) were the details.

Graves lays out a few guideposts as one considers the role of desire in the call

process:

1. It might be calling by desire if the sense of urgency is persistent and

relatively longstanding.
2. It is probably not calling by desire if I am completely unequipped to get
the job done.
3. It is probably not calling by desire if I quit when I encounter significant
hurdles. (Life@Work (vol 2), p. 85)

As a counterpoint to Graves, this student found fascinating Dan Allender’s emphasis on

God calling reluctant leaders. It was refreshing to have someone trace and develop this

major theological strand throughout Scripture. Allender states, “God seems to choose

leaders who don’t want to serve, and when they do follow God’s call, they often do so in

a way that creates new chaos [just consider the three patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac, and

Jacob] (Leading with a Limp, p. 15).” He illustrates through the lives of Moses, Jeremiah,

18
and the classic reluctant prophet, Jonah. His premise runs as follows:

“Doubt is the context for surrender. And flight is the path

for obedience. When we’re reluctant to lead, doubting our-
selves and our call, we are ripe for growth as a leader. Like-
wise when we hear the call to lead but we run in the opposite
direction. God has a way of having us thrown off the boat,
swallowed by a large fish, and spit onto the shore where we
are to serve … God invites us to run and yet to know that he
will arrive at our place of flight before we arrive so he can
direct our steps again (Ibid).

Henry Blackaby alludes to God’s uncanny knack for pursuing unlikely or disinclined

candidates for leadership, “Spiritual leadership…is not a role for which one applies.

Rather it is assigned by God. God determines a person’s assignment. Historically, God

has chosen ordinary people, most of whom were not looking for a divine assignment…

While there is nothing wrong with wanting to experience God’s powerful working in

one’s life, those wishing for God to use them mightily should not pursue leadership

positions in God’s kingdom (Spiritual Leadership, p. 46).” We’ll come back to that

biblical theme of reluctant leaders.

CALLED versus DRIVEN

Discerning a “call” from God is not simply an academic or theoretical exercise. In

a profound way, a person’s life and leadership is forged and guided by that sense of

calling. Gordon MacDonald carefully delineates between persons that operate out of an

inner sense of call and those that are driven out of an external performance-based

mentality. He uses two biblical figures to illustrate these characteristics of being called

and driven (John the Baptist and King Saul respectively).

Called Person • know exactly who they are

• understand stewardship

19
 Driven Person

• most often gratified by a sense of

accomplishment
• preoccupied with symbols of • tend to have limited sense of
accomplishment integrity
• uncontrolled pursuit of expansion • often possess limited or
• possess an unwavering sense of undeveloped people skills
purpose • tend to be highly competitive
• often possess a volcanic force of
• understand unswerving sense of anger
commitment • usually abnormally busy

(Ordering Your Private World, pp. 28-61)

Saffold citing the call of the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 6), says that leadership is

understanding who God is – and who you are in relationship to Him (i.e., His power,

majesty, moral character, and purity). Isaiah sees the vision of God high and lifted up in

all of His holiness and is undone in His presence, “’Woe is me! For I am a man of

unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King,

the Lord Almighty (6:5).” God dramatically proceeds to remove Isaiah’s guilt (with the

live coal touching his mouth/lips) and prepare him for the mission He has store for the

prophet. Then he poses the penetrating question, “Whom shall I send? And who will go

for us (6:8)?” Of course, God never asks questions to get the answer. He didn’t ask Adam

and Eve, “Where are you?” because he had lost track of the little rascals. He asks the

questions for our own reflection and benefit. He gives Isaiah the opportunity to step up

and volunteer. Isaiah’s answer to God’s call, “Here am I. Send me!” is a voluntary

response to His goodness, love, and grace – no matter how difficult the task might be

(and His assignment was horrendous) or how long it might take to complete. In fact, it is

a life-calling with no term limits but a whole, complete, total commitment of one’s life.

The driven, “try harder” approach to ministry (serving God) doesn’t work. Those who

20
operate from a driven mentality eventually discover that all the joy gets sucked out of

their service.

Discussion Exercise: What has been your own experience of “call” from God? In this
sense, which biblical leader do you most identify with? Do you recognize more
characteristics of a “called” or “driven” leader in your life?

Finding Your Leadership Voice: Journey to Identity for an Emerging Leader

James M. Kouzes, in a fascinating chapter entitled Finding Your Voice, defines

three phases of leadership development. He compares a leader’s development to that of

an artist. He received this insight into leadership during a discussion with an artist friend.

After attending a retrospective of a painter together, his artist friend made the following

observation:

“There are really three periods in an artist’s life. In the first

we paint exterior landscapes. In the second, we paint interior
landscapes. In the third they come together into an artist’s
unique style.”

Kouzes further comment that he recognized this art lesson was applicable to the art of

leadership as well:

“When first learning to lead, we paint what we see

outside ourselves, the exterior landscape. We read biographies
and autobiographies of famous leaders, we read books by exper-
ienced executives and dedicated scholars, we attend speeches
by famous military men, we buy tapes of motivational speakers,
and we participate in training programs. We learn from others.
We try things out.
We do all this to master the fundamentals, the tools, the
techniques. We’re clumsy at first, failing more than succeeding,
but pretty soon we can give a speech with ease, conduct a meeting
with grace, and praise an employee with style. It’s an essential
period; an aspiring leader can no more skip the fundamentals than
an aspiring painter.
Then it happens. Somewhere along the way we notice
how that last speech sounded too mechanically rote, how that last
meeting was a boring routine, and how that last encounter felt
terribly sad and empty. We awaken to the frightening thought that

21
 the words aren’t our’s, that the technique is out of a text, not straight
from our heart.
This is a truly terrifying moment. We’ve invested so much
time and energy in learning to do all the right things, and we
suddenly see that they are no longer serving us well. They seem
hallow. We stare into the darkness of our inner territory, and we
begin to wonder what lies inside.
For aspiring leaders, this awakening initiates a period of
intense exploration. It is a period of going beyond technique, be-
yond training, beyond copying what the masters do, beyond taking
the advice of others. And if you surrender to it, after exhausting
experimentation and often painful suffering, there emerges from all
those abstract strokes on the canvass, an expression of self that is
truly our own.” (Insights on Leadership, chap. 28)

Optional Discussion Exercise: This story or metaphor brings to mind a statement made
by Henri Nouwen that I recorded in my journal: “A real leader doesn’t just blaze the
trail into the future, he or she courageously blazes the trail into his or her own heart.”
John Maxwell comments, “Change always starts on the inside … Don’t worry about
where you’re going until you know who you are. Settle the inside issues first. When
they’re in order, you can start to work on the outside (Christian Reflections on the
Leadership Challenge, p. 43).” Do the three stages of finding your leadership voice (or
parts of it) ring true with you? Where are you at in the process?

Forging the Identity of a Leader: Your Story

All emerging leaders need to know that there will be tests or crises along the way

that will challenge them to the core and ultimately determine the leader they will become.

Patrick Lencioni asks the question, “If you were searching for leaders to change the

world for the better what qualities would you look for?” He answers his own question:

“…I have found many courageous, intelligent, charismatic, and creative people. But few

of them possessed the two qualities (I rank higher than all the others): humility and pain

tolerance.” He suggests two questions that every leader needs to answer:

1. Who am I really serving?

2. Am I ready to suffer?

Lencioni underscores that the pain comes not just from enemies but (more hurtfully) at

the hands of the people you are trying to serve (Christian Reflections…p. 71f). Every

22
human being – leader and non-leader alike – encounters disappointments, trouble,

tragedies, setbacks, and failures. What sets leaders apart is how they respond and weave

(interpret) these experiences and events into the fabric of their life story. Saffold “They

see the past and present from a different perspective and that enables them to look ahead

to the future with a more positive attitude, greater confidence and far greater optimism

(The Godly Leader’s Identity, p. 2).” For the leader, her identity (who she was, who she is

now, and who she is becoming) is found in Christ Jesus (see attachment from Freedom in

Christ Ministries). The depth of what it means to be in Christ, to find one’s identity (past,

present, and future) in Him, is forged through what Warren Bennis and Robert Thomas

call crucible experiences. They found that every leader they studied, young or old had “at

least one intense transformational experience. That transformational experience was at

the very heart of becoming a leader. The descriptive term we found ourselves using is

crucible (quoted in The Godly Leader’s Identity, p. 7).” Saffold takes the concept of the

crucible, and brings the God-dimension into it:

“The crucible may be a deep challenge, a painful tragedy,

a difficult conflict, or a powerful encounter with another
person. On other occasions the crucible is an intense and
positive experience through which a leader develops new
perspectives, recognizes skills and capabilities previously
unrealized, or gains confidence through significant success.
Regardless of the particular nature of the crucible, the leader
emerges a changed person. In the intense, challenging and
transformational environment of the crucible, God transforms
His leaders from who they were and are into the people He
wants them to become (Ibid, p. 7).” (italics added)

He goes on, “Some people are devastated by their experience in the crucible and emerge

overwhelmed, crippled diminished.” And then, he quotes Bennis and Thomas again:

“Leaders (in contrast) create meaning out of the events and

relationships that devastate non-leaders. Even when battered

23
 by experience, leaders do not see themselves as helpless or
find themselves paralyzed. They look at the same events that
unstring those less capable and fortunate and see something
useful, and often a plan of action as well (Ibid, p.8).”

Saffold identifies four examples of crucible experiences (while allowing for many other

kinds) in Scripture. Transformation takes place through…

1. a vision of the glory of God (Isaiah/ Isa. 6:1-4) – a leader emerges with transitory
and eternal values clarified … with a passionate desire to serve no matter what the
cost and to be faithful to the very end.
2. trauma and tragedy (Joseph/ Genesis 37) – the leader finds meaning in adversity
and learns to face rather than avoid tough realities.
3. the refining fire (David/ 2 Samuel 11-12) – the leader emerges with a deeper
recognition of sin, a more humble attitude toward himself, and a passionate joy in
the Lord’s forgiveness that motivates him toward obedience.
4. facing an overwhelming challenge with faith (Abraham/ Genesis 12 & 15) – the
servant leader learns both trust and obedience in a context where they must turn
away from our human craving for evidence and assurance.
(The Godly Leader’s Identity, pp. 9-18)

These crucible experiences allow our stories to connect with God’s story. In the

final analysis, leadership is not so much propositional as it is relational. It is really about

how God’s story and our story connect, and then how our story connects with, and brings

meaning to others, who are on the journey – as we move toward the same eternal goals in

community. God is continually bringing new meaning and insight and, in a sense

recreating our story, and making it brand new; impregnating it again with meaning for the

present and hope for the future. As the Christian leader comes through the crucibles he or

she is in the process of being transformed with …

• Passion for the glory of God

• Joy about the forgiveness of God
• Confidence in the power of God
• Trust in the leading of God
• Commitment to a mission and vision (Ibid, p. 20)

24
Robert Quinn writes about this deep change (another phrase for transformation) that

needs to take place in leaders and organizations. The alternative is slow death. He writes,

“Perhaps the most difficult thing to comprehend about

deep change has to do with our relationships with others.

When we see the need for deep change, we usually see it
as something that needs to take place in someone else. In
our roles of authority, such as parent, teacher, or boss, we
are particularly quick to direct others to change. Such
directives often fail, and we respond to the resistance by
increasing our efforts. The power struggle that follows
seldom results in change or brings about excellence.”
(Deep Change, p. 11)

Heifetz and Linsky call for leaders to accept responsibility for their piece of the mess.

They write, “In short you need to identify and accept responsibility for your contributions

to the current situation, even as you try to move your people to a different, better place

(Leadership on the Line, p. 90).” Denial and blame shifting are symptomatic behaviors of

leaders who have not gone through, or been transformed by, the crucibles.

The Bible offers this simple paradox about life: If you try to keep your life, you

are fated to lose it. If you give up your life, you will find it (Mark 8:35). Dan Allender

suggests that the leader take a different path than is typically outlined in leadership

programs. He writes, “As an act of leadership, consider the risk of giving up your life

through facing, naming, and bearing your weaknesses, and imagine the paradoxical yet

promised benefits (Leading with a Limp, p. 7-8).” Below is a chart devised by Allender

(along with an explanation) that will help a leader measure in a practical way how he is

doing in some of the crucible type challenges and experiences of life (Ibid, p.9).

Five universal challenges that every leader faces are listed on the vertical axis.
Just as it is essential to recognize these challenges, it is also imperative that you identify
your default response to each. The most common ineffective responses are listed on the
horizontal axis.

25
 Typically, when facing the problem of complexity, a leader will default to rigidity.
By doing so, he narrows the available options in an attempt to bring order and sanity to
the complexity he faces. But such a response cuts the leader off from the wide range of
options that he needs in order to effectively address the problem of complexity.
While rigidity tends to be a leader’s typical response to complexity, it’s also true
that many leaders respond by hiding or with some combination of the ineffective
responses listed. As you think about each one, assess and note how you automatically
respond to it.

LEADERSHIP CHALLENGES AND FAULTY RESPONSES

Again, the challenges that every leader faces are listed on the vertical axis. Now
as you think about each challenge, look at the effective responses (on the horizontal axis)
that are needed.
Typically, when faced with complexity, a leader needs to avoid rigidity (see the
previous chart) and instead draw on depth. At the same time, other effective responses
might also be needed. For instance, to effectively address complexity, a leader might
draw on courage or hope paired with depth.

LEADERSHIP CHALLENGES AND EFFECTIVE RESPONSES

26
Optional Exercise: Create a life map (participants will have some background on what a
Life Map is – and be prepared to share your story with your small group.

Servanthood and the Leadership Community

As we come near the end of this paper and try to connect some dots, Henri

Nouwen comes right to the heart of what’s important for the Christian leader. In his

excellent book on dealing with temptations that Jesus faced in the desert … that all

leaders after him have faced – to be relevant, to be spectacular, and to be powerful, he

makes a simply profound statement:

“It is not enough for priests and ministers of the future

to be moral people, well trained, eager to help their
fellow human beings, and able to respond creatively
to the burning issues of their time. All of that is very
valuable and important, but it is not the heart of
Christian leadership. The central question is, Are the
leaders of the future truly men and women with an
ardent desire to dwell in the presence of God, to listen
to God’s voice, to look at God’s beauty, to touch God’s
incarnate Word, and to taste fully God’s infinite
goodness? (In the Name of Jesus, p. 43)

Earlier in his book, Nouwen framed the ultimate leadership question this way, he writes,

“The question is not: How many people take you seriously? How much are you going to

accomplish? Can you show some results? But: Are you in love with Jesus? (p. 37).”

Jesus told Peter, “If you love me, feed my sheep.” Clearly, service flows out of – is the

organic response to – the love we have for Jesus Christ.

Leadership emanating from servanthood is most powerfully articulated and

demonstrated by Jesus Christ. He said it in a number of different and paradoxical ways,

“The last shall be first and the first shall be last” and “the least will be the greatest.” “The

27
Son of man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for

many (Mark 10:45).” Jesus teaching in Mark 9 confused the disciples but, more than that,

it scared them. They did not even want to ask what He meant because it might derail their

own agenda and quest for power, greatness, and godlike status. The disciples constantly

bickered over who would have the best position and the spot of choice in the Kingdom of

God. They were constantly jockeying for advantage and status with Christ. He really set

them up for an incredible dressing down of their misguided thinking about “who’s who”

when he took off his garments, put on the towel of the low down slave and washed their

feet. The basin and towel have become the (sometimes forgotten) symbols of leadership

in the community of Christian faith. Above that, we have the Cross standing as THE

symbol of sacrificial servanthood providing both life and inspiration to the followers of

the greatest leader this world has even known. The apostle Paul tells us that we are to

adopt the same servant mindset as Christ Jesus – who was obedient even to the point of

death … therefore he was highly exalted and given a name that is above every name

(Phil. 2).” Our part is to humble ourselves and let God do the exalting (1 Peter 5:7).

Jesus was very carefully calibrating the depth and scope of leadership: SERVE

OTHERS (see John 13; Luke 22:14f)! There are only two ways to lead: by lording it over

or serving – the world’s way or His way – only two choices. Allender graphically

describes the nature of decisions in the life of a leader:

“…there are no easy decisions. To decide requires a death,

a dying to a thousand options, the putting aside of a legion
of possibilities in order to choose just one. De-cide. Homo-
cide. Sui-cide. Patri-cide. The root word decidere means “to
cut off.” All decisions cut us off, separate us from nearly in-
finite options as we select just one single path. And every
decision we make earns us the favor of some and the
disfavor of others.” (Leading with a Limp, p. 14)

28
Nowhere are those words more true or the implications more far-reaching than with this

choice to lead by dying to oneself. Rejecting servant leadership is to brashly imply, “I’m

better than Jesus. He had to serve but I can rule with sheer power and control.” Those

who choose to be servant leaders after the pattern of Christ operate out of the Agape

Principle, that is, to seek the will of God and the welfare of others (as defined in God’s

terms). But, who will look out for my interests? Randy Alcorn offers some help with this

question:

We get this false dichotomy in our minds – am I going to act

in the best interests of the Kingdom of God or am I going to
act in my best interest? But the truth is, what’s in the best
interest of God, the Kingdom of God, the church of God and
the needs of God’s people, is in fact ultimately in my best
interests. Therefore, every apparent sacrifice has a great
eternal payoff.” (Life@Work, vol. 1, p. 115)

Three questions will assist us in filtering decisions through the lens of servant leadership

taught and modeled by Jesus: 1) Am I obeying God? (what is right), 2) Am I doing good

for others? (highest and best for others), and 3) Am I being selfish? (examination of

motives). Chuck Colson offers a caution though against confusing ambition – or as he

prefers to call it “the desire for significance” – and selfish ambition:

“Ambition is a bad word in some respects. It often has a self-centered,

personally directed connotation. But the desire for significance is part
of the image of God that is planted in each of us. It is at the root of every
human being. The key question, Colson says, is whether we will use our
talents and skills to feed our own ego and make a name for ourselves or
whether we will choose instead to use these God-given attributes to try to
accomplish things that have lasting significance.” (Life@Work (1), pp. 128-9)

Alexander Pope is known for the statement, “The same ambition has the ability to save or

destroy.” Colson says his own decision to follow Christ didn’t make him soft. In fact, he

says, much like the Apostle Paul (who was a high charging Type-A personality before

29
and after his Damascus Road experience), “I still have that same drive, that insatiable

urge to accomplish things, to make things happen.” But he says his drive “has been

redirected” to serve God and others. Or more precisely, it “is being redirected anew each

day” to serve God and others. (He’s) quick to acknowledge that each of us must “die

daily” to selfish ambition if we hope to keep our pride in check. And he says that each of

must seek to avoid self-deception about our true motives for wanting to accomplish

things (Ibid).

Dr. John Piper was speaking at a Moody Conference this student attended and

recounted how he wanted to title one of his books, “Stop Serving God!” But the publisher

would not go for it because that title might be hard to market to a Christian audience. He

went on to explain his premise: God does not want us to serve Him. He wants us to stay

in a humble dependent position and allow Him to serve us. When we try to serve God, we

easily move into a performance mentality (become driven rather than called) and get

hung up on, “How am I doing?” The focus is on us. However, when we live with a

realization of how frail and weak we are and how great God is … that we can do nothing

apart from Him … and humbly abide in Him (John 15), God has the opportunity to serve

us and manifest His power through us, THEN, He gets the honor and glory and credit that

is due Him AND we minister out of a sense of gratitude and awe of Him, not from a

place of duty and frustration, or pride and arrogance. Some have made a similar

distinction between living out of a sense of commitment or surrender to Jesus Christ.

When I focus on being committed to Him, it tends to lead me in the direction of

performance and, again, the question of “How am I doing?” And the answer to every

problem becomes, “If I was just more committed, I could do it. If I could just muster

30
more commitment.” The end result is usually frustration, guilt, comparison, or misplaced

pride (“at least I’m more committed than so and so”). Surrender is placing my life into

God’s hands realizing that He is the source and fountain of strength, wisdom, courage,

and fortitude. When the leader lives in this surrendered way, she keeps things in their

proper perspective – God gets the glory and ultimately people are better served. The

leader finds his greatest satisfaction in giving himself away.

Service and servant leadership brings us back to the picture we started with, of

life that is “done” in community. Jesus died to make this new community possible. He

modeled it through His own connection to the Father and the Spirit during His earthly

ministry – and His connection with those He came to save and lead through serving them.

We cannot miss His total identification with those He came to lead.

Heifetz gives and example of this type of identification from the business world.

The CEO of a highly successful chemical factory in Israel did everything he could to

assure workers that the line was safe after an explosion tragically killed two employees.

Still the workers were leery, their trauma was palpable, and productivity declined. The

CEO (Avram) came to a decision to resign his position as CEO and take a job on the line,

right at the spot where the explosion had taken place. His action turned the company

around and made it even more profitable than before (Leadership on the Line, p. 95). He

put himself on the line, humbled himself, and totally identified with the employees. As a

result the community came together again and was restored. “Lording it over” fractures

and disrupts community, serving one another brings everyone together. When we serve

one another in this way, treat one another with dignity and respect, and honor the gifts

and contributions of each one, oftentimes answers come from the bottom-up rather than

31
from the top-down. And isn’t that the way it is in the paradoxical kingdom of heaven?

The question always in front of the Christian leader, is, “Who’s kingdom am I trying to

build?” (By the way, a good parable of this is found in a book by Dr. Seuss, Yertle the

Turtle).

Servant leadership does not mean being weak or caving in to the demands of the

most vocal person or group or doing whatever someone wants you to do. I wrote down in

my class notes this statement, “Sometimes a leader has to be very coercive, forceful, and

even disruptive. That is not incompatible with being a servant.” Leaders who are working

toward adaptive, transformational, deep change will encounter strong opposition at times:

“…adaptive work creates risk, conflict, and instability because

addressing issues underlying adaptive problems may involve
upending deep and entrenched norms. Thus, leadership requires
disturbing people—but at a rate they can absorb (Ibid, p. 20).”

Lencioni points out that finding Christian leaders willing to work in this kind of

environment is a challenge in itself:

“Finding leaders who can challenge the process and change the world
for the better is not easy. The truth is, it is rare to find a human being
who can accept the requirements of true Christian leadership, setting
aside ego and fear of suffering, failure, and rejection, which isn’t such
a surprise when one considers the nature of our humanity and our
inclination toward sin and self-preservation. As it turns out, the world
is not as difficult to change as its leaders are.”
(Christian Reflections, p. 81)

Servant leadership leads to wounding. Make no mistake, the leader must endure his or her

share of hardship as a good soldier. It is inevitable that the leaders will be hurt. They

must pray for the grace to accept the wounds of Christ in their leadership.

In this final paragraph, there are a couple statements from class that linger with

this student. One was actually a model for decision making known as the “good for each

32
and good for all” approach. The group together lays out the criteria for making a decision

and then operates under the basis of, “If we don’t meet the criteria, we don’t make the

decision” and “We have to find a way to make it happen!” While it sounds idealistic, it

resonates as a way of really leading in community. The implementation looks like this:

“We will be together and we will pray together until we find a way forward.”

Dr. Saffold addressed the power struggle that often goes on between church board

and the ministry staff or administration and faculty. He threw out this challenge and it is

a good note to close on, “Tell the Board they’re in charge and in a year from now we’ll

know that they led if the staff says, ’We’ve been served well.’ Tell the staff they are in

charge and in a year from now we’ll know if they led well if the Board/church says,

“We’ve been served well.”

33