Leadership, Humility & Brokenness: A Tale of Three Kings

Leadership.  We love it and we hate it.  The feelings that rise in our souls when we hear the word are usually the responses to our experiences - good or bad.  We cringe as we think of bad leaders who manipulated, berated, or abused us.  We smile as we remember the leaders who inspired us to be and do more than we ever thought possible.  Unfortunately, bad memories linger longer and deeper than the good ones, so for many people, leadership is a necessary evil.  We often take the phrase, "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and expand it to just, "power always corrupts."  But maybe not.

In "A Tale of Three Kings" pastor and author Gene Edwards shares the story of David, the shepherd-King of Israel, and shows his response to both Saul and to his son Absalom.  His theme is clear - David did not grasp for power, he did not fight to get power, nor to retain power.  He trusted that God is ultimately in control and gives and takes power away to whom, from whom, and whenever he wants it.

This is my second time to read this good book.  I recently lead a men's campout/retreat and this was the required prerequisite reading.  Needless to say, this got the guys talking because it touches on so many tender spots in the male psyche:  painful memories, desire for revenge/justice, our call to leadership, and our longing for significance.

The books talks a lot about the pain we endure at the hands of others (especially bad/abusive leaders).  The author suggests that while pain is not good, it is useful in that God uses our painful situations to break us down in order to be completely dependent on him.  He even goes so far as to say, "God did not have-but wanted to have-men and women who would live in pain.  God wanted a broken vessel."  While I think the second sentence is true - I am not sure that God wants us to live in pain.  It does seem like most of us are not broken and humble without some pain.

The books talks a lot about our desire for revenge when we have been wronged, attacked or abused.  The example described is Saul's habit of throwing spears at David.  The author reminds us that David could have pulled the spear out of the wall and thrown it right back at Saul - revenge - and that he would have been justified at doing so.  But- and here is a great insight - by doing so, he would have put himself in the "order" or way-of-doing-things of Saul.  This is a great reminder that while we can call it "justice," it is really more like revenge when we are seeking it on our own behalf. 

The books also deals with our desire for leadership.   We rightly desire to lead and to influence - but the author asks us if our prayers for influence come from truly good motives - and to examine our real motives for power and control.

This book is a great read for anyone who finds themselves in a position of leadership or authority.  For the one who has been called or somehow thrust into a position of leadership, this is important to read.  For the one who enjoys leading and influencing, this is a good reminder and opportunity to examine one's true motives.  For the person who resists the call to leadership, this book presents a positive vision for leadership that is centered on character not charisma. 

From a formal theological perspective, there are a couple of things to know going into the book.  As I read it, I kept thinking, "this author comes from the Baptist/Reformed tradition, but has strong pietist/revivalist tendencies!"  This combination of influences is not common.  I saw the Baptist/Reformed theological influence throughout the book as the author suggested that David didn't seek power or resist his son's rebellion because he just believed that God was Sovereignly pulling the strings. The pietist influence came through as he exalted weakness, suffering, praying more and doing less, etc.  They Wesleyan/Arminiam reader will merely have to say, "I can't agree with how far he pushes God's sovereignty," but will appreciate the pietist influence!  It would be foolish to dismiss the book because of a differing view on the extent of God's sovereignty! 

There are points at which the convergence of these 2 influences almost goes too far, but the reader must understand the narrow purpose of this book.  (Because of the author's strong statements, it can be easy to misunderstand his purpose).  The author is not suggesting that Christians should never resist or fight against evil!  He is not suggesting a passive spirituality that is all prayer and no action!  A short reading of the life of David easily refutes it.  The author is only attempting to speak to our desire for personal power and personal ambition!  And when this limited scope is kept in mind, we discover a message that we all need to hear!

The greatest take-away for me was the reminder to guard my heart.  I wonder if so many fallen religious leaders just became so busy, stressed, and overloaded with decisions and meetings, that they lost their way.  At one point, the author suggested that those who lead by way of "rules" and by reminding everyone around them about their authority, are not really leading.  Leading by way of rules and position is the easy way out, the cop-out.  But sometimes I just get too weary from meetings, making decisions, answering emails, and returning phone calls, and I default to the easy way out.  And I can imagine that years of that results in burnout and failure.  I am reminded to guard my heart, and regularly seek God, asking him to reveal to me my true motives, and to correct in me any impure motives.

"Gathered and Scattered" is too Simplistic

"Gathered & Scattered"

Gathered:  When the church comes together for worship, teaching, fellowship, sacraments, etc.

Scattered:  When the church departs the gathering, proceeding into the world for mission. evangelism, justice etc.

What is the church called to do?  The answer is easy: BOTH

This sounds nice.  It is nice.  It is a simple couplet, easy to remember.

But it is too simplistic. 

We often assume that our "scattering" is an individualistic endeavor to merely be Jesus wherever else we do life.  Or, in an attempt to combat individualism, we sit around tables with Bibles and beers (or coffee, if we are holiness folk), with other Christians and call in community, but in a spiritually neutral location so we can call it missional.  Assuming that our being will rub off on others, we conveniently excuse our lack of doing.


Here is the problem - it only lasts one generation.  Where is the multiplication?  In order for the cause of Christ and the Kingdom of Christ to last for more than a generation, there must be multiplication of disciples and of the gatherings of the disciples.  Yes, this includes the multiplication of organizations and institutions, but only as necessary to support the multiplication of disciples.
What if, instead of merely scattering to our workplaces, neighborhoods, and places of need, we scattered as teams, with the purpose and intent to re-gather in smaller groupings, in these other places of work, neighborhood, or need, not for more fellowship, but to intentionally invite others to gather as inquirers, seekers and disciples?

It is just not as simple as "gather and scatter."  There must be more.  We must envision and plan with an end in mind that includes multiplication "to the ends of the earth."  Then and only then are we faithful to the mission of Jesus.

"Fasting" by Jentezen Franklin is a great primer on the subject!

As I have previously written, God is leading me on a journey through the spiritual discipline of fasting.  As I have experimented with various ways of fasting, times to fast, etc., I have read some of the subject.  Recently, I felt it was time to lead our congregation in the practice of fasting as well, teaching our members to fast privately, as well as corporately.  I discovered, though, that there are very few effective resources designed to teach fasting to groups.  Since we use video-based teaching series in our small groups, I was amazed at the lack of resources on video for any group setting.  When I found one decent video-based study, I hoped it would be good!  It was.

Jentezen Franklin is a pentecostal preacher in Georgia.  He regularly leads his churches in fasts of twenty-one days at the beginning of every year.  Through his television ministry, he has encouraged thousands to follow.  A few years ago he published a hard-cover book, journal, study guide and DVD for those who follow him at a distance.  I purchased a copy of each and was pleasantly surprised.

I have been trained to be wary of pentecostal preachers.  I have been warned of their tendency towards emotionalism, to putting too much emphasis on speaking in tongues, and especially their current abuse of God's blessings, especially in the area of desiring prosperity (sometimes more than God himself).  Of course, wisdom reminds us that the headlines only tell about the most radical in any group, those who over-emphasize any teaching to the point of abuse.  Franklin, however, is a gem in the pentecostal tradition.  If you are wondering what fasting is all about, read his book!  You can get it here. "Fasting" is a book for those who want to know more about fasting, but are weary of radicalism from either end of the spectrum.

I appreciate that Franklin comes from the old revivalist tradition within pentecostalism.  He teaches that fasting is a door to a deeper relationship with God.  He emphasizing seeking the Giver of gifts and blessings more than the gifts and blessings themselves.  His sections on the sanctification of one's life by way of consecrating everything to Christ would make many Nazarene preachers proud!

While reading a description of the book, you might be thinking that at 237 pages it will be a little too technical.  It is not.  It is a small book, comprised of 17 short chapters.  Check it out!  You will learn a few things about fasting and you will be encouraged to try it out!

Dispelling the "We Can't Change Until Everyone is On Board" Myth

I heard it all the time.  "We need to make some changes at our church, but we can't do it until everyone is on board..."  Really?

I understand the intention of the person saying it.  Whether a pastor or a strong lay leader, we don't want to force our ideas on others.  We don't want to lead as a dictator.  We really don't like, "my-way-or-the-highway," leaders and don't want to be one of them.  We have also heard about building consensus.  So, we work to build consensus...but then, what?

Here is the problem with waiting until everyone is on board: there is too much power in one person's hands.  It allows one person, or a very small handful of people to become passive dictators!  Moreover, as I was reminded by a recent article, most people are late adopters, and they won't buy into an idea until it has already succeeded!

So what is a leader to do?  Gently push for change, and try new ideas on an experimental basis with those who are willing to try.  In other words, form a test group.  Here is how pastor and leadership expert Larry Osborne suggests going about it:  "I've found that most boards and congregations will let us try something long before they'll sign off as fully supporting something that is brand new or untested...most people are happy to let us try something as long as they don't have to support it or pay for it.  Frankly, there are very few true innovations that require broad buy-in to launch.  Most can be launched at the fringe of your ministry with minimal support.  Simply count the "yes" votes and start with those who like the idea.  It it's successful, everyone will jump aboard soon enough.  If it's not, you'll be able to bail out or make any necessary midcourse corrections without losing all of your leadership chips."  (Outreach Magazine, January/February 2014, page 70)

Do you hear the humility here?  After all, my great idea might not be all that great! But testing it with a group of supporters is a great way to try it and make corrections.  Maybe that humility will be all the others need to give it a try.

I wish I had listened to this advice nine years ago.  I was working with a team to Re-Focus our ministries and we concluded that we needed to completely re-vamp our discipleship program (which included one adult Sunday School class, a weekly prayer meeting, and occasional small groups) into a full-fledged small group program with no prayer meeting or adult Sunday School class.  The idea blew up and a bunch of people left the church.  Looking back, I would have been wise to launch the group program with just 2 groups of interested people, and allow the other groups to continue to meet.

So how many people do we need on board to make change?  Only enough folks to experiment with the change, and then take it from there!

Samson Was Lonely - And It Killed Him

Last Sunday I preached on Samson - as in the Old Testament character who was a mix of Superman's strength, G.I. Joe's military prowess, the Incredible Hulk's rage, and Fabio's hair.  The sermon was a bit long, and a few parts hit the cutting room floor and were not picked up again.  But I can't stop thinking about this one element:  Samson Was Lonely!

Leadership consultants (in both the church and business worlds) teach the same truth - Leadership is lonely!  As one progresses up the "ladder" there are fewer and fewer people to answer to and go to for advice until, at the top, it feels like there is no one.  And with greater responsibility comes fewer options.  Leadership is lonely!  You think I'm kidding - here is one of many articles.

When I look at the life of Samson, and especially his pitfalls, it seems obvious that he was a lonely guy.  Okay, I realize that the Bible never says it specifically, but it really is not difficult to see.  Most people took the Nazarite vow for a limited time - Samson lived the vow for a lifetime.  Which means that most of his friends saw him as some kind of religious extremist.  I can begin to relate to that.  Sometimes I purposely do not tell people that I am a pastor because I know that as soon as I do, they will get all weird around me, like they aren't good enough to be around me (which just feels like I don't "fit in.").  How do you think it felt for Samson?  He probably had no friends.

Samson couldn't even find a girlfriend among his own people.  I know the Bible tells us that God was working to get Samson "in" with the Philistines, but still - Samson didn't know that - he just wanted a wife and couldn't find one.  When he got married, he didn't even have friends to join him as his groomsmen, but was given 30 "friends."  Later, after that whole wedding fiasco, we find him visiting a prostitute.  What kind of men visit prostitutes?  Lonely ones.  Finally, he gives away the secret of his strength to the gold-digging Delilah.  I wonder if he saw it coming, or if he ignored the giant-red-flags-with-blinking-lights because he just wanted to feel loved by someone.

Yep- Samson was lonely.  And like so many lonely leaders, he compromise his integrity and lost all credibility and influence.

If you are a leader and you are feeling a bit lonely, welcome to the club.  But you can't stay lonely for long.  Or at least you must pro-actively work to address it.  In addition to the one above, here are a few articles that can help.

7 Ways to Help Prevent Leadership Loneliness Lonely and Dangerous
It's Time To Acknowledge CEO Loneliness

The suggestions are not genius, though.  We already know them.  We already want them.   We just think we are too busy.  We think we can't make the time.  But maybe we should ask those who have gone before us and never made the time...until they really lost everything and everyone with a few bad decisions.

I keep thinking that Samson could have been so much more of an influence.  He could have lead his people for forty years, not just twenty.  He could have lead them back to God, not just to temporary reprieve from Philistine invasion. 

Oh, what might have been, had loneliness not taken its toll.

My Fasting Experience - Longing to Eat What Fell From the Rich Man's Table

On the eighteenth day of my twenty-one day fast, I served as a WatchDOG at Olivia's school. This wonderful program invites dads to serve for a day at their child's school. We help car riders unload and get into school.  We push swings at recess.  We review flash cards with students who are struggling.  We open six to seven hundred milk cartons, yogurt containers and Lunchables lids.  It is a great program!  It also gives dads a new appreciation for teachers! I usually enjoy my days at the school serving as WatchDOG.  However, when I signed up in January for a Wednesday in April, I didn't know I would be fasting, living life at 50-75% speed.  The kindergarteners on the playground didn't expect that either.

Recess was a bit rough, but I made it.  Two hours of lunchroom help, however, did me in.  At the end of lunch, with a few hours left in the school day, I had to give in and go home.  I just couldn't do it.

But that is not the purpose of this post.  The cafeteria crisis was deeper.  I have written earlier that after even one day of fasting, the hunger pains go away.  If you have experimented with fasting, you really must try a multi-day fast sometime. It is not has tortuous as you have imagined - the hunger pains really do go away!  But by day 18, having lost more than twenty pounds, I was getting hungry.  And desire for food increased in the presence of it!  The hot lunch options for the day included a hot dog or roasted chicken.  You can imagine which option most of the kids selected.  It was so hard to open container after container.  I just wanted a bite.  Near the end of each class's lunchtime, the students walk to the end of the table and dump their styrofoam trays, sporks and uneaten leftovers. I found myself longing for a leftover.  Gross, I know, but hey, I was hungry and there was food!

No, this is not a post on how Americans waste too much food, or a critique of school lunch programs.  If you want that, write your own blog post on the topic.

Here is the takeaway from my lunchroom longings:  I wondered how many hungry children in developing nations or in overcrowded cities walk past electronics stores and stare at televisions in the windows showing first world citizens eating cheeseburgers, hot dogs, cake and specialty coffees. As   gaze at life in a distant world, do they long for just a bite of food, of any food, but get no nourishment, neither from their own family or government, or from the families they see feasting around the world?  Do they, like the beggar Lazarus who lived outside the gates of the unnamed rich man, long to eat even the scraps that fall from our tables?  That story in Luke 16 scares me.  You see, I am a one-percenter, globally speaking.  And most likely so are you.  So are all of the campers who "occupied" Wall Street a few summers ago. 

When I am not fasting, I am feasting, and most likely so are you.  If "overeating" is the consumption of more calories than are needed to maintain healthy BMI, then I am guilty.  How can I regularly feast/overeat in good conscience while others are starving?  The parable of the rich man and Lazarus scares me.  Just sayin...

A second image raced through my mind as I stood in the cafeteria watching fifty gallon trash liners fill with leftovers and utensils.  I wonder how much of our processed food is packaged in foreign companies by underage workers earning pennies an hour, working seven days a week from dawn till dusk, sharing what they earn with their families but remaining hungry?  I have no research, so the answer might be zero.  But it might be in the thousands, too.  And as they watch my future snack food fall into one hundred calorie packages, and as they load trucks headed for my grocery store, do they long to sneak a bite to fill their stomachs, but stop short because they know the dreadful consequences?

I hesitated to write this for three weeks because I wanted to present viable solutions.   I wish I had answers. To say, "just give more money to the poor," is an easy, vague cop-out.  We all tried once to take up our mom's threat to send our vegetables to starving kids in China, but she never did ship that box, did she?  But somehow we must connect our personal eating habits to giving, to make it real, and more than a mere impersonal monetary donation.  I did have the idea that maybe whenever we eat out we should commit to giving a donation equal to the amount of our bill to a ministry that is feeding the starving.

Do you have ideas?  How can we truly share our food with those who are hungry and have no means to obtain it themselves?

Viktor Frankl's "A Man's Search For Meaning"

In preparation for this Sunday's message, I pulled a book from my shelves.  I purchased Man's Search For Meaning while a student at seminary.  Those days were filled with books I had to read, leaving little time or energy for the books I wanted to read.  I am now trying to fill my time with the latter...

I remember hearing about and reading excerpts of Viktor Frankl in both philosophy and theology classes.  I repeatedly heard that Frankl discovered that concentration camp inmates who lost hope quickly lost their lives, while those who retained hope often retained their lives! This concise, but insightful, work on the subject of meaning, suffering, and hope just cannot be ignored.  I concur with one reviewer - I could barely put it down.

I read this short work in order to hear Frankl's perspective on the necessity of hope. Interestingly, he rarely use the word itself.  Rather, he focused on the subject (as the title suggests) of finding meaning.  Frankl pushes existentialist philosophy beyond the mere acceptance of the reality of suffering to the discovery and acceptance of the meaning of suffering.  He regularly quotes Friedrich Nietzsche, "He who has a why to live can bear with almost any how."

The value of Frankl's work is his firsthand description of his experiences in a Nazi concentration camp, coupled with his professional training and experience as a psychiatrist before and after his imprisonment.  He recognizes the limits of his personal experience, but also makes the most of his experiences.  He writes of what he witnessed in others and in himself.

Frankl's thesis is to show the various ways that prisoners found meaning in the midst of and in thedoes life have meaning right here, right now, or is it now meaningless? He writes, "It is a peculiarity of man that he can only live by looking to the future."  A few pages later, he writes of the consequences of failing to see a future: "The prisoner who had lost faith in the future - his future - was doomed."
experience of sufferings that included starvation, beatings, and the constant threat of death by extermination.  Frankl discovered that the central question asked by the prisoners was,

Frankl's genius, however, was not a simplistic solution of "well just find meaning..."  He pushes further.  He suggests that a person must hold on to the future (as something to look towards), find meaning in the present (as something to live for today), but also to take responsibility for his life's meaning.  Genius!  He writes, "we had to teach the despairing men, that it did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us...Our answer [to the question of the meaning of life] must consist, not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct.  Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks to which it constantly sets for each individual."  I think he is right on!  Too often we want to think about the meaning of life and then expect it to "just happen."  But the real heroes are those translate meaning into action!  Frankl even prophetically warns against societies who promote reflection without action!  Frankl also acutely noticed that a person's "meaning in life" is not vague and grand, but is specific and related to the time and place at hand.  In other words, our meaning in life can and does change - and so in every place and situation, we must ask ourselves what our meaning is here and now. Genius!

This idea is expanded upon in the second half of the updated edition which I read (published in 1963).  In this edition, Frankl adds a brief introduction to his therapeutic method, that which he calls logotherapy (a method to help patients discover and activate meaning in life).  He describes his method the "third school of Viennese therapy" (following Freud and Adler).  Frankl clearly, but gently, challenges a few of their ideas which continue dominate.  First, I appreciate his challenge of the human need for "homeostasis."  Frankl suggests that humans need tension, challenge, and "the struggle and striving of some goal worthy of him."  He suggests that expectation or demand for homeostasis results in a sense of meaninglessness.

Finally, and I think this is a great observation that applies especially to my own field of strategic, missional evangelism and outreach, is Frankl's teaching that we only experience meaning when we are others-oriented and world-oriented, not self-oriented.  He writes, "by declaring that man is a responsible creature and must actualize the potential meaning of his life, I wish to stress that the true meaning of life is to be found in the world rather than within man or his own psyche...By the same token, the real aim of human existence cannot be found in what is called self-actualization.  Human existence is essentially self-transcendence rather than self-actualization...In other words, self-actualization cannot be attained if it is made an end in itself, but only as a side effect of self transcendence."  In other words, we need to stop thinking about ourselves so much, and as we think more about others and the world around us, we will find ourselves happier and fulfilled!

I now know why Viktor Frankl's short work is so highly regarded.  It is moving, challenging, and deeply personal.  I thoroughly enjoyed it!