Tag Archives: leadership

•

This is my second time through this book, the first time I breezed through, this time I want to get at what he wants to get at.

Worship matters. It matters to God because he is the one ultimately worthy of all worship. It matters to us because worshiping God is the reason for which we were created. And it matters to every worship leader, because we have no greater privilege than leading others to encounter the greatness of God. That's why it's so important to think carefully about what we do and why we do it.

The first chapter is about how Kauflin started his career, and about a really dry spot he went through. Frustrated and tired, he was pointed again at the cross (a good thing.)

What I hope to get from this book HOW worship matters, as well as WHY worship matters.

There is a line that Sunday morning groups need to grapple with, that many don't: what is the difference between being in a performance group, and being in a group that deliberately leads a congregation in corporate praise?

That's not a matter of how to choose songs, that's a matter of leadership technique.

•

★★★★★★I've come to the conclusion that every conservative should know Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" inside out.  And be ready to name the tactics (whether liberals know they're using them or not) when confronted with them.

"Rules for Radical Conservatives" takes those rules, turns them around and gives conservatives hope for taking our country back from the liberal elite (leadership) who want to wreck it.

It's written from the viewpoint of a conservative, what the rules are and why they will work.

Know them, use them.

It's one that will stay on the front page of the kindle app.

•

Two pursuits, yet very similar.

Jerry Bridges wrote two books, "The Pursuit of Holiness" and "The Practice of Godliness".

Holiness and Godliness are two callings of a Christian; similar, but Bridges makes a distinction.  In the book on holiness, he talks about putting off the old man, Godliness is about putting on the new man.

Neither one of these works unless you include a generous sprinking of the Gospel.  Unless we have a full understanding that we are called to be perfect, but the only perfection we can rely on is the perfection of Christ, we will run into deep anger and dispair at the failure of our efforts.  If we don't understand that we cannot to it on our own, we run into deep pride.

And still, we are called to holiness, Godliness; we are called to be perfect, for the Lord our God is perfect.

What does it mean to be "holy"?  We turn away from that which is sin.  We love what is good and we hate what is evil.

What makes God angry also makes us angry.

In the call to holiness and Godliness, we strive (with the Spirit's sanctification) to become more like Christ.

What made Christ angry?  Those religious people who took what was evil and called it "good".

Immediately, Gene Robinson comes to mind.  Those religous people who look at abortion and call it a good, human right.

Those who look at women and call them inferior, denying them an education and a voice.  Men who abuse their wives and call it "leadership".

You see, there are extremes on either side.  To examine the extreme on one side without examining the log on your own side...

•

Both of my kids appear to be on the "education track" and the I'm remembering the psychology professor I had last year.  He knew his stuff; he was also an adjunct who happened to be the head of the special education programs for the country next to mine.  With years of service under his belt, he was very unlike the academics who were getting their information out of a book.

These "parenting styles" have also applied to many teachers I've known so it's a good discussion to have with somebody on the teaching track.

The first (and worst) is "neglectful" parenting.  The basic needs (food, clothing, shelter) are met, but other than that, the kid is mostly on their own.

Next is "permissive" parenting.  There are few expectations of behavior and the child is rarely (if ever punished).  At the end of the day, the parent caves.  Children raised in "permissive" homes grow up unable to take responsibility for their own actions and immature.

The next two sound alike but in practice are not.  And they are the most interesting because they can apply to so many different parts of life.  From a job manager, to a teacher/college professor, to a board president, to a neighborhood association.

Of all the "parenting" styles, psychologists say "authoritative" is the ideal.  An authoritative parent (or manager, or board member or elder) will clearly state boundaries and expectations, while giving those supervised the freedom to explore and learn within those boundaries.  There are consequences that are known ahead of time for breaking the "rules" (if applicable) and two-way communication is not only welcome, but encouraged.

"Authoritarians" are just as good (or even better) at making rules and handing out consequences.  The difference, however, is huge.  Instead of discussion, the rules are stated with a "my way or the highway" attitude that discourages opinions that may affect the style of the manager/parent/board member.

The differences between "authoritative" and "authoritarian" (outside of the parenting arena) can be roughly illustrated by two difference church boards.

1) says that "X" is a good program and is recommended for  personal growth.  "Y" is also a good study guide and church 1) urges members and attenders to choose the group and study that best fits their needs.

2) drops everything that all small groups, studies, age groups and classes are doing for (whatever period of time) so that every single person that attends the church within that time frame will be doing "Z" program.  Period.

In volunteer boards, this can mean a president who holds every bit of information close to the vest, so that other board members have a difficult time making informed decisions, vs. a president who distributes spread sheets and letters so that everybody who has to vote also has all the information available.

The "authoritative" v. "authoritarian" has a big impact on those who sit under these types of managers (or what ever authority structure a person is under).  From a philosophical point of view, as a parent and educator, it bears thinking about what sort of authorit... I am.

• 17 Comments

•

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. (2 Cor 3:17  ESV)

In providence, the sermon I heard yesterday was on Spiritual leadership, taking from Acts 6.

The problem was an administrative problem but it was a problem.  When widows were being fed, one demographic was fed, while another was not...how to solve it.

Which is more important?

spiritual LEADERSHIP.....or.....SPIRITUAL leadership?

We can tend to see our spirituality as one aspect of our person, along with psychological, emotional, physical, mental, sexual, social, etc.

OR

We can see our spirituality as encompassing all that we do.  Anything that we do that is of the Spirit IS spiritual.

The apostles understood their job to be one of discernment and proclamation of the Gospel message.  Also understanding that in their apostolic leadership role, they could not do everything; things (such as the group of widows) were slipping through the cracks.

Rather than wait on tables, the apostles decided to choose a group of men to do take care of the administrative and day-to-day details.

But wait! Wait on tables?  Couldn't they have hired that done?

No....no.  The men who were chosen were not any men, even the men chosen for this task were "of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom."

It is a false dichotomy to set up

  • the spiritual
  • against the physical.

and

  • the leadership
  • against the servant

In reality, it is

  • the spiritual act of leadership in discerning and proclaiming the Word and
  • the spiritual act of leadership in administration and serving

Everything can be spiritual.

  • The Apostles were doing a spiritual job
  • the Seven were doing a spiritual job.

Were all of these men equal in salvation? Yes.

Were all of these men equal in personhood?  Yes.

Were all of these men doing vital jobs?  Yes.

Were the Seven under the authority of the Apostles?  Yes.

Were they doing the same job?  No.

Were they supposed to be doing the same job?  No.

Were they all working in the Spirit?  Yes.

Does this make the seven "less" than the apostles?  Less equal?  In importance?  No...feeding the poor and caring for those less fortunate is a command.  In salvation?  No, there is no Scriptural evidence that the Apostles were more "saved" than the Seven.  In personhood?  No, they were all human.  In authority?  Yes.  The Apostles were given authority over the church, while the Seven were given authority over administration under the Apostles.

So, rather than seeing a group of leaders (spiritual) and a group of servants (physical) what we have are two groups of men, both doing spiritual jobs, both serving God in vital ways, both equal in personhood and salvation, but not equal in authority.

The pastor compared the Apostles and the Seven to the church today:

He likened the Apostles to the elders and pastors.  They are the ones who are responsible for discerning the will of God for the congregation.  They are the ones responsible for church discipline.  Even within that group, there is leadership structure.  The elders are responsible for the discerning of the long-term and overall direction, while the pastors are the ones who are more responsible for leading day-to-day activities.

He compared the Seven to the board of deacons, the ministry facilitation and operations staff.  They are the ones who carry out the direction of the elders, under the leadership of pastors.

Are any of the jobs less "spiritual"?  No.  Are the elders and pastors more important than the deacons and staff?  No, they all fill vital shoes.

Is the child with Down Syndrome who passed out bulletins any less spiritual than the pastor?  I think the pastor would say no?  Is the child less valuable, less equal in the eyes of God?  I think the pastor would say no.

Is the spiritual act of servant-hood less equal than the spiritual act of  pastoring?