The idol of acceptance and popularity

Way too many Christians put popularity ahead of their obedience to Christ. This is absolutely evident in the number of youth who walk away from their faith when they no longer fit in a youth group. It is equally evident in the fact that youth groups are often, maybe even in my church, a place that youth feel more popular. I know this is often the goal of church leaders and parents. They hope that youth group is a place where the young Christians can find acceptance with their peers.

That doesn't seem too wrong. We want our children to be accepted by Christian peers rather than be lost in the wrong crowd. The problem is that when that is the goal of youth group, the real purpose of the church is lost. The only valid purpose of the church is to hold one another up as we glorify God and spread his light to the world.

Glorifying God is not popular.

I have a challenge that hit me this week. Name one person in the Bible that God told to become popular and through politics of the day quietly bit by bit, with great sensitivity to the will of others develop a popular and comfortable community that glorifies God.

I can't think of one. The closest I can come up with is Esther. Her challenge from Mordecia was to gain political power to save the people of Israel. While this could be seen as a move to become political for a godly goal, the fact is that Esther didn't do what was popular. She stuck her neck out in great risk of becoming unpopular with the king. The fact that it worked was a blessing from God because of her obedience.

Of course in 1 Kings 12, the elders of Israel advised Rehoboam to lighten the tax load on the people after Solomon's expensive reign. One might interpret this as a step to make him more popular, but you'll see as that text progresses that the issue of seeking popularity is the downfall of Rehoboam. He was seeking to be popular among his peers. The elder's goal was less about popularity and more about wisdom of the moment.

As a follower of Christ and leader in a church, my goal cannot be about popularity. My goal is about obedience. Both my personal obedience to Christ and teaching others to be obedient. Church growth should be a natural outcome as more people obey Christ, but I cannot confuse the idol of acceptance with obedience in faith.

Leadership and Marketing: Are they the same?

Interact with me on this thought…

Marketers give people what they want. Leaders give people what they need. 

 I wonder if marketing is often confused for leading in a consumer-driven, populous society. In a couple days, I'll be attending the Willow Creek leadership Summit. I don't like this event but I go because my leadership team supports it and because I want to help them to interact with the different concepts that are shared their. I don't like it, because, in the end, I don't feel that the Summit trains leaders but marketers.

One speaker at this summit is a marketer named Seth Godin. I'm enjoy reading Seth Godin's books and his blog. I feel that Seth has a lot of excellent thoughts that should be considered by church leaders. However, recently, I haven't been so enthralled about what he has to say. My concern is that I have been drawn into the church leader as church marketer mentality. Godin constantly talks about getting people what they want.

What people want is often not what's good for them. I want a Rita's water ice right now. One was custard in it. But I don't need it. In fact it would be bad for me in the sense that I'm already overweight and I don't need the extra calories.

In many ways, the contemporary church is overweight. It's over program and most of these programs focus on giving people what they want, not good discipleship. Granted, the church, as a fully volunteer organization, must rely on people wanting to be a part of the organization. But maybe that's the problem right there; too many people are attracted to an organization before they are attracted to faith in Jesus Christ.

So am I right on this one? Is the job of a leader to give people what they want? Where is the job of the leader to give people what they need? Maybe it's a combination of both? What they want leads into what they need. But then I wonder, how do leaders know how to make turn from what they want to what they need so that the people are willing to move away from just the thing that they want. Is there any value in giving me a Rita's water ice but telling me what I really need is a well-balanced diet?

Teachers wanted

A few years ago, about the time I was in seminary, the general movement in preparing church leaders was to focus on the skills and gifts of organizational leadership. That trend is reversing in many circles as churches are more and more looking for pastors to be shepherds of the flock. A shepherd in the field has one goal: to help his flock thrive. This goal is met through two clear objectives: leading the sheep to fresh, healthy grass, and protecting them from danger along the way.

While thinking this over this morning I came to a realization about the first objective. That is, the shepherd doesn't regularly feed the sheep. He helps sheep to feed themselves. As such, leaders of the church need to be helping people to thrive through leading them to the place they aught to be. In modern language, leaders need to be about the business of teaching, not educating.

Defined by Merriam-Webster's:

teach: to cause to know something.
educate: to provide schooling for .

We often think of these terms interchangeably. They aren't. Teaching is freeing. It is about helping one to discover or uncover knowledge. Educating is about a system; it's about making sure that the person gets through all the important hoops so that they come out "qualified." Teachers think about expanding the student's mind. Educators think about expanding the students' portfolios. Teachers address the needs of the individual. Educators address the mechanism where many are processed as they are certified for something beyond.

The church needs more teachers to open the minds of the next generation. We don't need systems to process people. We need people who lovingly challenge others to seek out knowledge and use the knowledge so they can thrive.

Growth of a moment

I was reading Seth Godin's blog this morning.  He's talking about the growth of a movement. Guy #3 is his post title. This video demonstrates the Guy #3 principle.



I'm usually the dork at the beginning or one who runs in later.  I need more Guy #3 in my life.

Full review of Intuitive Leadership

I just finished reading Intuitive Leadership by Tim Keel. I've hit on some point about this book before. In final analysis, I'd say that this may not have been the best book for me to have read. It's not a bad book, but it left me wanting some things that it didn't deliver and with a few things that I didn't really need.

I liked the fact that Keel poses a different kind of leadership book from those analytical, linear books that are so often published. The problem is it left me wanting something that I'm not so sure I can have: freedom within an established organization to create in the way Keel prescribes. There are some good principles that can be applied to established churches, and I'll address those later, but it will really be difficult to get away with pushing those principles beyond a basic level.

While those principles are there and as exciting as they may be, I also found myself frustrated that the creative church movement has to tie itself so closely to certain things that to me are negatives. How many times does Keel refer to the great value of the monastics and escaping to monastic communities? Monastics, to me, are a sign of failure in Church. Some monastics were running from a very broken church; others were running from a very broken world. One could argue that we have in North America both a broken church and a broken world. Still, I don't think escaping to an experiential community is at all the answer that the Bible gives us. I would instead love to hear creative people discovering God in creative ways among the broken piece of both church and world.

I like Keel's points of creativity that should be kindled in the church: in leadership, in worship, in theology. I love the thought of creative people taking leadership of the church. We are still stuck in a world were safe leadership is considered godly. Wouldn't God rather leaders push the envelope? Isn't he in control in the end?

I love the thought of the church living in paradox and theology being more a matter of "I don't know (yet)" than a fix system to never deviate from. I think our practices and services should highlight this paradox.

I also love Keel's desire to get rid of the old idols of the church. I know that I am tempted by the idol of ministry that he talks about. Many people use the church and symbols of God as idols just as the Keel point out that the Ark was used before the Israelites.

Unfortunately, I'm not so sure that Keel doesn't create some new idols along the way. To me monasticism is often an idol of experience and community. Similarly, I think if creativity for the sake of creativity is not kept in check, the thrill of doing something new can also become an idol.

In the end, I wonder if this is a book that should not have been written. Keel pronounces great frustration over other church movements that are successful and then copied because of there success. He says that he doesn't want people to copy him instead consider their own context. That's good, but I think human nature and the nature of leaders is to copy that which is written up as a success. Heck, didn't Hybels say in his book Rediscovering Church that people should try to copy the Willow Creek model? Still, copying Willow Creek seemed to me to be Keel's biggest struggle with the Evangelical Church, or at least its leaders.

I'm not sure how to get this message out, but when a leader writes a book describing how he found success, people are going to try to copy. Then again, maybe leadership is about causing success, and, after all, are there really that many intuitive leaders out there? I guess time will tell.