There is a mystique about the term leadership. For many it places and aura around the heads of those that are called leader. It conjures up images of either success or failure when people either hear the term or visualize a particular person or situation. And for certain, there have been good and bad, positive and negative leaders throughout history. The term leader is also somewhat illusive when it comes to defining, for there are not only numerous definitions and ideas surrounding the term.

Leadership is often thought of in terms of a general leading an army on the battlefield, a candidate running for high political office, a CEO of a fortune 500 corporation, or the senior pastor of a megachurch. Without a doubt, all of the groups of people in those contexts need and have leaders in order for those institutions to function. It is a misnomer though to only think of leaders and leadership in those contexts, because leaders are needed in all types and sizes of situations and groups of people. The family, the local school board, and even the local church that has less than 150 members are all contexts which need leaders. Leadership has been ill defined and presented so much so, that the average person fails to ever think they could be a leader. Clarity of definition and direct application to life situations is what is needed in a culture full of people on all levels who need leadership. This article will briefly dele into the definition of leadership and some application to ministry.

This writer, like many in the early years of his generation, was presented with a less than realistic view of leadership, and few principles to build upon let alone to become an effective leader. In the context of ministry, this writer came away from Bible college with perhaps a cloudy and confused view of leadership, for the individuals that were often paraded in front of the student body were individuals that were unique and especially gifted in the area of leadership. They led ministries that were unusual, in particular to their size which was vast and numerous. The instruction on leadership was meager at best, and had it not been for some caring and interested ministry mentors and a determination to read on one’s own, this writer may have become a casualty in the ministry like so many today. Bolman and Deal (2003) echo this sentiment when they write, “Leadership is universally offered as a panacea for almost any social problem. Around the world, middle managers say their enterprise would thrive if only senior management showed ‘real leadership’ . . . Yet there is confusion, and disagreement about what leadership means and how much difference it can make.” The intent of this article is to bring a little clarity to the definition of leadership, especially as it applies to minstry.

Many leadership theorists, gurus, and practitioners both secular and Christian have penned their ideas, thoughts, and experiences in the attempt to bring clarity to the subject of leadership. This article will look at a portion of those offerings as they define and give descriptions in order to gain a better understanding of leadership. Their definition and descriptions will reflect their preferred leadership style which are numerous.

Bolman and Deal (2003) take a look at leadership and identify that leadership is not something that is tangible because it exists only in relationships and in the imagination and perceptions of the people that are involved in a particular context. Leaders are expected to persuade or inspire rather than coerce or give orders, and they are expected to produce a cooperative effort and to pursue goals that transcend narrow self-interest. They draw some distinction between leadership and other areas that are often associated with the subject such as authority and management. Management and leadership are often confused although there is some overlap between the two. There are distinctions like John Gardner (1989) says, that one may be a leader without being a manager and many managers could not “lead a squad of seven-year-olds to the ice-cream counter.” Another difference offered by Bennis and Nanus (1985) say, “managers do things right, and leaders do the right things.” Bolman and Deal (2003) thus, offer their definition, “Leadership is thus a subtle process of mutual influence fusing thought, feeling, and action to produce cooperative effort in the service of purposes and values embraced by both the leader and the led.”

Kouzes and Posner (2002) who are identified with transformational leadership give their definition, “Leadership is a relationship between those who aspire to lead and those who choose to follow.” They do not believe that leadership is about personality as trait theorists do, but put more weight on the practice of leadership. Their research has produced what they call the Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership and the 10 Commitments of Leadership. The five practices are as follows: model the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process, enable others to act, and encourage the heart. The 10 commitments are as follows: Find your voice by clarifying your personal values, set the example by aligning actions with shared values, envision the future by imagining exciting and ennobling possibilities, enlist others in a common vision by appealing to shared aspirations, search for opportunities by seeking innovative ways to change, grow, and improve, experiment and take risk by constantly generating small wins and learning from mistakes, foster collaboration by promoting cooperative goals and building trust, strengthen others by sharing power and discretion, recognize contributions by showing appreciation for individual excellence, and celebrate the values and victories by creating a spirit of community. This model of leadership has become very popular in both secular and religious organizations, but there are still other definitions.

Peter G. Northouse (2007) in his book, Leadership: Theory and Practice, gives a definition of leadership. His definition, “Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.” He explains the definition by first establishing that leadership is a process meaning that it is not a trait or characteristic that resides n the leader, but a transactional event that occurs between the leader and his or her followers. The fact that it is a process means that it is not linear or in a one-way event but an interactive event that both affects the leader and the follower. And, since it is a process, it is available to everyone. Northouse’s (2007) definition includes the concept of influence which is how the leader affects followers. He further shows that leadership does not occur in a vacuum or along, but in the context of groups of people. Also, leadership includes the pursuit of goals. The leaders is the one who moves the group toward the final desired destination. Northouse (2007) then spends the rest of his text showing the various approaches and theories to leadership including: trait, skills, style, situational, contingency, path-goal, leader-member exchange, transformational, team, psychodynamic, and gender. Time and the brief purpose of this article will not allow for the exploration of all the approaches and theories mentioned above. The above mentioned definitions and descriptions have briefly surveyed the secular approaches to leadership, but now this writer will look at some Christian definitions, although many of the above definitions express the Christian and Biblical philosophy on leadership.

The Bible is the authority and anchor for Christian belief and practice. It gives a multitude of examples and principles both positive and negative with regard to leadership. For instances, there have been many notable leaders illustrated in the Bible such as Moses, the great deliverer of Israel; Nehemiah, the Jewish leader that led the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem n the return from captivity; Jesus Christ, perhaps the ultimate leader of all times and peoples; and Paul, the first century Christian apostle. All these and more are given in the Scriptures to learn from on the subject of Leadership. Others have built upon the Biblical examples and principles to give us definitions such as Alex Montoya (1995).

Montoya (1995) writing in Rediscovering Pastoral Ministry: Shaping Contemporary Ministry With Biblical Mandates, quotes two writers that are worth noting. First he gives a definition by James Means (1989) which goes as follows: Spiritual leadership is the development of relationships with the people of a Christian institution or body in such a way that individuals and the group are enabled to formulate and achieve biblically compatible goals that meet real needs. By their ethical influence, spiritual leaders serve to motivate and enable others to achieve what otherwise would never be achieved.

The second definition of leadership is from the late Ken Gangel  (1989) which says, “The exercise of one’s spiritual gifts under the call of God to serve a certain group of people in achieving the goals God has given them toward the end of glorifying God . . . The pastor or administrator or executive, therefore, works with and through people to get things done. He takes the proper leadership in following up each objective to the end that God might be glorified.” Montoya (1995) notes that the common denominator in both the definitions is that the leader is one who leads others to the accomplishment of a common goal. There is still another perspective on Christian leadership.

Gary Bredfeldt (2006) says leadership should be values-driven, vision-driven, venture-driven, and virtues-driven. He identifies the biblical leader as Leader-teacher and explains further his definition as follows: Biblical leaders value people as divine image-bearers. They are hope-filled and visionary because they know God continues to do great things in this world. They are venturous as they establish churches, Christian organizations, mission efforts, new programs, and efforts to meet human needs. And they are virtuous leaders who seek to do all of their ministry in a manner consistent with the character of Christ and the principles of God’s Word. Bredfeldt (2006) notes that though leaders lead through various means it is through teaching that leadership is done. There is one final writer’s perspective that is to be considered in this article.

Kenneth S. Coley (2006) in his book, The Helmsman: Leading with Courage and Wisdom, presents a transformational approach to leadership as it applies to education, and uses the metaphor of the Helmsman-one who steers the ship for the image of the leader. He presents the helmsman in four different roles that are Scripturally based and are as follows: Administrator-based in the writing of the apostle Paul; Community leaders-based on Nehemiah; Builder of the body-base on Ephesians; and Steward-based on Jesus and others throughout the Scripture. Coley (2006) offers eight characteristics of transformational leadership that are drawn from the Biblical character-Nehemiah. The eight characteristics are supported numerous quotes from transformational theorists and they are as follows: the building block of prayer, the building block of vision, the building block of developing unity, the building block of high expectations, the building block of individual support, the building block of modeling, the building block of the Word, and the building block of celebration. Coley develops the leadership conclept further in his book, but this is central to his approach. This concludes the survey of definitions, and now how it is applied to this writer’s area of ministry.

This writer’s adoption of leadership theory and practice has gone through an evolution of over thirty plus years, from the early days of ministry preparation and practice of pastoral ministry to the present. The early days consisted of a strong modeling of the trait approach to leadership, and a more informal instruction of a quasi-skill/style approach to leadership. this was all messed with the Biblical concept of servant leadership. It left this writer this writer somewhat floundering for there were many gaps, until 1990 when this writer too a course on leadership that primarily presented the situational leadership model. It was adopted and put into practice as it is easily understood, implemented and equated with a discipleship model. As time has progressed, and with study and ministry maturity, this writer presently concludes that the transformational approach is the style that is embraced and practiced for the following reasons. First and foremost is that this writer believes that transformational leadership is a biblical approach. Also, as Peter Northouse (2007) has said: Transformational leadership is a process that changes and transforms people. It is concerned with emotions, values, ethics, standards, and long-term goals and includes assessing followers’ motives, satisfying their needs, and treating them as full human beings. Transformational leadership involves an exceptional form of influence that moves followers to accomplish more than what is usually of them. It is a process that often incorporates charismatic and visionary leadership. Another point that Northouse (2007) mentions is that transformational leadership is encompassing meaning that it is broad based and flexible enough to be versatile and it has a vital component that many approaches do not, and that is the moral aspect. This writer has transitioned into this approach over time, and currently practices this style of leadership in his pastoral ministry.

In conclusion, leadership can be defined in a variety of ways, and it can be conceptualized in numerous ways. One must determine based on the teaching of Scripture what the definition of leadership is, and then how that concept is translated into a practicing style. It is the opinion of this writer that the transformational style of leadership is the approach to practice.

The war against Christmas has not been abated, but it continues to be waged on many fronts. Advertisers and many department stores continue to coach their employees to say, “Happy Holiday” or “Season Greetings” instead of “Merry Christmas.” Washington State’s Governor  allowed an atheist group to put a religiously degrading sign up next to the annual nativity display. Several news outlets reported the American Humanist Association’s campaign, where the slogan  “Why believe in god? Just be good for goodness’ sake” will appear on Washington, D.C. buses throughout the month of December. A similar campaign is to be waged in January on buses by the British Humanist Association with the slogan, “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.” Fred Edwords, spokesman for the Washington Humanist Association said, “Our reason for doing it during the holidays is there are an awful lot of agnostics, atheists and other types of non-theists who feel a little alone during the holidays because of its association with traditional religion.” It’s interesting that the reason for these efforts seems to be to help its followers through spells of lonliness and worry associated with this time of year. Why would people who don’t believe in God and accountability to him, while believing in a system of relativism and evolution have to be concerned about lonliness and worry? Perhaps that says more about their true state of being than what they verbally claim to believe or not believe.

So, what’s a Christian to do? Push back! Jesus said in Matthew 5 that Christians are the light of the world and salt of the earth.  A characteristic of light is that it drives the darkness back as far as it can be driven, and salt preserves and penetrates. Push back Christian! Push back with the light of God’s glorious truth, and unfathonable love! Say, Merry Christmas! Tell someone the good news of Jesus coming. Perhaps your salty lifestyle will influence some of those lonely, worrying, and fearful people to respond to the encouraging message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ!

Who Says The Bible Is Holy?

According to a Barna survey of U.S. adults (July 2008):

84% of U.S. adults

90% of women

78% of men

96% of Blacks

83% of Whites and Hispanics

54% of Asians

90% of those over 40

77% of those under 40

67% of those 18 to 23

38% of self-identified non-Christians

These are interesting results yielded by the Barna survey. Do these results mean that the majority of American adults are conservative and behaving in a holy manner? If so, that’s good news! But there seems to be a problem. If so many people say the Bible is holy, yet why is there is so much unholiness in the land? Could it be that the media is just focusing on the few bad apples? That’s a good possibility.  It would be good if the media would focus more on the holy and positive things than the unholy and negative things happening in our culture. Maybe we all need to take a moment and write an email or make a call to the media and voice our opinion. But there may also be a disconnect between what people say and how they live. Now if the gap were closed between the saying and living, the American culture would be a whole lot more holy than unholy! The closing of the gap is achievable, when more and more people begin a relationship with Jesus Christ by placing their trust in him as their Savior, and then live by that Bible they say is holy. Perhaps the church is not shinning enough light and being salty enough so that the few unholy that are getting the spotlight can be influenced toward holiness! Let’s do both!

The Apostle Paul in 1 Timothy 2:1-6 says, “Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all…” (NKJV)

Paul penned this during the first century A.D. when it was not popular to be a Christian under Roman rule. The Christian community was under persecution, yet Paul exhorts believers to pray for all men, including government authorities. He does not distinguish between those who were favorable toward Christianity and those that were not! We may be entering a season when Christian values are trampled upon as never before in the history of our country.

So what is a Christian to do? Christians need to heed the teaching of Scripture, and that begins with praying faithfully for our government officials. We need to pray that God will work in the hearts and minds of these officials, so that we as Christians can lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence, and that we can freely spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ to our fellow citizens.

We also need to work within the system of our government for good laws that uphold Christian values as taught in Scripture. Many Christians have become almost nonexistent when it comes to involvement in the government of these United States. They fail to realize that the United States is a Constitutional Republic, a democratic form of government which is a government of the people. It means that we Christians, as citizens of this country have as much say-so, and right to be involved in the process as anyone else. The separation of church and state does not mean that Christians are to not be involved in the government or stay out of politics, but that the government is to stay out of the “religion” business. So Christian, write letters, make phone calls, send emails to your Congressman, Senators and President, consider running for office, and by all means, vote. In other words, get involved!

Remember what Jesus said in Matthew 5:13-16, that Christians are the salt of the earth and light of the world, so start being an influence and light for the glory of God! Also, continually remind yourself of the words of Isaiah 33:22, “For the LORD is our Judge, The LORD is our Lawgiver, The LORD is our King; He will save us;” (NKJV).

For further input on this subject, read Albert Mohler’s blog-November 5th (www.almohler.com).