:: in.a.mirror.dimly ::

Yesterday, I searched for general “leadership failure” and the overwhelming results mentioned the failure of Christian leaders.

From affairs to power struggles to personal meltdowns, the internet results suggested that Christian leaders have issues with time management, character, sin, relationships with colleagues, and communication. Are Christian leaders alone in the failure department?

I dug into general leadership failure trends, and I found an article at Psychology Today that shared the following numbers:

“In the past two decades, 30% of Fortune 500 CEOs have lasted less than 3 years. Top executive failure rates [are] as high as 75% and rarely less than 30%. Chief executives now are lasting 7.6 years on a global average down from 9.5 years in 1995. According to the Harvard Business Review, 2 out of 5 new CEOs fail in their first 18 months on the job.”

Those are some pretty staggering numbers. The article goes on to suggest a number of reasons why leaders fail. These include hubris, resistance to change, and hostility toward colleagues.

It’s hard to say whether the existing conventional wisdom on leadership is inherently flawed or whether these washed up CEOs are simply failing to execute wise practices. Likewise, it’s hard to point to a cause behind the failure of Christian leaders. Do we expect too much from them? Are they just as sinful as the rest of us?

I’m honestly the last person to prescribe a path forward for Christian leaders, but I’ve seen what seminary students and pastors read when it comes to leadership. I know what church leaders talk about and where they look for their examples of excellent leadership.

Our church leaders look to the business world for lessons on leadership.

Can we learn something from good leaders? Sure. This is not a black and white matter.

The main point for consideration in my view is that we need to ask whether the high failure rate of CEOs in the business world tells us anything about the quality of the advice in our business books. Even if a small percentage of CEOs can rise to the top, overcome tremendous odds to succeed, and publish a book about “how they did it,” should we fawn over the advice they offer? What works for a small group of successful CEOs may not apply to other CEOs, let alone the pastors who read leadership books.

What’s more, if that Psychology Today article is right about CEOs failing because of pride, resistance to change, and failure to communicate, the solutions to these problems are not necessarily found in leadership books.

Do you struggle with pride? The cross has something to teach you about that.

Do you fight change? The Holy Spirit can change your mind.

Do you fail to communicate effectively? Love will help your relationships stay healthy.

The failure of a church leader is a tragedy, but today it’s not surprising. In fact, church leaders are in good company, since the leadership models that many churches follow seem to produce high failure rates in the business world as well.

Christianity has something to say about leadership, failure, restoration, and rethinking a new way forward. A good place to begin is admitting that the CEO leadership model is not the most healthy way forward for our leaders and their churches.

The solutions to our problems may be right under our noses.

I sat in the main hall at a recent conference attended by 1,000 creative, innovative, and smart people. Many of us traveled hundreds of miles and paid hundreds of dollars just to be in that room together.

We changed our schedules. We missed family time. We reordered our obligations in order to be physically present in the same room.

What did we do once we were in the same room together?

Like junkies desperate for a fix, the majority of the people around me poured over their cell phones and ipads, tweeting, texting, and even playing games.

I sat by myself with people all around me using technology in order to be “more connected” with more people. The people in that room were connected indeed. They had lots of “connections,” but they weren’t necessarily interconnected with the people either around them or appearing as bits of text on their devices.

Connected vs. Interconnected

Technology is such a wonderful tool. I’m not here to slam it in general. I tweet and text, but I also think we need to frankly discuss the quality of our connections and how we use technology in particular situations.

Are we actually interconnected with people, sharing our lives with them when we have the opportunity? Perhaps there was some interconnecting happening over those phones and ipads at that conference, but I’d venture that most of what happened in those moments could have waited until later.

When you’re in a room filled with people who intentionally showed up in order to learn and network, texting should be on the lower end of priorities.

The thing is, it’s hard to sit next to a person and start talking. I did this over and over again at that conference, and each time I would have preferred to send that text message or tweet rather than break the ice.

One guy kind of grimaced, as if I was torturing him by asking what he was up to at the conference. Other folks welcomed a chance to talk about what they love to do. Some introduced me to their friends. Some of us even swapped business cards.

Arriving at that point was hard work.

The easy connection through impersonal technology will always be easier than becoming interconnected with a flesh and blood person who may ignore or reject you. It’s costly, but the quality of that connection has the potential to change lives.

Costs and Rewards of Being Interconnected

Real life change can only happen when we reach out and risk something. The conversation may fall flat. I may say something stupid. There are a hundred ways a conversation can run off the tracks. The point is that there are real blessings to be given and received when we are interconnected with the people around us.

While I’m advocating for seizing the moment when we’re in a room with others, we can also make powerful, life-changing connections through technology as well. I’m not ruling that out by any means. Sometimes you may be spent emotionally and reaching out isn’t the best idea.

However, next time you’re at a conference, I encourage you to turn off your phone and talk to the person next to you. Look for the person no one wants to talk to. Find the people who are open to connecting in genuine ways that extend beyond the simplicity of a text message.

Technology is great for keeping us in touch with one another, but there is no substitute for the connections that come about when reaching out to the person in the next chair over.

While on a critical mission to purchase celery for our stuffing, I walked into Wal-Mart on Thanksgiving Day, saw a large Christmas tree, and thought to myself, “Ah, that’s really nice.”

Wait, what did I just say?

Wal-Mart is usually my least favorite place in the world. I only brave it for cheap bread flour and contact solution. And yet, when I should be drinking cheap wine or expensive coffee with my loved ones, I was sort of enjoying Wal-Mart.

Much like the sweeping sentiment that took hold of me like a rip current, the Christmas season can latch onto us and drag us into mindsets, schedules, and emotions that can leave us lost, bewildered, and exhausted. Many years I’ll wake up on Christmas Day and wonder how it arrived so fast.

And then the guilt drags me down. Why didn’t I make the birth of Jesus more significant? Why did I let myself get swept into commercialism? Why did I put off my shopping? Why didn’t I pray more? Why did I feel more emotion while singing Christmas songs than thinking of the birth of Jesus?

Guilt and regret multiply like fruitcakes.

Now that Advent is in full swing, I want to look at some ways we can have a meaningful Christmas without losing ourselves in guilt or mushy sentimental goop. I’ll be honest, as I ask some hard questions, it may feel like I’m out to ruin Christmas.

However, I think that once we have a better idea of this holiday’s true nature, we’ll be in a better position to enjoy it for what it is, rather than letting sentiment, unrealistic expectations, and cultural baggage determine its meaning for us. In addition, I wonder if we sometimes try to force meaningful experiences or major spiritual epiphanies on ourselves during holidays like Christmas.

The Next Post: Before we can answer those questions, we’ll need to begin by asking whether we should bother celebrating Christmas. Is it a holiday that should be meaningful for us? That should be a fun post…

Photo: Sue Sylvester from Glee: “That’s the smell of failure, and it’s stinking up my office!”

The other day  a Christian Leader tweeted a quote from a motivational speaker. Here it is:

“Being challenged in life is inevitable, being defeated is optional.”

Well, screw you, I thought.

What universe is he living in? Of course being defeated is an option. We all lose from time to time. He got me really fired up…

Giving up on life in general is not optional. Maybe that’s what he meant. However, this idea that “failure is not an option” is present in our culture and has disastrous consequences in certain situations. It implies that we should never retreat or leave one thing in order to pursue another. Situationally speaking, failure is sometimes inevitable.

Admitting failure is perceived a bad thing. And admitting failure after following God’s lead is even more difficult for Christians.

However, to say that defeat is something we always choose to avoid, betrays a warped sense of reality that only the fabulously wealthy and delusional could cobble together.

Idolizing the “winner” is a recipe for depression and disaster. “Were you defeated? Well, that’s your own fault for giving up.”

There is much dignity to be found in trying, failing, and moving on to do something else. In fact, sometimes failure is the only way we learn. That isn’t to say we should bail out when adversity hits. There is much to be said for perseverance—a point on which I agree with this quote. However, there come times when defeat is a real option.

Don’t give up easily. But don’t let the lure of standing in the winners circle be your only measure of success. Pressing on to win while fearing defeat may lead us in the wrong direction.

Later in the day a friend tweeted a much better quote:

“God never calls you to be successful. He only ever calls you to be faithful.” -Mother Theresa

May we prayerfully seek God’s will and live in obedience to him, accepting triumph or failure along the way.

At a writing workshop, an experienced writer and editor warned us to avoid using weasel words.

Sure, I thought to myself, I would never do that.

Then he listed Republican and Democrat as his examples,

Shoot, I thought to myself. I use weasel words all of the time.

He explained that there is a lot of variety among the adherents of these political parties that we as writers need to be aware of. We need to dig deeper beyond these broad labels, rather than using this vague label that didn’t tell us all that much about the person.

And that is the trouble with labels: they’re weasel-ish.

It’s funny, when I meet someone without knowing their political or theological label, I’m sometimes surprised to learn later on where they find their news and which theology books they read. I see them in a different light, with more nuance and I’m less likely to assign to them the attributes of other folks I know under the same label.

Labels, though functional in giving us a general idea of where someone stands, are a poor substitute for having a conversation with a person and getting to know what they’re really like.

I popped by someone’s blog this week. The post had something to do with Christianity and politics. Of course it got ugly within a few comments. And of course I couldn’t resist weighing in. And of course someone replied to my post. And of course I started labeling him in my head as some kind of right wing extremist based on who he watches for news.

I thought I knew who I was addressing. He probably held up misspelled signs with stupid slogans… But then again, he may not. And I gave him the benefit of a doubt. I replied, but I treated him as a fellow Christian, forgetting about all of the political labels that were coloring how I originally planned to reply.

And then he responded with the most gracious, encouraging reply. I wasn’t that nice to him. I didn’t say he was right or anything like that. However, by dropping the negative associations I made based on some labels I’d been using, I was able to experience a much more gracious conversation.

And then I wondered how many times I’ve missed out on conversations like that because I’ve clung to my weasel-word labels.

The anniversary of September 11th prompted some difficult thoughts for me. Troubling to the point that I’ve been sitting on this post for nearly a week, asked friends for feedback, and have written and rewritten it. Terrorist attacks prompt me to consider whether I really want to take Jesus seriously.

I’m particularly concerned with this question: What will we do when the next attack comes? Will we rally to arms and find a new country to invade? And what does Jesus have to say about all of this?

Christians such as myself need to decide whether we want all of Jesus or some kind of American religion that pulls from bits and pieces of the Bible—the parts that are easy to obey.

Jesus told us to love our enemies and that peacemakers are blessed. 9-11 made it clear who our enemies are: the people who attacked our country and wish to do the same again.

Christians can’t uncritically support killing our enemies. Unless we want to turn Jesus into an American flag-waving caricature, we cannot ignore his words about peacemaking and loving our enemies. They have to mean something for us in our public discourse, policies, and personal actions.

I would never rule out peacekeeping and defending the innocent—I believe there is a place for soldiers in our world. And I wouldn’t have any problem with arresting terrorists. However, a retaliatory war following a terrorist attack may very well put us at odds with the teachings of Jesus, while also killing and permanently wounding thousands of our soldiers and innocent civilians. To what degree should the teachings of Jesus act merely as ideals for the future or concrete goals to work on for today?

Christians do not have to adopt one perspective—pacifism, just war, etc.—on the teachings of Jesus in order to follow Jesus, but we need a broad Christian debate about our relationship with war based on the words of Jesus. That critical debate is missing, meaning that we glorify the righteousness of our military cause to the exclusion of biblical peace-making and considering how to love our enemies.

Jesus prayed from the cross, “Father, forgive them for they do not know what they do.” He’s saying the same words about the terrorists, our enemies, the targets of our bombs. These words of forgiveness and reconciliation are part of the power of the cross.

Is the cross only relevant for redeeming lies, lust, and larceny?

Are the words of Jesus null and void in the event of a terrorist attack?

When we destroy our enemies, we may also destroy the cross and the possibilities of peace and reconciliation that come with it.

What to do…

Read the rest of this entry »

Have you heard about the pastor down in Florida who wants to burn the Koran?

Yes, of course you have. It’s all over the news. General Petraus has asked him to stop. Blog posts and tweets are expressing concern and outrage. You can’t miss it.

Each day we read a story about this pastor’s dogged persistence, interviews on the news, and small protests that are erupting around the world.

It sounds terrible to us. The stakes are high. Our troops may be in danger. The reputation of America is on the line and the reputation of Christianity is REALLY on the line.

But is this really that big of a deal?

If you’re a Muslim, I understand that this pastor’s actions are offensive, but keep in mind that this man represents the tiniest fraction of American Christians. His church is not that large, and just about every Christian I know thinks he’s an offense to our country and our faith.

I’d like to think that most Muslims around the world can see that. I understand there have been some protests and some have thrown rocks at American soldiers in Afghanistan. However, does one extremist need to dominate the news cycle when his actions hardly come close to representing anything close to a majority or minority position?

In addition, must we view the protests over this event as a concerted reaction from the Muslim world?

I think it’s safe to say that the majority of Muslims don’t see American Christians as the kind of people who would burn the Koran, just as the majority of American Christians don’t see Muslims as the kinds of people who would blow up innocent civilians. Most people can see the nuances, the extreme elements, and the true course of those in the center.

However, our news cycles thrive on highlighting the controversial extremes. They just need a Christian who’s willing to do something stupid and some groups of people who are willing to protest it, and presto, we have a leading news story that pits civilizations and religions against each other.

The only people who won’t see the nuance in the story of this Koran-burning pastor are those hungry for a news story and those looking for an excuse to get angry. Otherwise, this is exactly the kind of story we should ignore.

This pastor has made terrible protests against Islam—calling it Satanic—before, but there were no consequences because no one reported the story.

Stopping this man is not the only way to defuse this situation. Reporters could stay away from him, bloggers could write about something else, and tweets could cover what we’re having for lunch. Because really, the average person should be able to grasp the nature of extremism and sort out the rest. If we’ve lost our grasp of nuance, then God help us.

And besides, we have much better things to do on September 11th, such as honoring those who sacrificed themselves in order to save lives. That represents the best of the Christian faith and the sentiments of the majority of believers.

My father-in-law wisely pointed to an article about a denomination’s new outreach campaign. While the campaign mentioned preaching the Gospel, the motivation behind the campaign struck him as odd: attracting new members to the denomination’s sagging membership rolls.

In other words, these churches needed new members, and as a bonus they could have Jesus.

This trend of turning Jesus into the bonus that comes with church membership is easy to slip into. I know that I want more people in my community to know Jesus, but I have often slipped into wishing for more people at church services. Growth is the mark of health in our economy, just listen to the news for a few minutes, and membership growth has become the goal for many churches.

We’ve all done it at some point.

More bodies equals health. If we’re losing people, then our churches are in danger of shutting down, and we need to figure out a way to get them back.

If you stop to reread that sentence, I hope you’ll notice that Jesus is missing from it. We’re not calling people back to Jesus; we’re calling them back to church. Some may say that Jesus is implied in this, but I think it should be the other way around: by calling people back to Jesus we are also calling them back to Christian community.

Brett McKracken’s post in the Wall Street Journal illustrates this quest for church survival. Citing a 2007 Lifeway poll, McKracken states, “70% of young Protestant adults between 18-22 stop attending church regularly.” I’ll share a note at the end about these numbers, but for the time being, let’s focus on how McKracken addresses this alleged problem.

He says we want to keep people “In the Church” so we need to, “figure out a plan to keep young members engaged in the life of the church.” There is a fine difference, but I think it’s an important one when we say that we are called to make disciples. The disciple-making happens in community, but we don’t make disciples to keep our numbers up.

He’s right to critique this: “Increasingly, the ‘plan’ has taken the form of a total image overhaul, where efforts are made to rebrand Christianity as hip, countercultural, relevant.” However, some of this rises out of someone’s cultural location, and not a desire to simply be hip. There’s a world of a difference between a church-plant in a thriving artistic community using art in its service and McKracken’s example of “looking cool, perhaps by giving the pastor a metrosexual makeover, with skinny jeans and an $80 haircut, or by insisting on trendy eco-friendly paper and Helvetica-only fonts on all printed materials.”

I agree with McKracken’s point: we can get lost in trying to be hip or relevant, but to a certain degree churches need to be who they are where they are at. Not every church that meets in a bar is pulling off a hipster stunt. Many are sincerely trying to reach people where they’re at.

McKracken brings a valid critique to gimmicks and consumer marketing strategies that have infected the church, but his motivation for this is still flawed, “Are these gimmicks really going to bring young people back to church?”

My point of contention with McKracken is subtle, but critical for our understanding of the Gospel. Churches can come and go. The survival of a church is not a reason to share the Gospel.

I love my church, but I’m not called to share the Gospel in order to get more people to attend. If the goal is the survival of my church, then I can become desperate, resorting to the hipster gimmicks that McKracken rightly lambasts. I’m no longer motivated by the love of God and the call to discipleship. I’m motivated by the call to membership.

I understand that church attendance serves as a helpful mark of how we’re doing. To that end, a church that’s losing members should certainly take note of that trend. It could be a symptom of something gone awry.

McKracken wants to point Christians toward a more authentic way of following Jesus rather than relying on marketing and clever tricks. I appreciate that. I think we could do much better at reaching our communities by serving them in a hands-on way rather than trying to lure them into church.

Nevertheless, trying to get people back into church pews misses the point. It’s a subtle mistake, but it’s important. I agree with McKracken that we want to make disciples and not just another Jesus brand, but the solution is not getting people back to church for the right reasons.

We do want people in Christian community, but we want them to come because they are learning to pray to Jesus, to serve others, and to love. Our job is not done when the pews/chairs are full. Our job is done when we have made disciples who count the cost and imitate Christ. That is a much more difficult job because it’s hard to measure, and impossible to do without the work of the Holy Spirit. In fact, we may draw some back to Jesus and not to our churches.

If someone is drawn to our church because they see us serving Jesus but fail to become disciples and servants themselves, then they aren’t doing much more than those who stay home and watch cartoons.

About the 2007 Lifeway Poll

Read the rest of this entry »

My friend Bradley Wright, a sociology professor at UConn, released his first book yesterday titled Christians are Hate-Filled Hypocrites… And Other Lives You’ve Been Told: A Sociologist Shatters Myths from the Secular and Christian Media. He also blogs on sociology and religion at http://www.brewright.blogspot.com.

The release of Brad’s book gives me a great opportunity to test out a new feature on my blog. While Twitter has Follow Friday, in which users recommend folks to follow on Twitter, I’d like to recommend one other blogger each week who is worth reading.

I have known Brad since last September, and it has been great to see how he thinks. Brad brings a down-to-earth analytical mind to his work. I appreciate the clarity he is able to bring to confusing and complex situations, and his ability to ask the right questions.

These strengths help him evaluate the data that comes his way and yields some interesting insights on his blog. He keeps his posts short and to the point, which I think suits his nature. They read like sociology-light, and so most readers can swing by to check out his latest poll analysis without spending the better part of the morning there.

If you have a little time on your hands, Brad has a great list of his best posts that will prove both informative reading and an excellent introduction to his book.

I remember the diversity group that the lone east Indian student started at my predominantly white high school in the Philly burbs: CAFE. It stood for Cultural Awareness For Everyone.

I was like, PHHHBBB! What’s there to know? I was shocked to see a friend of mine start attending the meetings, and just didn’t get it. I KNEW there were other cultures in the world. They just weren’t around me. What’s the big deal?

Thankfully I’ve left the foolishness of my youth behind, though I’m not always as proactive about correcting my diversity deficiency as I should.

A revelation came rocketing down on me while, if I may name drop a little bit since all Christian bloggers name drop—say if NT Wright sneezes on us or whatever, chatting with Christine Sine in New Haven, CT. I heard the words come out of my mouth, but didn’t realize how true and challenging they were until later that night.

While discussing the diversity of the Christian faith, I said, “All of my significant moments of spiritual growth resulted from interacting with a different Christian tradition.”

My trajectory is something like this:

Bored Catholic.

Jumpy Fundamentalist.

Saved but uptight evangelical.

Saved but relaxed evangelical.

Saved evangelical with spiritual gifts.

As I look back at my growth and how my life as a Christian changed, I can see that interactions with Christians from diverse denominations, backgrounds, and countries opened fresh experiences of God in my life.

Next week I’ll talk about why we need diversity and take a couple swings at what diversity can look like in our church today. If you want to take this a step further, check out my book Coffeehouse Theology, as I get into the place of Christian tradition and the global church in the development of our beliefs and practice.