Looking for a leader
Commentary
Leadership is a hot topic in business and society. Dozens of new books on leadership appear in print every week. Leadership tracks at conferences are the first to fill. Executive coaching with the purpose of creating confident leaders is a mushrooming industry. Even in the church, a seminary education is not complete until leadership has been taught and caught, and congregations are looking for pastors who can function at least in part as CEOs.
Kouzes and Posner, in their book, The Leadership Challenge, and the seminars that have been developed around it, declare that there are five primary investments that leaders must make, and that the better they do these things, the stronger their leadership quotient will be: 1) challenge the status quo; 2) inspire a shared vision; 3) enable others to act; 4) encourage the heart; and 5) model the way. These leadership activities sound like they might be lifted from the Bible. The prophets of the Old Testament (and New, for that matter) certainly challenged the status quo in their communities. Kings like David and Solomon were gifted in their abilities to inspire shared visions that captured the minds and passions of the nation in a quest for greatness. The entire priestly system was designed to enable others to act by resolving the brokenness in people's relationships with God and with each other. Elders of both Old and New Testament times were informally selected on the basis of their ability to wisely encourage the hearts of the people. Deacons of the New Testament were put in place to model the way for the community of grace to express its care in meaningful ways.
In our lectionary passages for today, the idea of leadership is probed and developed. As Moses helps Israel transition from his role at the helm of the national ship to the next generation of captains, the promise is given that God will provide the next generations with the gifts and qualities necessary to carry the torch and blaze the trail. In his conversations with the church in Corinth, Paul explains how a fractured community can function holistically when positioned well, under effective leadership, and Mark's Gospel makes clear that unusual leadership competence was evident even in the early days of Jesus' public ministry.
Part of the task of preaching today seems to be to call out leaders and leadership development among the people of the congregation. The other part is probably to reiterate that the church is never leaderless -- it is always the church of Jesus Christ, the truest leader of leaders on both sides of eternity.
Deuteronomy 18:15-20
Deuteronomy is the fifth and final book of the Pentateuch (the Hebrew Torah). If one arranges these five books around the theme of covenant which is constantly expressed throughout them, Exodus serves as the pivotal expression of the covenant establishment at Mount Sinai; Genesis provides the background in a kind of covenant prologue; Leviticus mandates the character and qualities of covenant lifestyle; Numbers explains what happens when the covenant is stretched and tested and broken, and whether it can survive the tensions of its partners' relations with one another; and Deuteronomy serves as a bridge to the next generation of those who will live under the covenant. Deuteronomy is developed as a kind of last will and testament of Moses, a final declaration of the identity of Israel as God's people, and a summary of earlier covenant expressions.
Here, Moses eases the worries of the people. He has been their only national leader since they emerged from slavery into freedom four decades previously. Now he is talking about his life coming to an end, and there is fear in the camp that no one will be able to fill his shoes, no one will emerge as the next warrior and elder statesman who has the ear of the mighty, but hidden, deity that has provided for them during these wilderness wanderings. As he announces his imminent departure, Moses assures the people that God will not leave them leaderless, and that others will be called and equipped to function in this role.
What is not certain, in this passage, is whether Moses and/or the people understood this promise as something to be fulfilled immediately, or only in some distant future. The people are in need of leadership, and would want, hope, and pray for an immediate divine election that would quickly and firmly establish the next phase of community safety, development, and history. Does Joshua fit this criterion? Is he the next Moses? The first chapter of the next biblical book, called Joshua, seems to lean backward on this passage to highlight the significance of Joshua's emerging leadership presence. Yet there is no question but that the New Testament church understood Jesus as the truest fulfillment of this pledge (see the reference Stephen gives to this passage in his speech in Acts 7:37).
What is clear in the text of Deuteronomy is that the divinely called leader of God's people would be confirmed in his presence and performance by declaring truth that is in harmony with God's unfolding plans and designs. The true leader will speak and act out of a confident relationship with the all-seeing and powerful deity, and their important collusion will be evident from the raw data of experience.
This theme of prophetic leadership has been given contemporary shape by Frank Peretti in his novel, The Prophet. While there are various responses to Peretti's theological and eschatological stance, his story is insightful as it imagines how a prophet would function in society, not merely in the safety of historical distance, but in our contemporary setting. The book and the movie that was made about it may provide illustrative material helpful in explaining the important but challenging nature of prophetic identity in any culture, past or present.
1 Corinthians 8:1-13
It was probably in the year 53 A.D. that Paul carried on the bulk of his correspondence with the congregation in Corinth. Late in the previous year, he and Silas had embarked on their second mission journey together (Paul's third, according to the book of Acts; see especially chs. 18-19). While the previous trek had established their primary base in Corinth, this one focused on a long-term commitment to Ephesus. But Paul's strong leadership with the Corinthian congregation would not dissolve easily. Around the turn of the year from 52 to 53 A.D., as Paul was getting established in Ephesus, he wrote a rather sharply worded letter of chastisement and instruction when he found out that immorality seemed prevalent and unchallenged in the Corinthian congregation (see 1 Corinthians 5:9). The response from Corinth was mixed at best. Stephanas, Fortunatas, and Achaicus (see 1 Corinthians 16:17) brought news of challenges against Paul's leadership (see 1 Corinthians 4 and 9), word of ongoing immorality in the community (see 1 Corinthians 5-6), and a list of questions (see 1 Corinthians 7:1) that may have been legitimate queries from those who missed Paul's personal leadership presence or secret attempts to undermine his credibility from those who despised him.
Chapter 8 is found in the section of this letter that responds to the questions from Corinth in serial fashion. Evidently someone had asked whether it was permissible for members of the congregation to purchase the more inexpensive cuts of meat in the marketplace that were left over from ritualized pagan sacrifices. It is clear from various references in this letter that the population of the church in Corinth included both rich and poor, both free and slave. While wealthy members of the congregation would have no problem purchasing whatever meat and other food items they wished, the poor would always be stretched by the cost of staples. After the daily and seasonal sacrifices at the pagan temple shrines, leftover meat that was neither burned in the offering nor roasted to feed the priests and other temple workers was dumped in the marketplace cheaply for a quick sale. Some Christians believed this flesh was off limits because it had undergone ritual dedication to other gods during its sacrificial process. Others believed that the great God of Paul's preaching was powerful over all other gods and therefore counteracted any ritualistic magical powers that others might have superstitiously applied to the leftover meat, and that it was thus available for consumption by Christians, especially at the lower prices it was offered.
Paul takes a middle road, endorsing neither position strongly. He recognizes the motives that drive both the abstainers and the takers, and then posits an ethic based upon mutual respect. He encourages people to eat or not eat this meat based upon their understanding of the power of those pagan rituals that have entered the food preparation chain process. More importantly, he says, is for all to understand that the work of Christ has brought all into a new relationship with the creator God, and that no one has a right to use these secondary issues to drive a wedge between people and the deity or between segments of the uniformly redeemed community.
Paul's response must have satisfied no one in its immediate context. Those who ate freely of the meat would find Paul lacking leadership courage to declare things the way they truly are. Those who refused to eat on spiritually superstitious principals would resent being called "weaker" in their understanding of the impact of Christ's work.
Nevertheless, Paul's answer is a brilliant and helpful leadership model. Thinking again of Kouzes and Posner's leadership tasks, Paul challenged the status quo among all who were wrestling with this issue; he inspired a shared vision as to how Jesus trumps the entire question with a superior authority; he enables others to act by removing some of the community stumbling blocks that have stymied authentic engagement between members of the church with different views; he encourages the heart by speaking with passion and compassion of his care for all who are part of the congregation; and he models the way when he concludes his teaching by revealing his own practices in the matter.
There are at least two ways to preach on this passage (and probably many more). One is to focus on Paul's specific instructions and make the application to other debated behaviors in the Christian community (use of alcohol, Sunday observance, devotional practices, involvement in the entertaining arts, political leanings, tithing, and similar behaviors, have all been hot ticket items in such debates at one time or another and may well linger in many congregations). Another approach would be to take this passage in the context of today's other lectionary passages and unpack more fully the qualities of leadership that are stated briefly in Moses' promises about future great prophets and are always evident in the popular reaction to Jesus' teachings and ministry style.
Mark 1:21-28
According to the early testimony of the church, Mark wrote this gospel account based upon the teachings of Peter during his last years in Rome. There is no question that in it Jesus is portrayed as man of action and power. The gospel opens with a declaration that Jesus is the "Son of God," a term used widely in the day as a reference to the Roman emperors who were senate -- or self-declared as offspring of the deities. Moreover, Mark does not give any birth or infancy narratives. These would only show Jesus in a weak and vulnerable state. Instead, the Jesus of Mark's Gospel bursts upon the scene as a full-grown man, divinely commissioned (1:9-13) and commanding immediate respect from others (1:14-20).
It is important to read this gospel with fresh eyes, cleansed of the accumulation of theological baggage that so often prejudices our understanding of what the text might be saying about the Jesus of our dogmatic declarations. Notice these things: first, "they" go to Capernaum. Jesus has already gathered a band of followers and they together are a visible force to be reckoned with. There is a scene in the movie, The Last Temptation of Christ, where Jesus (played by Willam Dafoe) walks toward the camera from the distance, across heated wilderness sands that shimmer and warp our vision in the dance of distortion. Cut by cut, as Jesus draws closer, a few at first and then many more people are added to his wake. It all happens in a few seconds on film, and here in Mark's Gospel there is something similar taking place. Within a few strokes, Jesus the strong man divinely sent becomes the leader of an impressive "gang."
Second, the scene quickly moves to a sabbath service in the synagogue. By doing so Mark sets the stage for Jesus to be revealed as a leader of authority. Only men (not women or boys) could speak in the synagogue, and only men of stature and learning could teach there. Without telling us of Jesus' education or other influences, Mark immediately places Jesus front and center in the community. He has something to say and he deserves to be given the contextual podium from which to declare it. The people respond at once to Jesus' pronouncements by affirming his insight and authority.
Third, their confirmation is not the only that is given. Right at that moment a spiritual antagonist enters to challenge Jesus' authority. From a vantage point outside of the sensory limitations of humans, this devilish spirit not only recognizes the transcendent power and authority of Jesus but also clearly states the supernatural battle that must emerge. And, according to Mark, Jesus is able to assert his authority decisively in a manner that leaves no question about Jesus' clout.
Fourth, the immediate reaction is widespread dissemination of Jesus' unique stature and abilities. This becomes important in Mark's Gospel because much of the rest of the book includes an underlying suppression theme. Jesus often warns those he heals not to tell others about it for fear of how the people might react. Meanwhile, Mark has set it up from the very beginning of the gospel that people will respond, and will churn out the gossip network buzz, and will refuse to allow Jesus to disappear into backwater oblivion.
The stage is set for Jesus to become the greatest leader of all time. What remains, in the gospel, is to outline the strange way Jesus will end up on top; first he must be misunderstood, then he must be slighted and shamed, and finally he must be murdered before Easter morning will provide a different context in which to apprehend and follow his divine and eternal leadership.
Application
Jim Collins' book, Good to Great, has become a new Bible for doing business. Collins outlines the results of his research into companies that have moved up from decent business results to spectacular growth over an extended period of time. Among the seven qualities or traits Collins and his researchers found exhibited in these breakaway companies, one of the most important is what Collins calls "Level Five Leadership."
The idea of "Level Five Leadership" begs us to ask what are the other four levels of leadership? In Collins' paradigm they exist as follows: Level One Leadership is personal competence. Those who display it give evidence of impressive skills and integrated performance that lifts them to distinction among their peers.
Level Two Leadership is that of a contributing team member. When people work on projects or are assigned to groups, people exhibiting this kind of leadership quality are recognized by the group for both their relational talents and also for the insights that they bring into the team dynamics.
Level Three Leadership is that of effective management. Those who reach this recognition and achievement generally give appropriate guidance to systems and divisions that have been set up by others. They may innovate, but primarily within the context of the business structures that have been put in place before their term of service.
Level Four Leadership occurs when people are given opportunities to take charge of groups or companies and they do so with grace, style, and ease. It is an expression of public leadership on terms we are usually familiar.
But Level Five Leadership is a gift owned within more limited circles. Level Five Leaders, according to Jim Collins, express all of the competencies of levels one through four. To these, however, they add two additional qualities. The first is a paradoxical humility that does not wrap up self-identity with the leadership position, and the other is a tenacious commitment to the outcomes of the enterprise. Level Five Leaders own responsibility for the organization, but without egomaniacal posturing. They identify their life's purposes with that of the organization so that others understand the symbiotic fit. They are not here for a short while in order to make a name for themselves or to reap the windfall of profits and inflated salaries; they are in for the duration because they understand the needs and dynamics of the company.
These levels of leadership, even though derived from a business model, may help to explain the uniqueness of Moses in Israel and the model he established in Deuteronomy 18. They many also help people understand what it was that Paul sought to do in his relationship with the recalcitrant Corinthian congregation that sapped so much of his energies. And they may certainly create analogies through which Jesus' early impact on his community and his continued influence on the church and the world may be framed.
An Alternative Application
1 Corinthians 8:1-13. This is a great passage for exploring Christian behavior. It might be used on its own to probe contemporary issues of social and personal ethics and build a moral paradigm which moves beyond defining legalistic particulars to investigating responsible lifestyles.
Preaching The Psalm
Psalm 111
Convincing someone of an idea is not an easy task. Anyone who has worked in politics can vouch for this. Teachers, preachers, community leaders, all know how hard it is to convince people to rally behind an idea or a concept. Harder still, is the effort to get people to act on something.
There is, however, one magic trick that works almost every time, and that is fear. As German writer Bertolt Brecht put it: "Magic fear puts the world at your command." A people who are afraid will do most anything. Adolf Hitler knew this very well, as he brilliantly manipulated and manufactured a fear of Jews. Countless leaders, both religious and political, have relied on this magic fear for centuries. From fomenting fears of Christians in the Roman Empire to stirring up fear of "terrorists" today, the manipulation of people through fear continues unabated.
And, upon reading this psalm, one might get the idea that the fear game is being played here as well. We praise God, the psalm asserts, for all of God's mighty works. But in the end, it's because of fear that God gives food (v. 5). Moreover, fear of God is the "beginning of wisdom."
The evidence is strong. Follow God, or else. Indeed, it causes shudders down the spine to imagine how our ancestors in the faith made use of such fear.
However, it's worth noting that the translators of Holy Scriptures have made a bit of a slip here. It seems that the Hebrew words that have been translated into the English word "fear," do not in fact mean "fear." In both cases a more accurate translation would be "reverence."
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to notice that there's a good bit of distance between "fear" and "reverence." A given person or people may well do something as a result of being made afraid. However, true reverence, arises from a different location.
It is reverence that gives this psalm its depth and beauty, not fear. Praising God because of God's wonderful works is something we can manage. Who can stand on top of Half Dome at Yosemite and not feel reverence? Falling down in worship because of God's faithfulness to the covenant is something we can get our minds and hearts around. It is not so hard to revere a God who will not abandon us.
So while our traditions, both religious and political, opt too often for fear as a primary motivator, might we perhaps take a step toward reverence? Worship and praise induced by a humble acknowledgment of God's utter greatness will lead us in a very different direction than praise motivated by fear. Let us begin together by pausing to revere our God, in worship and in the rest of our lives.
Kouzes and Posner, in their book, The Leadership Challenge, and the seminars that have been developed around it, declare that there are five primary investments that leaders must make, and that the better they do these things, the stronger their leadership quotient will be: 1) challenge the status quo; 2) inspire a shared vision; 3) enable others to act; 4) encourage the heart; and 5) model the way. These leadership activities sound like they might be lifted from the Bible. The prophets of the Old Testament (and New, for that matter) certainly challenged the status quo in their communities. Kings like David and Solomon were gifted in their abilities to inspire shared visions that captured the minds and passions of the nation in a quest for greatness. The entire priestly system was designed to enable others to act by resolving the brokenness in people's relationships with God and with each other. Elders of both Old and New Testament times were informally selected on the basis of their ability to wisely encourage the hearts of the people. Deacons of the New Testament were put in place to model the way for the community of grace to express its care in meaningful ways.
In our lectionary passages for today, the idea of leadership is probed and developed. As Moses helps Israel transition from his role at the helm of the national ship to the next generation of captains, the promise is given that God will provide the next generations with the gifts and qualities necessary to carry the torch and blaze the trail. In his conversations with the church in Corinth, Paul explains how a fractured community can function holistically when positioned well, under effective leadership, and Mark's Gospel makes clear that unusual leadership competence was evident even in the early days of Jesus' public ministry.
Part of the task of preaching today seems to be to call out leaders and leadership development among the people of the congregation. The other part is probably to reiterate that the church is never leaderless -- it is always the church of Jesus Christ, the truest leader of leaders on both sides of eternity.
Deuteronomy 18:15-20
Deuteronomy is the fifth and final book of the Pentateuch (the Hebrew Torah). If one arranges these five books around the theme of covenant which is constantly expressed throughout them, Exodus serves as the pivotal expression of the covenant establishment at Mount Sinai; Genesis provides the background in a kind of covenant prologue; Leviticus mandates the character and qualities of covenant lifestyle; Numbers explains what happens when the covenant is stretched and tested and broken, and whether it can survive the tensions of its partners' relations with one another; and Deuteronomy serves as a bridge to the next generation of those who will live under the covenant. Deuteronomy is developed as a kind of last will and testament of Moses, a final declaration of the identity of Israel as God's people, and a summary of earlier covenant expressions.
Here, Moses eases the worries of the people. He has been their only national leader since they emerged from slavery into freedom four decades previously. Now he is talking about his life coming to an end, and there is fear in the camp that no one will be able to fill his shoes, no one will emerge as the next warrior and elder statesman who has the ear of the mighty, but hidden, deity that has provided for them during these wilderness wanderings. As he announces his imminent departure, Moses assures the people that God will not leave them leaderless, and that others will be called and equipped to function in this role.
What is not certain, in this passage, is whether Moses and/or the people understood this promise as something to be fulfilled immediately, or only in some distant future. The people are in need of leadership, and would want, hope, and pray for an immediate divine election that would quickly and firmly establish the next phase of community safety, development, and history. Does Joshua fit this criterion? Is he the next Moses? The first chapter of the next biblical book, called Joshua, seems to lean backward on this passage to highlight the significance of Joshua's emerging leadership presence. Yet there is no question but that the New Testament church understood Jesus as the truest fulfillment of this pledge (see the reference Stephen gives to this passage in his speech in Acts 7:37).
What is clear in the text of Deuteronomy is that the divinely called leader of God's people would be confirmed in his presence and performance by declaring truth that is in harmony with God's unfolding plans and designs. The true leader will speak and act out of a confident relationship with the all-seeing and powerful deity, and their important collusion will be evident from the raw data of experience.
This theme of prophetic leadership has been given contemporary shape by Frank Peretti in his novel, The Prophet. While there are various responses to Peretti's theological and eschatological stance, his story is insightful as it imagines how a prophet would function in society, not merely in the safety of historical distance, but in our contemporary setting. The book and the movie that was made about it may provide illustrative material helpful in explaining the important but challenging nature of prophetic identity in any culture, past or present.
1 Corinthians 8:1-13
It was probably in the year 53 A.D. that Paul carried on the bulk of his correspondence with the congregation in Corinth. Late in the previous year, he and Silas had embarked on their second mission journey together (Paul's third, according to the book of Acts; see especially chs. 18-19). While the previous trek had established their primary base in Corinth, this one focused on a long-term commitment to Ephesus. But Paul's strong leadership with the Corinthian congregation would not dissolve easily. Around the turn of the year from 52 to 53 A.D., as Paul was getting established in Ephesus, he wrote a rather sharply worded letter of chastisement and instruction when he found out that immorality seemed prevalent and unchallenged in the Corinthian congregation (see 1 Corinthians 5:9). The response from Corinth was mixed at best. Stephanas, Fortunatas, and Achaicus (see 1 Corinthians 16:17) brought news of challenges against Paul's leadership (see 1 Corinthians 4 and 9), word of ongoing immorality in the community (see 1 Corinthians 5-6), and a list of questions (see 1 Corinthians 7:1) that may have been legitimate queries from those who missed Paul's personal leadership presence or secret attempts to undermine his credibility from those who despised him.
Chapter 8 is found in the section of this letter that responds to the questions from Corinth in serial fashion. Evidently someone had asked whether it was permissible for members of the congregation to purchase the more inexpensive cuts of meat in the marketplace that were left over from ritualized pagan sacrifices. It is clear from various references in this letter that the population of the church in Corinth included both rich and poor, both free and slave. While wealthy members of the congregation would have no problem purchasing whatever meat and other food items they wished, the poor would always be stretched by the cost of staples. After the daily and seasonal sacrifices at the pagan temple shrines, leftover meat that was neither burned in the offering nor roasted to feed the priests and other temple workers was dumped in the marketplace cheaply for a quick sale. Some Christians believed this flesh was off limits because it had undergone ritual dedication to other gods during its sacrificial process. Others believed that the great God of Paul's preaching was powerful over all other gods and therefore counteracted any ritualistic magical powers that others might have superstitiously applied to the leftover meat, and that it was thus available for consumption by Christians, especially at the lower prices it was offered.
Paul takes a middle road, endorsing neither position strongly. He recognizes the motives that drive both the abstainers and the takers, and then posits an ethic based upon mutual respect. He encourages people to eat or not eat this meat based upon their understanding of the power of those pagan rituals that have entered the food preparation chain process. More importantly, he says, is for all to understand that the work of Christ has brought all into a new relationship with the creator God, and that no one has a right to use these secondary issues to drive a wedge between people and the deity or between segments of the uniformly redeemed community.
Paul's response must have satisfied no one in its immediate context. Those who ate freely of the meat would find Paul lacking leadership courage to declare things the way they truly are. Those who refused to eat on spiritually superstitious principals would resent being called "weaker" in their understanding of the impact of Christ's work.
Nevertheless, Paul's answer is a brilliant and helpful leadership model. Thinking again of Kouzes and Posner's leadership tasks, Paul challenged the status quo among all who were wrestling with this issue; he inspired a shared vision as to how Jesus trumps the entire question with a superior authority; he enables others to act by removing some of the community stumbling blocks that have stymied authentic engagement between members of the church with different views; he encourages the heart by speaking with passion and compassion of his care for all who are part of the congregation; and he models the way when he concludes his teaching by revealing his own practices in the matter.
There are at least two ways to preach on this passage (and probably many more). One is to focus on Paul's specific instructions and make the application to other debated behaviors in the Christian community (use of alcohol, Sunday observance, devotional practices, involvement in the entertaining arts, political leanings, tithing, and similar behaviors, have all been hot ticket items in such debates at one time or another and may well linger in many congregations). Another approach would be to take this passage in the context of today's other lectionary passages and unpack more fully the qualities of leadership that are stated briefly in Moses' promises about future great prophets and are always evident in the popular reaction to Jesus' teachings and ministry style.
Mark 1:21-28
According to the early testimony of the church, Mark wrote this gospel account based upon the teachings of Peter during his last years in Rome. There is no question that in it Jesus is portrayed as man of action and power. The gospel opens with a declaration that Jesus is the "Son of God," a term used widely in the day as a reference to the Roman emperors who were senate -- or self-declared as offspring of the deities. Moreover, Mark does not give any birth or infancy narratives. These would only show Jesus in a weak and vulnerable state. Instead, the Jesus of Mark's Gospel bursts upon the scene as a full-grown man, divinely commissioned (1:9-13) and commanding immediate respect from others (1:14-20).
It is important to read this gospel with fresh eyes, cleansed of the accumulation of theological baggage that so often prejudices our understanding of what the text might be saying about the Jesus of our dogmatic declarations. Notice these things: first, "they" go to Capernaum. Jesus has already gathered a band of followers and they together are a visible force to be reckoned with. There is a scene in the movie, The Last Temptation of Christ, where Jesus (played by Willam Dafoe) walks toward the camera from the distance, across heated wilderness sands that shimmer and warp our vision in the dance of distortion. Cut by cut, as Jesus draws closer, a few at first and then many more people are added to his wake. It all happens in a few seconds on film, and here in Mark's Gospel there is something similar taking place. Within a few strokes, Jesus the strong man divinely sent becomes the leader of an impressive "gang."
Second, the scene quickly moves to a sabbath service in the synagogue. By doing so Mark sets the stage for Jesus to be revealed as a leader of authority. Only men (not women or boys) could speak in the synagogue, and only men of stature and learning could teach there. Without telling us of Jesus' education or other influences, Mark immediately places Jesus front and center in the community. He has something to say and he deserves to be given the contextual podium from which to declare it. The people respond at once to Jesus' pronouncements by affirming his insight and authority.
Third, their confirmation is not the only that is given. Right at that moment a spiritual antagonist enters to challenge Jesus' authority. From a vantage point outside of the sensory limitations of humans, this devilish spirit not only recognizes the transcendent power and authority of Jesus but also clearly states the supernatural battle that must emerge. And, according to Mark, Jesus is able to assert his authority decisively in a manner that leaves no question about Jesus' clout.
Fourth, the immediate reaction is widespread dissemination of Jesus' unique stature and abilities. This becomes important in Mark's Gospel because much of the rest of the book includes an underlying suppression theme. Jesus often warns those he heals not to tell others about it for fear of how the people might react. Meanwhile, Mark has set it up from the very beginning of the gospel that people will respond, and will churn out the gossip network buzz, and will refuse to allow Jesus to disappear into backwater oblivion.
The stage is set for Jesus to become the greatest leader of all time. What remains, in the gospel, is to outline the strange way Jesus will end up on top; first he must be misunderstood, then he must be slighted and shamed, and finally he must be murdered before Easter morning will provide a different context in which to apprehend and follow his divine and eternal leadership.
Application
Jim Collins' book, Good to Great, has become a new Bible for doing business. Collins outlines the results of his research into companies that have moved up from decent business results to spectacular growth over an extended period of time. Among the seven qualities or traits Collins and his researchers found exhibited in these breakaway companies, one of the most important is what Collins calls "Level Five Leadership."
The idea of "Level Five Leadership" begs us to ask what are the other four levels of leadership? In Collins' paradigm they exist as follows: Level One Leadership is personal competence. Those who display it give evidence of impressive skills and integrated performance that lifts them to distinction among their peers.
Level Two Leadership is that of a contributing team member. When people work on projects or are assigned to groups, people exhibiting this kind of leadership quality are recognized by the group for both their relational talents and also for the insights that they bring into the team dynamics.
Level Three Leadership is that of effective management. Those who reach this recognition and achievement generally give appropriate guidance to systems and divisions that have been set up by others. They may innovate, but primarily within the context of the business structures that have been put in place before their term of service.
Level Four Leadership occurs when people are given opportunities to take charge of groups or companies and they do so with grace, style, and ease. It is an expression of public leadership on terms we are usually familiar.
But Level Five Leadership is a gift owned within more limited circles. Level Five Leaders, according to Jim Collins, express all of the competencies of levels one through four. To these, however, they add two additional qualities. The first is a paradoxical humility that does not wrap up self-identity with the leadership position, and the other is a tenacious commitment to the outcomes of the enterprise. Level Five Leaders own responsibility for the organization, but without egomaniacal posturing. They identify their life's purposes with that of the organization so that others understand the symbiotic fit. They are not here for a short while in order to make a name for themselves or to reap the windfall of profits and inflated salaries; they are in for the duration because they understand the needs and dynamics of the company.
These levels of leadership, even though derived from a business model, may help to explain the uniqueness of Moses in Israel and the model he established in Deuteronomy 18. They many also help people understand what it was that Paul sought to do in his relationship with the recalcitrant Corinthian congregation that sapped so much of his energies. And they may certainly create analogies through which Jesus' early impact on his community and his continued influence on the church and the world may be framed.
An Alternative Application
1 Corinthians 8:1-13. This is a great passage for exploring Christian behavior. It might be used on its own to probe contemporary issues of social and personal ethics and build a moral paradigm which moves beyond defining legalistic particulars to investigating responsible lifestyles.
Preaching The Psalm
Psalm 111
Convincing someone of an idea is not an easy task. Anyone who has worked in politics can vouch for this. Teachers, preachers, community leaders, all know how hard it is to convince people to rally behind an idea or a concept. Harder still, is the effort to get people to act on something.
There is, however, one magic trick that works almost every time, and that is fear. As German writer Bertolt Brecht put it: "Magic fear puts the world at your command." A people who are afraid will do most anything. Adolf Hitler knew this very well, as he brilliantly manipulated and manufactured a fear of Jews. Countless leaders, both religious and political, have relied on this magic fear for centuries. From fomenting fears of Christians in the Roman Empire to stirring up fear of "terrorists" today, the manipulation of people through fear continues unabated.
And, upon reading this psalm, one might get the idea that the fear game is being played here as well. We praise God, the psalm asserts, for all of God's mighty works. But in the end, it's because of fear that God gives food (v. 5). Moreover, fear of God is the "beginning of wisdom."
The evidence is strong. Follow God, or else. Indeed, it causes shudders down the spine to imagine how our ancestors in the faith made use of such fear.
However, it's worth noting that the translators of Holy Scriptures have made a bit of a slip here. It seems that the Hebrew words that have been translated into the English word "fear," do not in fact mean "fear." In both cases a more accurate translation would be "reverence."
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to notice that there's a good bit of distance between "fear" and "reverence." A given person or people may well do something as a result of being made afraid. However, true reverence, arises from a different location.
It is reverence that gives this psalm its depth and beauty, not fear. Praising God because of God's wonderful works is something we can manage. Who can stand on top of Half Dome at Yosemite and not feel reverence? Falling down in worship because of God's faithfulness to the covenant is something we can get our minds and hearts around. It is not so hard to revere a God who will not abandon us.
So while our traditions, both religious and political, opt too often for fear as a primary motivator, might we perhaps take a step toward reverence? Worship and praise induced by a humble acknowledgment of God's utter greatness will lead us in a very different direction than praise motivated by fear. Let us begin together by pausing to revere our God, in worship and in the rest of our lives.
