Okay, so I admit it. I am fascinated by the on going war within the international Anglican Communion. I do not watch with the least bit of pleasure, as some are in the habit of doing, but with a morbid fascination with how a group of professing Christians can destroy the institutions that they inherited by fighting for their convictions. Conservative and liberal sides appear from this side of the pond to be engaging in this on going war with the least bit of concern for a life of love in community. Not that they are the unique is this way of fighting for "godliness." I have seen this in the church that I have been a part of as well. So what possesses a group of people to eat there spiritual young in order to have their way in the present?
Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, is attempting to lead the Communion into a place of unity at the upcoming Lambeth Conference. He has been thoroughly disparaged by both extremes in this ecclesial war on a number of issues during his tenure. Most importantly is the challenge to his quality and style of leadership, which some charge is obviously lacking in its effectiveness.
Alister McGrath was quoted as saying, "Rowan has a very high view of unity and has worked hard, but it is not going to be enough. It is virtually impossible to achieve consensus and it is very difficult to exercise leadership in that context. Leadership is about more than finding consensus - you also have to map out the route that you believe to be right." (You can read the Guardian article here.)
So, is all of this mayhem in the Anglican Communion a question of leadership? Is McGrath correct that leadership is more than finding consensus - which will most likely never going to be attained at the Lambeth Conference or any other gathering on issues of homosexuality, women bishops, and the break within the Episcopal Church USA. What happens when a leader maps out a route that they believe to be correct and the Communion/Church/Organization doesn't follow along in mass? Are they still a good leader?
Leadership is a touchy subject. Everyone wants to be their own leader, or in other words not have to take direction from someone else. Many leaders seem to be interested in maintaining and protecting their own power. And others stand back and wonder what the point of all of this is about in the first place. Is it possible for a group of Christians / Churches / Denomination to select a good leader, and then allow that person to have the authority and should come with the responsibility? And yet, can that group be able to hold their leaders accountable and still be good followers? Lots of questions...lots of sadness in the state of the Church!
3 comments:
Wow, great topic, Jeff!
Whew.... where to begin?! I agree with McGrath's quote. A leader, yes, should strive to be a consensus builder, team player, troop rally-er, etc. BUT at the end of the day, if consensus is not possible, a leader must go down a path.
Jesus was a team player with EVERYONE. Whether pharisee or prostitute or anyone in between, He hung out with everybody. He shared the vision of the kingdom with everybody. No one was "too good" or "too bad" to need the kingdom. Some EVEN SO rejected Him. Was He a bad leader because of this?
When put in this context, it gives me much hope that I'm not a bad leader. Nor are you. We're not perfect leaders, certainly, but as long as we're not driven by ego and power and all the abuses you mentioned, then leaders after Jesus' heart have to be willing to let go of "followers" who won't follow. Jesus had to all the time. It grieved Him. But what choice did He have? The kingdom was more important than their petty "liking Him."
This is my personal challenge. To not have to have people "like me" but rather to lead with vision and conviction. And I'm a team builder and consensus maker! So (like Rowan Williams) its especially hard for me too!
But at the end of the day, Jesus and McGrath are right on. So we set a course and say "follow me," just as Jesus had that simple "follow Me." Some won't follow. OK. Some in the Anglican communion won't follow. OK. But Rowan Williams will now be called on (I believe) to LEAD. Consensus CANNOT be built between extremists. Its impossible. There is no compromise between "homosexuality is good" and "homosexuality is sinful." A compromise position is absurd. Its like a Vikings fan and a Packers fan each "compromising" by both agreeing to be Bears fans. STUPID!!! Compromise and consensus are not our gods (at least I hope not). Therefore they cannot be served when truth and vision are on the line.
Hurray Jesus. Hurray McGrath. Courage to you, Rowan Williams. And to you, Jeff!
REV
A second angle at this issue. Historically Protestants tend to be more congregational (even the more hierarchical denominations like Lutherans and Anglicans) - somehow lots of input is highly treasured thing.
This makes sense historically against the backdrop of the Roman Catholic Church, authority of the pope, reactionary thinking of the Reformation, etc. Suddenly "I get a say!" is really important.
One of the downsides to this rabid congregationalism/spirit of democracy is that it just ain't biblical. A search committee didn't call Timothy. An evaluation committee didn't sit down with Paul once a year. A congregational business meeting didn't determine how the Macedonians should structure their budgets. The early church was not a democracy.
YET Protestants resist hierarchy because of fears of its abuse, whether the historical Roman Catholic Church or modern day Swaggarts, Bakkers, Meyers, Dollars, etc. A righteous and benevolent dictatorship is of course the best form of government. Its the most efficient and 100% trustworthy.
This of course is King Jesus. The issue becomes one of submission. Congregationalism defies submission because it says we're all equal and the leaders are our servants. We fear the abuse of power so much that we deny anyone any authority. BUT! We then hold those in "authority" responsible if something goes wrong. WOW! What a system!
We've worked ourselves into a pickle in the last 2000 years.
REV
Why can't everybody like me? :) This is a rub for me. I do not find myself in a position of the 'people pleaser,' but I also do not find it enjoyable with other followers of Jesus decide to dislike me.
I remember being in seminary in a theological reflection group, and one of my partners in the group declared to us one day that he had decided that he had the gift of prophecy. When asked to explain he told us that when the prophets talked in the OT they offended people, and when he talks he often offends people as well. So, his conclusion was that he must be a prophet. Really.
Here's the problem. I fail to find in Scripture where being a jerk is a description of the life of the Spirit at work in a person. Quarlesome, contentious, gossip, backbiting, hurtful words are described as those fruit which comes from a heart that is NOT aligned with the Kingdom. The only intentional offense that I read of in Scripture is the Gospel. Not my presentation of the Gospel or my attitude of arrogance about my understanding of the Gospel.
As a leader, I don't want to be trapped in the bondage of being a people pleaser, but I do want to be as winsome as I can so that by all means I may reach some. I suspect that this is the rub in which Archbishop Rowan Williams finds himself at this point in the Lambeth Conference (not that I am comparing myself in anyway to Rowan Williams).
The longer I serve as a pastor the more I see the benefit of having someone outside of the local church which as the authority to step in and give direction in times of need. I think of Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 11 when he wrote to the church that reports were getting back to him about their behavior as a community. He wrote with great weight and love, and it must have made the hair stand upon the back of their necks knowing that their father in the faith knew of their childish behavior. What wisdom is found in this relationship that continued long after Paul was a present pastor/leader in Corinth.
I'm a Baptist barking up the wrong tree on this one, I know. But perhaps barking will draw the attention of some hunters who will come to see what all the ruckus is about!
Post a Comment