Boots on the ground

In the political arena there is often a debate over whether our country should intervene in world conflicts such as the ISIS emergency in Iraq. The question is often whether there will be "boots on the ground" or if intervention will be "safe and sterile" through the use of drones or the air force. We have learned over time that it is difficult to deal with a real threat without people who are actually on the ground. Be sure here that I am not arguing for more US intervention globally.

There is an analogy here, however, to missions where there are those who would like to redefine missions in the west in a way that virtually eliminates long term missionaries in favor of short term training and the support of national missionaries. The argument is that it is a cheaper and more efficient way to do missions. After all it costs significant dollars to send full time missionaries. And then there are language acquisition challenges as well as the challenges of living cross culturally.

I am a huge advocate of effective short term teaching as well as helping nationals from around the world send missionaries. I also believe that the role of missionaries is changing from being primarily doers to being primarily equippers of others. That being said, I would argue that having boots on the ground is a non-negotiable for the church in the west as well as the church in any other part of the world.

Why? Well, lets think of Christ's instructions to the church in the Great Commission. He said “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.

 His explicit command was that we go to all nations and the promise that He is with us to the end of the age implies that this missionary mandate stretched from His ascension to His return. To abandon this mandate is to ignore one of the last and key instructions of Christ.

Furthermore, Jesus Himself gave us the example of what it means to reach the lost through incarnational ministry. He came to us, He lived with us, He became one of us in order to identify with us. Why would we do any different?  If Jesus was willing to forgo the advantages of heaven for us, why would we not be willing to forgo the inconveniences of another culture for the sake of the Good News? 

Think of how Jesus discipled His disciples. He was with them and shared His life with them. He ministered in their presence and then got the disciples involved in ministry. Eventually at His ascension he gave His ministry to them. This was life on life ministry that could not be done from a distance. 

In every sense of the phrase, Jesus' ministry was a boots on the ground ministry. That kind of personal and incarnational ministry must continue till Jesus returns. It should be supplemented by short term ministries and it should be focused on developing, empowering and releasing healthy national leaders wherever we work but it is and always will be a boots on the ground ministry.

How powerful is your passport? Check out this infographic

Passports matter and some are more powerful than others. Check out this infographic to see how powerful your passport is.

Organizations that outgrow their leaders

It is not something that we often think about but there is a challenge to organizational success: It often outgrows the ability of it's senior leader to lead it. Someone who shined at one stage of an organization's life cycle actually can become an impediment to that very organization in its next period. 

It is a variation on the Peter Principle which states that every individual gets promoted to their level of incompetence and stays there. In this case, however, the leader is not the the one getting promoted. Rather, the organization's success has caused growth which adds complexity and therefore a different set of leadership skills than the senior leader has. The result, however, is that the organization now has a leader who is no longer effective in the same organization that they were effective in previously.

I often see this in churches where the growth of the ministry takes the senior leader out of their lane as it requires a different set of skills than it did when the church was smaller. Some senior pastors can grow with the growth of the ministry and some cannot: they are simply not wired to lead a larger organization. Thus their initial success now becomes their greatest liability and if not cognizant of the dynamics at play can actually hurt the very ministry they worked so hard to build.

At this juncture staff often become restless because they sense a leadership void in the church. Boards can become frustrated because they sense the same but cannot put their finger on what is wrong since things worked in the past. Congregants who sense that the ministry is drifting without a purpose often quietly move on. And, senior leaders can become defensive when the issues are brought up because they don't want to leave and like the frog in the kettle don't realize that the temperature has gone up because of their own limitations. 

Often a leader in this situation will sense there is something askew and depending on their personal emotional security will seek counsel and feedback from others. Where they come from a place of insecurity they will often ignore the symptoms and resist candid conversation on the issues.

All of us have limitations on our ability to lead. Understanding those limitations allows us to maximize our leadership potential and part of that equation is knowing when we have reached that place. Because once we do, we either reconfigure our job, move on or start to erode the successes of the past. Part of good EQ is understanding ourselves, our lane and the role in which we will be most impactful. This often takes the perspective of others around us who see things we may not see and can give us honest feedback.

Our limitations are not a failure on our part. They often simply reflect how God designed and wired us (Ephesians 2:10) and part of our responsibility is to stay in the lane for which we were designed and where we will be most successful. There are many things I am not qualified to do but when I stay in the lane God designed for me I am fulfilled and productive. And, I never want to hurt the very ministry I have worked so hard to build. Besides, it is not my ministry but God's! 

If the ministry we lead outgrows us, we have much to celebrate: We took it as far as we could and now we hand it off to someone who can take it further. Not for our glory but for His! And if it is His glory we seek we will always do what is right for the ministry even if it feels inconvenient to us.

Not complaining, just saying

If you must be in the hospital you need a sense of humor. And if you are going to get sick, the Deaconnes hospital in Bozeman, Montana is awesome. Great care and great people - the two go together. However there are some things that I wondered about.

Hospital food. OK enough said, except for most of my stay, when they did feed me it was a clear liquid diet. Like, jello, water, some sort of broth and apple juice. Now being a simple guy I figured that Diet Coke had to qualify too. After all you can see through it just like jello, but sadly, no, it is not part of a liquid diet. I settled for water.

"The Management." There were a number of signs in my room that were signed by "The Management." Who is the management? If I asked to speak to the "management" who would show up? And further, why do I need to know that these instructions come from the "management?" Another thing, what if you ignore the instructions? What does the "management?" do? Kick you out? Give you a lecture? decrease your grade? It can be scary to be in the hospital and thinking you might just tick off the "management." Being who I am I kind of ignored the "management" and nothing happened. 

Before I could leave, my nurse had to walk me through my post-hospital instructions. There was an ambiguous reference to dealing with anxiety so being inquisitive I asked her what that was about. She said that when I was in the ICU I became anxious. Hmmm, was that when I could not breathe and they were going to intubate me again? There is something about not being able to breathe that makes me anxious at times. But better people probably don't have that issue. So I'll work on it.

Last thing. Did you ever notice it is hard to leave a hospital? It is kind of like being in jail. Quite easy to get in and a lot harder to leave. There is always one more form to sign or permission to get. It is a daylong process every time I have had to work it through. Maybe the "management" is checking to ensure that I have not stolen any of the dandy furnishings in my room! Or maybe I am such a model patient that they didn't want to see me leave. I am pretty sure it is the latter.

So glad to be out and thanks to all the caregivers at Deaconnes hospital. And for all those who were praying a huge thank you. There were some amazing God moments. For now, I am hiding out in the Montana mountains off the grid (true statement) hoping that the managment does not find me. Oh, and I miss the hospital gown with the constant breeze in the back.

Update on TJ

Sorry for the delay in Blogging. My wife and I travelled to Montana last Thursday and I ended up in the ICU with pneumonia an Saturday. For prayer updates you can visit reach TJ at www.reachTJ.com

You are not hearing me!

What does that statement mean? Do they think I need hearing aids? Or that I don't understand what they are saying? Or not paying adequate attention. Well I guess on a bad day all three are possibilities! But no, that is not usually what this statement means. In most cases what they are saying is "you must not be hearing me because you won't agree with me." Or to put it another way, "if you truly heard me, you would agree with me."

Not necessarily so!

The truth is that I do hear you but I just don't agree with you on the point you are making. Nor do I or others need to. Self definition is all about the ability to have a personal position that may well be different than someone else's position and be OK with that. Those who use the phrase "You are not hearing me" are saying the opposite: You need to adopt my position, and they are not OK with others holding a contrary position.

This phrase can actually be used to manipulate others by keeping a conversation going on the pretext that we are not hearing or understanding what the other party is saying. Truth is we did hear, we did not agree and that is that! It is not only OK but it is a sign of a self defined person. This of course does not rule out constructive dialogue between differing points of view. What it does rule out is that we are not hearing. We are but simply choose not to agree.

My insincere apology for any offence I might have committed

All too often when we have done something that we need to apologize for we further complicate matters with "half apologies," or "self justifying" apologies - neither of which are true apologies. In fact, the absence of apologies for wrongs committed is ubiquitous in all of society today, including the Christian community. We just don't like to admit we were wrong and need to do something about it.

What is a half apology? It often goes something like this: "If I have offended you in any way please forgive me." Now think about that for a moment. The very reason the individual is apologizing is that they know they have offended the other party - and they know how they offended. 

Putting the "if" in the apology along with the "any way" makes it a very general and comfortable apology. In effect it says, I don't know if I offended you or how but should it be the case please forgive me. This kind of apology minimizes the offense by suggesting we don't know what we did and the impact the offense had on others. By making it very general it also conveniently lets us off the hook from needing to specifically admit what it was that we did to cause the offense. It may even put the blame back on the other individual for being so thin skinned that they took offense at such a trivial matter.

The "self justifying apology" goes something like this. "If I have offended you in any way please forgive me" and then proceeds to justify why we did what we did. In other words it is far more about justifying our actions than it is about apologizing for them. The apology is simply the pretext for the self justification.

What makes an apology a sincere apology? First we name the behavior or action that has caused the problem so that it is specific. Second we recognize how that behavior or action impacted another party (whether intentional or not). Third we ask for forgiveness without any self justification. 

Where there has been a misunderstanding it is perfectly reasonable to explain what we intended to do which was perhaps either misinterpreted or was just careless on our part. There is a difference between explanation and self justification and the one we are apologizing to will know which one we are presenting.

Neither half apologies or self justifying apologies are sincere apologies. They are often made out of necessity (we have been called on our behavior) rather than out of contrition (we know we were wrong). But the truth is that whoever we apologize to knows whether it is sincere or not. And so do we. 

Is Evangelical Worship headed for a HUGE crash?

Many congregants will resonate with this insightful article on the contemporary worship scene. Written by Jamie Brown, the Associate Pastor of Worship and Music at the Falls Church Anglican in northern Virginia.

Is Evangelical Worship headed for a HUGE crash?

How to spot a bully in the church

Newsflash: There are often people in a church who are bullies and get away with it because church leadership is too nice to call them out on their destructive behavior. Often we know something is not right but how do we know when behavior has crossed a line and is unacceptable? Here are some behavioral signs that you may be dealing with a bully.

They have to get their own way. If a group decision is not their liking and they insist that things are done their way, beware.

They intimidate in order to get their way. It can be intimidation in attitude, not letting go of an issue, always pushing or threats of one sort or another.

They triangulate others into their orbit in order to put pressure on leaders. Talking around about their "concerns" (which is nothing other than manipulation) they develop a group that they rope into their point of view so now there is a group dynamic to the bullying.

They criticize others, usually leaders in private seeking to undermine the authority of a leader or leaders. Often those they talk to will take up the offense or cause without any reason for doing so.

No matter how much attention they are given or how many conversations one has with them they do not move off their position. It is their way or no way.

They often raise their issues in congregational meetings seeking to force the hand of leadership. Nor are they nice about what they have to say.

They do not respect authority. Especially church authority - unless they are in church leadership in which case they demand others respect their authority.

They cloak their concerns and language in spiritual terms. When behaviors don't match the words, don't be fooled. This is not spiritual it is about power and getting one's way.

When confronted they deny, fight back or lie. They are not willing to be held accountable.

They hurt people who get in their way but they are never wrong and rarely apologize. After all it is about them, not others.

Why do bullies get their way in many churches? Because they can and because fellow Christians are not very smart about what is going on. After all, would a fellow Christian have ulterior motives??? The answer in many situations is "absolutely." Don't be fooled and don't be intimidated, and don't allow these kinds of behaviors in your church. It is divisive, dangerous, ungodly and evil. Call it for what it is.

Candid discourse among church leaders

It has been my observation after working with hundreds of churches over the years that candid conversation among church leaders is often sorely lacking. Observations that one might make outside the church boardroom are not made inside the boardroom for fear of hurting feelings, being seen as lacking grace or violating the "nice" culture that churches often live in. The practical result is that there are often many elephants that go unaddressed often to the detriment of people on staff or within the congregation.

Often, when I am called to help a congregation, I will do extensive interviews of staff and congregants. I will then have a very candid conversation with the board. What is intriguing to me is that most of what I share with them they already know, in whole or in part. Or, they suspected that I might find certain issues. Yet, those same issues have often never been discussed by the board. Rather, good and competent people have danced around them or chosen to ignore them.

Let me say that there are times when leaders do know something is amiss and bring in a consultant to help identify the issues from a dispassionate perspective and get help in navigating those issues. That is a healthy practice and indicates that leaders are willing to address issues but need the perspective that an outsider can bring.

I suspect there are several reasons for known issues not being addressed. First, there is the "church nice" culture that often mitigates against honest candid conversation. Second, senior pastors can be notoriously defensive and prickly about anything they perceive to be criticism (I can say that as I have been a senior pastor). 

Often leaders are timid in bringing up issues for fear of hurting the senior pastor's feelings. Question: What does that say about the EQ of your senior leader and of leaders who are afraid of his reaction? We are all grown ups here! Third, Christian leaders tend to gloss over the realities of what is under the hood and assume that God is at work and all is well. It is often a form of denial that allows them to avoid what they perceive might be an unpleasant conversation. 

All this adds up to a complicit silence on issues that really do need to be discussed and which left unaddressed long enough creates a crisis that forces the issues to the surface. Had they been addressed earlier, however, a crisis may well have been diverted.

I am a firm believer in gracious relationships between church leaders and between leaders and staff. But that does not preclude candid, honest and even robust dialogue where any issue should be open for conversation with the exception of hidden agendas and personal attacks. Honest dialogue is a sign of relational health while the inability to be candid is a sign of relational dysfunction. And remember that what is modeled by leadership is what is practiced in the congregation as a whole.

Here are some key questions for church leaders:

• Are there elephants in the room that we know about and if so lets name them. Once named, they are no longer elephants but issues we can discuss.
• Do we have the freedom and ethos where we can have candid and honest discussion on any issue that concerns our ministry? If not why not?
• When we don't address issues candidly how does that negatively impact our congregation?
• Do we as a board need to have a candid discussion on this issue?

What defines our identity?

The question of what defines our identity is a very real one. For many men it is their work but this is not a good source of identity as it is uncertain and temporary. For those in vocational ministry it is often our ministry but again that is confusing vocation with who we are as a person. Identity is what we are without the external props that we often confuse for significance. This includes titles, incomes and accomplishments.

There are also those whose identity is wrapped up in an event in their lives such as long term illness, a death in the family or their own personal issues which are always on the forefront of their lives. After two serious health scares that should have taken my life there are those who connect me with those illnesses but they are simply events (serious that it was) that I walked through and my health does not form my identity. There is no question that God's grace in my life did help shape my understanding of Him!

Theologically, for the Christ follower, our identity is all about who we are in Christ, stripped of all the external trappings (Ephesians 1 and 2). This is a fact that stands apart from all circumstances, jobs, accolades, disappointments, or the good and bad that life throws our way. In Jesus we stand forgiven, we are made members of His eternal family, we have His Spirit resident in our hearts, and positionally sit with Jesus in heaven (Ephesians 2:6). All of His goodness has been lavished on us and we have the very power of His resurrection within us. We are sons and daughters of the King no matter what our life situation.

That being the fact, we have choices in how we view life and subsequently how others view us. I want to be defined by a transormational life that lives in the hope of God's work, the faith that He acts in our best interests, the significance of joining Him in that work (Ephesians 2:10), living in His grace daily and the joy of His presence. In other words I want my identity to be defined by Him because I was created by Him and for Him and He changes the equation of our lives in every way.

I don't want to be defined by my ministry role, job title, the books I have written or the places I have traveled. Those are all part of my life as are many other things. Ultimately I want to be defined by who I am in Jesus. Because when all else is stripped away, as eventually it is, who we are in Him is not only all that is left but it is the most important thing. 

The Ten kinds of people nobody can help

In my younger years I believed that I could help almost anyone. Today I know that this is not the case and that there are people that are not a good stewardship of my time to pour my life into. It sounds crass perhaps but I am convinced it is true and this blog articulates what I have long believed. A great read for all of us and especially young pastors. 

The usual rebuttal is that the Holy Spirit can help anyone. I get that but I also get that we are not the Holy Spirit. Until people want help and will be honest with themselves it is very hard to be of assistance. We can pray for them because the Holy Spirit can work in their lives but even then they must be willing to hear and respond to the Holy Spirit. Until He does, there are people whom we often cannot help. Much as we desire to!

The ten kinds of people nobody can help

The art and discipline of thinking deeply

The ability to think deeply is both a skill and a gift. It is also a discipline that is often given short shrift in our information packed, media dominated and frenetically paced world. Most people simply do not have time to think deeply. It is easier to be busy and distracted than deliberative and thoughtful.

The deepest thinking is obviously about God and His word: witness the number of times in the Psalms that David speaks of meditating on the Word. It is almost novel today for people to read through the Bible and yet it is the source of our most profound understanding of ourselves, God, life and what it means to be a follower of Jesus. When life crowds this out we have lost our most valuable source.

Or take the priorities of our lives: work, marriage, finances, time management, relationships and even physical health. The business of life leads to an autopilot existence where we fall into deep ruts without even thinking about it. And that is the problem: we are not taking the time to think deeply, consider carefully and prayerfully evaluate our lives. One day we wake up and think, "how did I get here or allow that to happen?"

It is the lack of careful consideration of our lives that causes the regrets we have in later life. One of my goals is to minimize the regrets because we cannot do life or relationships over. I am sure that many couples who have drifted apart in their marriage realize that there were things that could have prevented the drift had they taken the time to become aware and do something about it. In too many cases we put a lot of thinking into our careers and work to the neglect of other priorities in life which then suffer as a consequence.

We often feel we are too busy to take time to sit still, take that walk, spend time with God or sit in a peaceful place to think. In truth we would be far happier and more productive if we did. It is then that we can gain a needed perspective on our lives, relationships, marriages, work and the many things that are core to our existence. Time to think is never wasted time. Activity that drives out that time is wasted time.

Posted on Sabbatical (time to think)

Envisioning the future while not disempowering the past

Every new senior leader faces the twin challenge of moving the organization they lead forward and at the same time doing so in a way that does not detract from what leaders have done in the past. All too often we envision the future but do so by directly or indirectly dissing the past. It is not necessary nor is it helpful.

Take a new pastor coming into a church that needs renovation. Because they are new their focus is on the future and they have no ownership of the past. What we often forget, however, is that our constituency is often far more focused on what was and what is than on what will be. I know of pastors who have publicly criticized the past practices of the church they take, the state of the campus facilities, the architecture and other things that in their eyes were broken.

They may be right in their analysis but they do not help move the congregation forward by marginalizing the past or those who made the church what it is today, imperfect as it may be. Remember that if change is needed it will take these very people to go with you. Thus I would offer several suggestions for envisioning the future while not disempowering the past.

First, honor the past: It got you to where you are. Find the positive things to honor and do it publicly.

Second, honor the faithful folks who are responsible for where the ministry is today. They may or may not represent the future but they have been faithful.

Third, position change not as a criticism of the past but as a necessary step to stay engaged with a changing world. Rather than positioning the past as "bad" position the future as "different" as we respond to a changing world environment.

Fourth, always be gracious. We would desire the next leader to be gracious with us after we leave. We need to set the stage by being gracious to those who have led in the past. There is rarely an excuse for a lack of graciousness.

Fifth, be very careful in how you communicate a need to change. Think about how your constituency will interpret your words from their point of view and experience. When in doubt, find a colleague who can give you feedback. How we message is as important as the message itself.

Sixth, don't move faster than your constituency can follow. Moving too fast sends a message that we do not value the past. Words are not the only things that matter. Our actions and attitudes send messages as well.

People who choose to leave their ministry by taking shots on the way out

So let me just say: It is not cool to take public shots at the organization we have been serving on the way out whether it is justified in our minds or not. It does not serve Jesus, it is not necessary and in the end it reveals more about our character than it does about the faults of the organization we are leaving.

When we choose to leave a ministry for whatever reason, we always have a choice as to how we leave. We can preserve unity, good will and relationship or we can destroy all three. Usually when we choose to take public shots it is more about our lack of EQ and character than it is about the shortcomings of the ministry. 

It is one thing to privately share our observations and concerns with those who can do something about them and it is another to go public with those who cannot and may not even know there are issues. I have watched pastors split churches and staff seek to hurt other ministries they have been a part of on leaving.

Ironically, any ministry that a disgruntled staff member goes to after they have publicly castigated their prior ministry is foolish to receive them. Why would they think that the individual will be any more gracious to them than to their prior ministry? They may feel good at the moment that the individual wants to work for them (and look how much better we are than that other group) but those who speak ill of their prior group may well do the same to the new group.

There are no perfect organizations, or leaders. But what would motivate one to seek to hurt or cast aspersions on either as they leave? The motivation certainly cannot be the betterment of the group they are leaving as they are no longer in a position to contribute. Those doing it certainly know it will not help their prior ministry. Usually the motive is personal and the behavior passive aggressive. It certainly does not fit the criteria given by Paul that what we say ought to build others up. In the end it is simply sad!

As one who has consulted with many churches and organizations I understand dysfunctions. But when I hear public criticism of a ministry as a staff member leaves it usually tells me a lot more about them than it does the organization they are leaving.

A very tough decision: When it is time to leave!

All of us face this decision from time to time in our lives. Henry Cloud calls them necessary endings. It is making the decision that it is time to leave a job - whether for another - or even not yet knowing what is next.

A good friend of mine just announced his resignation from a ministry. I asked him what he was planning to do and he simply said, "I am concentrating on finishing well and the rest will sort itself out." His internal compass convinced himself that after a ten year run it was time to move on. Even though he does not know what is next.

There are times when we know that our time is finished but we cannot pull the trigger to resign a familiar position. We are afraid for the future. Yet the coinage we trade in is that of faith and these are times that require great faith. Even when we leave for another position there is uncertainty and the requisite fears about leaving the familiar for the unknown.

In his book Necessary Endings, Henry Cloud rightly makes the point that in order for something new to start, something old must die. It is the nature of life. That is why there are endings that are necessary. The courageous heed the inner signs that it is time. Often we know in our heart of hearts that it is but resist out of fear. When we resist we miss out on that "new thing" that God wants to do in our lives. 

A tough decision but often the most important decision. Knowing when it is time.

If I truly understand that all people are made in God's Image...

The theology of creation and God's amazing decision to make us in His Image has implications for all relationships and interactions. The more we understand what it means that all are made in His Image, the more we will live out the following commitments. We will:

• Treat people with dignity and respect - all of them
• Not marginalize any person
• Exhibit the fruit of the Spirit in our interactions with others
• Want the best for other individuals
• Not slander others
• Treat all with fairness
• Desire that all come to know the One who created them
• Want all to fulfill their God given potential
• Reject all attitudes and actions that diminish life
• Never use people or our selfish purposes

Everyone you meet today is an Image bearer of God, tarnished as that image may be. Think of how Jesus treated all those around Him. As the creator He understood the implications of the Image He planted in every human being.

Theo geeks in the church

There is a place for slicing and dicing of fine theological points but it is rarely in the church. Certainly all Christ followers should be able to articulate the major doctrines of evangelical theology - and there is way too much Biblical illiteracy in the church today. However, just as Biblical illiteracy is a problem, those who are "Theo geeks" (I believe Paul Tripp used this term) can also be a problem, when they want to debate all theological points with very little tolerance for those who don't hold to their particular point of view. On a church board, they can tie up time and energy with their fine tuning of doctrine - by their interpretation.

There is nothing wrong with desiring to understand the nuances of theology. It is when we start to confuse the pillars of the faith that define orthodoxy with non-essential doctrines which have been debated for centuries that we get ourselves into trouble. My own denomination has a wonderful saying for this: "In essentials unity, in non-essentials charity." The essentials are spelled out in our statement of faith. On the non-essentials there is considerable latitude and points of view. 

Theo geeks are often not satisfied with latitude on non-essentials. They can be very black and white thinkers for whom latitude is not part of their vocabulary. The problem is threefold. First, in not making a distinction between essential and non-essential doctrines they elevate all doctrine to the same level which the church has never embraced. The various well know creeds of the church are all about the essential doctrinal issues that do in fact matter. 

Second, in doing this they often create conflict over issues that were never meant to divide people or the church. When non-essential doctrine becomes a cause of disunity there is usually an underlying issue of black and white, inflexible individuals who are majoring on the wrong things and need to have their views accepted. 

Third, narrow theological thinking (we all need to agree on all points of theology) often leads to a theological pride. The focus on getting every jot and tittle correct marginalizes those whose tittle might end up elsewhere and the focus on fine points of theology takes our focus off of the grace of Jesus, the transformation He wants to bring to our lives and the practical application of the Scriptures to our every day lives. When intellectual pursuits and knowledge become more important than grace and transformation the end result is pride and arrogance.

The study of theology ought to engender humility not pride. The longer I am immersed in the Scriptures the more clear I am on the essentials of the faith and the more humble I am about how much we do not understand of the fullness of God. In all eternity we will still not plumb the depths of His greatness and the breadth of His person. 

The problem with small untruths

It is easy to justify a small untruth. It is small and insignificant and has little impact one way or another. Except: With that small lie, I have moved the boundary of my moral compass ever so slightly, but it has moved which makes it easier next time to move it just so much more until the boundary become malleable and subject only to what I can justify. 

This last statement is very important because most of us will not tell an untruth that we cannot justify. That is why lies start small. It is something that is not too hard to justify and if the boundary of truth moves ever so slowly we can keep up with it. And the thing about self justification is that because a lie creates dissonance between our belief system and our actions it becomes necessary for us to justify the action and pretty soon we actually believe our own justification, skewed as it is.

I have met very bright, sometimes brilliant Christian leaders who have caused immeasurable hurt to others through promises not kept, untruths, financial mismanagement, unjust firings and the like. And they have a justification for all of it. Nothing is their fault, they don't take any responsibility and their justifications while absurd to others make perfect sense to them. They believe their own lies. Why? Over time their moral boundaries moved ever so slightly until they were now a great distance from where they started and the only one who does not see it is the individual himself or herself.

The problem with small untruths is that multiplied over and over they become large untruths. And one day, there is no way to even confront those lies because the justifications are believed by the one who has moved their moral boundaries. And it happens to believers and non-believers alike. Even Christian leaders!

Don't get caught in the trap of those who want endless dialogue as a means of getting their way

There are people who must have their own way and when that is challenged they try to rope others into endless dialogue designed to wear people down until they give in. They use phrases like, "I am not being understood, can we talk?" or "I am confused by your position," and "I must not be making myself clear." If it is a group decision and their position is not being agreed with they may try to triangulate with others on the team to get their way.

Those who rope others into endless dialogue have a strategy. They have learned that they can wear others down by debate and eventually many will simply give in or give up. Often they have strong personalities and the dialogue becomes a method of intimidation until people basically surrender. 

I once observed a dialogue between two senior leaders. One of them was trying to convince the other to make a certain decision that he did not want to make. The aggressor kept coming back with different angles, never acknowledging that the other party kept saying no. It became so problematic that I finally asked them to take a time out so I could suggest to the aggressor that he needed to back off and leave it alone.  He was simply unwilling to take no for an answer and his MO was to keep pushing until someone gave in. This behavior is nothing other than bullying and intimidation under the guise of dialogue.

Healthy people don't keep pushing others when they have clearly indicated their preferences. Humble individuals do not try to force others to agree with their position. Don't allow aggressive and pushy individuals to rope you into endless dialogue. They know exactly what they are doing and it is not about "understanding each other." Rather it is simply about getting their way.

Signs of Humility

We care deeply about what God thinks and says.

Life is not about us!

We honor other people above ourselves.

It is not necessary for us to always get our way.

We can submit to the decisions of a team or board.

We are deeply aware of our shadow side and seek to manage it well.

We understand and are willing to live under authority.

When people disagree with us we listen respectfully.

We don't need to be right.

We are not self absorbed.

It is easy for us to admit when we are wrong and to apologize.

We are not quick to judge others.

When success comes we can give credit where it is due.

When others succeed we celebrate their success.

We love to serve others.

We have a balanced understanding our ourselves, our strengths and our weaknesses.

We keep our egos in check.

Pastors and their dreams

Most pastors have dreams for their congregation and ministry. After all, they are leaders, they have a vision of what the church should or could be and they have a powerful platform from which to share those dreams - the pulpit.

The question, is not whether we have dreams for our ministry but whether we have a shared vision of what God wants to do in and through us. When my dream is only my dream, it is about me. When we are able to develop a shared dream and vision it is about us - together. As leaders we can use our leadership capital to build something for ourselves or we can build something together and which comes from a group of leaders seeking God's agenda together.

Corporate dreams have far more lasting power than individual dreams. God may well use a leader (think Nehemiah) to spark a vision of what could be but that then needs to be shared by those who must make it happen. Good leaders inspire others to action but they also help others gain ownership of a common vision.

And ultimately it should be God's vision for what He wants from our ministries. God calls us to things that are on His heart and when we discern that together, the conviction of the Holy Spirit binds good leaders together to move in a common direction.

All leaders have dreams. Ask yourself this question if you are a leader. Is this my agenda and vision or a shared agenda and vision. And, does that agenda and vision come from me, us or from God?

Best practices in pastoral searches: Moving beyond Kumbaya

The unfortunate fact is that many pastoral searches do not lead to a good marriage between the senior pastor and the congregation. I have watched great search processes and really poor ones. Here are some very practical suggestions that go beyond the need for prayer and the Holy Spirit's leading. They go to the core of understanding if this is likely to be a good fit or not.

Rather than a job description which no pastor can usually fill focus on the necessary competencies needed for the job. Then, write the actual job description around the individual you call with a focus on their particular strengths. He can then build a team to compensate for his weaknesses.

Resolve issues you know to be dysfunctional before you call a new leader - or - be fully disclosing as to what those issues are and how you will work with him to resolve them. Never hide the truth of your situation, just as you do not want the candidate to hide the truth of who they are. Give them the good, bad and the ugly so there are no surprises when they come. If the bad and the ugly scare them off, you have the wrong individual.

Ensure that your candidate knows where the authority lies in the congregation. It is a bad surprise for a new pastor to find out that authority he thought he had is withheld or that there are power factions in the church that hold veto power even over the board's decisions. If there is a church boss or some power faction, be sure they know about it.

Ensure that you are clear with the candidate as to what their authority is and is not. We don't like to talk about these things when we are courting a pastor but the fact is that they must know the boundaries of their role. If those boundaries are not acceptable to them they can self select out on the front end rather than fighting battles once they get there.

Every congregation has a DNA - some good and some problematic. Be sure that your candidate understands what that DNA is, what the strengths and weaknesses of the congregation as a whole are. If there have been significant conflicts or there are yet unresolved issues or a need for reconciliation tell the candidate.

The one group that the pastor must deal with regularly is the board. Be honest about the health of the board and allow the candidate to speak frankly and confidentially with whatever board member(s) they choose to get the real story. Unhealthy boards are as dangerous as unhealthy pastors. Don't hide reality from the individual who must deal with that reality for their leadership tenure.

Clarify in writing issues that need to be clarified in either direction. For instance, one search committee I met with could not explain who actually had authority for what: Board, senior pastor, staff or congregation. That is enough ambiguity to sink the relationship fast if not clarified. Some things need to be clarified up front just as in a marriage.

Don't try to make everyone feel good in this process. Good marriages take hard conversations and so do good pastoral/board relationships. Allow your candidate to ask the same hard questions of you that you ask of them. This is not about everyone being able to sing Kumbaya but about the ability to work together long term. Some things may need to be negotiated and agreed to up front.

Be clear about whether the new senior leader has the ability to change his leadership team which means staff. If you as a board see some staff as off limits for change (they are your friends or whatever the case) be honest about that.

Be honest, candid, up front, frank, how many ways can we say it! Tell the truth, don't gloss and be sure you are ready to keep promises that you make.

One of the fundamental ways that trust is broken early between new pastors and boards is when they are surprised by realities that the board fully knew but chose not to tell them in the candidating stage as it might scare them off. Where this happens the process lacks integrity and the potential damage to the congregation and pastor can be high. Be up front on the front end and you will build trust for the back end.

First look at the upcoming book Deep Influence

Table of Contents

Forged on the Inside

Choosing a Posture of Humility

Allowing Suffering to Mold

Embracing Spiritual Transformation

Managing the Shadow Side

Growing Emotional Intelligence

Leading from Who God Made Me to Be

Choosing Intentionality

Thinking as a Contrarian

Getting to the Freedom of Clarity

Living with Transparency

Guarding Our Hearts

Vital statistics on pastors that all pastors and church board members should know

How healthy are pastors today? What is their spiritual life like? What do they struggle with? Who are their friends? What is their drop out rate. The following article is sobering for pastors and their congregants alike and calls for some serious discussion.

See article here

An insightful article by Albert Mohler on Gay marriage and the evangelical church

There Is No ‘Third Way’ — Southern Baptists Face a Moment of Decision (and so will you)

See article here

Every person of influence has this characteristic

They are purveyors of hope!

Every day we are bombarded with messages of pessimism and fear whether it is the economy, the political situation, challenges in the workplace or ministry. Good leaders and people of influence don't live in the world of pessimism but in the world of hope and they transmit that hope in all that they do. When others say, "It won't work," "We cannot do it," There are no good options," leaders resist the tide of pessimism and provide their people with hope!

One of my heroes is Winston Churchill who almost single handedly provided hope to the nation of England when appeasers wanted to make peace with Hitler, when the blitz threatened to destroy London, when their ships were being sunk and the nation was nearly bankrupt and no one was providing help. It was Churchill who refused to give in to despair even though he knew the odds were stacked against his nation. Time after time, in Parliament and on the radio his voice was the voice of hope and it literally changed the course that history might have taken.

Think about the message of Jesus. "The thief comes to steal, kill and destroy but I come to give life and life abundant (John 10:10)." Or, "In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world (John 16:33)." If there is one thing I don't understand, it is believers who live with fear and pessimism rather than peace and hope because that is what Jesus came to give us and we have its reservoir in our hearts through the Holy Spirit. 

The Apostle Paul understood that! Because he understood God. He was no pessimist even in the midst of a tough ministry. He wrote, "Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to His power that is at work with us, to Him be glory in the church and in Jesus Christ throughout all generations, for ever and every! Amen! 

On a hard day think about that!

These are not easy days to be in ministry. Good leaders though see the possibilities and threats but they rally the troops to see what can be rather than what many fear will be. They are optimistic while still being realistic, find ways to overcome adversity and believe that God is a big God not a small God. Their perspective becomes hope that others can borrow from. They are purveyors of hope.