Leaders and followers

Everybody has a head. Maybe not two kidneys or hands, maybe not a spleen or appendix but everyone has that center of knowing and doing that usually rests atop the shoulders. That’s why Paul’s description of Jesus as the head of the church in Colossians 1 and Ephesians 1 works as a picturesque and universal portrayal of our place of submission under our Lord.

Groups of humans have a head also. A football team has a quarterback and devotes a lot of manpower to guarding him, and to attacking the quarterback of the other team. Armies have generals, countries have kings or presidents, churches have pastors, companies have CEOs, and so forth. All of those entities devote a lot of effort to the nurture and protection of their respective heads. Without those individuals the corporate body will not function well, or long. I suppose that’s one reason you can’t turn around without stumbling over a pile of leadership books or a cluster of people taking a leadership seminar. The importance of leadership implies something that many Americans have trouble grasping. In fact, I think the frantic emphasis on leadership we’ve seen for 20 years or so reflects a problem more subtle than ignorance about how to lead people.

Our culture has too little respect for authority. And the necessity of a leader means that he must have authority over those he leads. Disrespect is reflected in the way we speak of and to our leaders, in the way we complain and express our expectations, and in the way we honor our own feelings above any established ethical code. I think our people struggle to be leaders because we have never learned to be followers. We can train, clone, or rear effective leaders forever and they will still fail if placed before a group of people who will not follow.

I confess to being part of the problem. Something as simple as how we address people can reflect inadequate respect for necessary roles. I grew up addressing those older than myself (aunts, uncles, and family friends) by their first names, as if we were peers. My teachers were “Mr.” or “Mrs.” and clearly not my peers. As a high school student, my pastor was called by his first name, as were my Sunday School teachers and youth leaders. We did that to flatten our social or generational differences, to our detriment—it made those people less effective leaders. My gaggle of high school and college students had plenty of buddies. What we needed was experienced people to be respected role models and leaders. A trend toward irreverence is not self-correcting. The problem has grown as we self-absorbed baby boomers took charge.

A whole generation of Americans now cannot remember television shows or movies where kids did not crack wise and treat their parents horribly. I remember “Father Knows Best” and I remember “All in the Family.” The former program (notice “Father”) portrayed Dad as wise, kind, winsome, and appropriately stern. He usually wore a suit to work and a tie to dinner. The latter program portrayed Dad as a bigoted wiseacre who drank a lot of beer and ridiculed his wife. Since that day, portrayals of families have become increasingly toxic. Because we scorned the old “square” model of family and were amused by the new “hip” model, we got what we wanted in entertainment and in reality.

In politics we’ve gone in my lifetime from “President Eisenhower” and “JFK” or “President Kennedy” to “Tricky Dick,” “Slick Willy,” “W” and “Barack.” Even if some of those monikers are intended affectionately, and some are, it is a slide in respect for a necessary role and for the authority required to fill that role.

And I certainly, as a part of the problem, understand why this is tempting. We are a democratic, congregational, egalitarian culture. No kings here. A person is not superior in essence just because he’s lived longer or attained a higher standing. What seemed more evident to me then than now is that older people are not necessarily smart or right. Why respect an accident of birth order or the compromises that a long life accumulates? I like the idea of respecting people who deserve it and treating the rest in whatever way I think they deserve. That’s the problem. I thought it was a fine idea that I would decide who deserves my respect and who does not. It’s not only a modern idea or an American idea; it is a very human and ungodly one.

About the time I received the right to vote I was introduced to a passage of Scripture I’d never seen before. First Samuel 24 tells the story of an unrighteous king of Israel who sought to kill the righteous future king. As Saul (the bad king) found himself at (good future king) David’s mercy, David stayed his hand because Saul was his “master” and “God’s anointed,” even in the midst of his decline and sin. Saul did not deserve respect in my view, but he did in the view his Master (and mine), the Lord who appointed him king. This view of authority as derived from God was revolutionary to me at the time. Who else has God appointed over me? He’s appointed pastors, presidents, parents, board members, supervisors, congressmen and a host of people with authority delegated by one of the above for one purpose or another. It is not for me to judge their worthiness for the role.

This should be a no-brainer for God’s people. Clearly we have people at every stage of life who have been set in place by God for the common good. Nearly all of us find also ourselves in the role of leader to at least one other person. The respect we need is the respect those in authority over us need also. In fact, we must occasionally cordon ourselves off from familiarity and fellowship so as to better fulfill a vital role in the lives of others. This too is a decidedly un-baby boomer instinct. There is a time to be “Gary” and a time to be “Dad” or “Mr. Ledbetter” or even on rare occasions “Rev. Ledbetter.” As I say, it goes against the grain to give or receive the trappings of office. Part of being a leader requires sometimes going against the grain.

Maybe we should dial back the wit and arrogance so popular in our public and private dialog. Could we even stop letting Hollywood script writers set the tone for our families? It is appropriate that we spend less time deciding how much respect to give those God has already appointed over us. A counter-cultural move toward what used to be called common respect will benefit our communities and churches more than we can imagine. I believe it would also solve part of our leadership vacuum. The real problem may have been a followship vacuum all along.