Separateness

I had a conversation over the weekend with the leader of our college ministry who was my successor in the job.  We were having an afternoon church activity and during our lunch before it began, a couple of the college students chose to not sit where we were sitting, and rather ate their lunch away from us.

I thought nothing of it, but Jon commented how he would have been "one of the guys" before he had assumed the position, but now that he is in charge, he is viewed in a different way.  He was slightly lamenting the change, however I told him that this was significant.

He sighed when I told him I was going to tell him about George Washington.  I told him, and now I will tell you. Luckily the internet doesn't tell me if you are sighing. Or actually even reading this.

In 1776, David McCullough quotes Washington, writing:

"Be easy . . . but not too familiar," he advised his officers, "lest you subject yourself to a want of that respect, which is necessary to support a proper command."

In doing ministry, this is a lesson that I have only recently learned.  If you want to have the ability to work with and influence a group of individuals, you can't simply be one of them. You must stand apart from them so that they will have a reason to follow you.

It's that mental note that people will naturally create in their heads--yeah, this guy is in charge. He always (seems to) know what he is doing. What does he think about that? Why is he telling me this?

This designation takes effort to create.  McCullough writes, "It was a philosophy unfamiliar to most Yankees, who saw nothing inappropriate about a captain shaving one of this soldiers, or rough-hewn General Putnam standing in line for his rations along with everyone else.  Nor was it easy for Putnam and others of the older officers to change their ways." (p.43)

Don't get me wrong here. I am certainly not saying that within the church, one must deliberately construct walls in the form of clergy and laity.  I'm not clergy. Jon isn't either. We are simply leaders.

An individual must be willing to be separate from the crowd to be a leader.  Otherwise, they won't be.

Going all in

Today I was reading 1776 by David McCullough which I've started for the third time but still haven't finished. It's not a bad book by any means, but just one of those it takes several times to jump before it gets rolling.  I'm hoping the third time's the charm.

Anyway, as I was reading on the bus today, I came across a few sentences about George Washington. Earlier this summer I read a biography of him (His Excellency by Joseph J. Ellis if you are looking for a good one) so his presence in the story is somewhat like watching a flashback of a character whose story you know so well, but now a part player in the context of others.

Washington's wealth and way of life, like his physique and horsemanship, were of great importance to  large numbers of the men he lead and among many in Congress. The feeling was that if he, George Washington, who had so much, was willing to risk "his all," however daunting the odds, then who were they to equivocate. That he was also serving without pay was widely taken as further evidence of the genuineness of his commitment. (pg. 48)

Washington's leadership was inspirational because if he was willing to put so much on the line for the cause, they who had relatively little to put up surely could do the same.

My initial takeaway from this was purely in the realm of leadership.  Those in the highest positions, those who are the most visible to the crowd have an extremely important role to play. The amount of themselves they are willing to personally sacrifice for the sake of a collective cause has a direct impact on how those below them will respond. If their leader doesn't appear to care or concern himself with taking a risk to face a seemingly insurmountable challenge, his followers in their relatively smaller capacities will respond in kind.

When those you lead do not appear to care about a mission that you personally believe in, it may be because you haven't truly displayed your personal commitment to it.

However, I then thought about Christ and His willingness to risk "his all."

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.  Philippians 2:5-11 (ESV)

Christ's sacrifice on the cross was a deliberate act of going all in and trading all he had for the sake of the cause of man. However in a far greater act of modeling, seeing the humility of Christ which God then exalted, we must also model our behavior as He did.

In James, it is written, "Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands you sinners; and purify your hearts, you double-minded. Lament and mourn and weep! Let your laughter be turned to mourning and your joy to gloom. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and He will lift you up." James 4:7-10 (ESV)

Our humbling of ourselves, rather our going all in for a cause greater then ourselves, is like a militiaman's sacrifice compared to that of George Washington. Well, sort of like that on a much different scale.  But if Christ was able to give up so much, who are we to equivocate?  And God Himself will then lift us up.