Do leaders exist ontologically? I know that some church traditions claim an ontological ordination but that just seems to set us up for abuse of power, (of course the church would never abuse its power).
Most leadership literature speaks more about what a leader does, than who is a leader. Some will say that leaders are born not made, or the inverse. And of course the there is the discussion of spiritual gifts, does the person “own” said gifts?
One of the more popular definitions of leadership is that leadership is influence. Since everyone has influence, leadership then becomes, in part, an issue of scale. The more influence one has, the greater the leader. Yet Christ had a great deal of influence but it sure didn’t look like it. Some claim that the truly great leaders lead in such a way that no one knows they’re leading.
Well, these days I’m inclined to suggest that leaders do not exist, at least not ontologically. Rather, leaders are called forth by communal ethos, to lead particular moments or seasons. This would take leadership as a function to an extreme.
“Sure I’m a leader, look at my title and job description.”
Who is the leader in the Godhead? Before you jump to saying the Father, reflect on the “heresies” of modalism and tritheism – why might those concepts have caught on within certain segments of the church, granted they are likely unsound but they reflect an effort, among other things, to honor the seemingly special or unique role each person of the Godhead play in different moments. Could it be that the communal ethos of the Divine was calling forth unique expressions of leadership?
Could it be then that the way of leadership is the way of self-emptying, kenosis or the way of the cross. Could it be that King David’s uncertainty as to who the Lord’s anointed person was, might be a key leadership principle. Can my influence be such that I continually look for ways to decrease so that Christ can increase?
Peace, dwight
