Lack Of Servant Leadership In The Church Today
In reality, the concept of servant leadership within the church today is not prevalent, as oppose to the Greco-Roman world of Jesus and Paul. This lack of servant leadership in our church, culture and society today, is influenced by trends, myths and challenges in the leadership environment, as well as, the scarcity of the human abilities, qualities, and competencies in becoming a servant leader. By contrast, Paul’s leadership was considered the opposite of the leadership models that were prevalent in Greco-Roman society. By reasons, Paul’s intentionality and leadership approach reflected his inabilities, failures, weakness, foolishness, lowliness, humiliation, self-sacrifice, self-denial, and suffering of his Lord. But as Paul attested,
…show more content…
“Therefore I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities for the sake of Christ; for whenever I am weak then I am strong.” (2 Cor. 12:10). Essentially, Paul’s own admission and leadership style, which reflected Christ, subsequently exposed the false apostles as impostors, who were leaders in terms of social influence and whose message and lifestyle indicated, they were Christian leaders, who were servants of Satan. (2 Cor. 11:13-15)
Paul’s servant leadership style was very evident in many aspects of his ministry. For instance, in the letters he wrote to the churches, Paul did not approach them in an authoritative manner, instead he greeted, taught, corrected, and encouraged the Christian community, displaying that he valued and cared for them deeply. This aspect of his ministry made it clear that he regarded them as co-workers with him, and that he was very interested and compassionate about their well being and social influence. Apart from that, we see Paul managing the Christian community by delegating the public readings of his letters (Col 4:16), arranging for the collection of aid (1Cor. 16:3), and sending others on errands (1Cor. 4:17). On the contrary, John P. Kotter would probably disagree with Paul’s dual leadership and management functionality, by making the distinction that, management is coping with complexities, practices and procedures to bring a degree of order and consistency, while leadership is coping with the changes. Evidently, Paul functioned under both disciplines effectively. By contrast, Paul’s leadership entailed coping with changes in an oppressive socio-economic political Roman world, as well as, establishing direction, to motivate and inspire others to growth spiritually in the Lord.
Another interesting aspect of Paul’s servant leadership style is demonstrated by the descriptions and titles he uses throughout his ministry, such as, a herald, teacher (1 Tim 2:7; 2 Tim 1:1), an apostle (Rom 1:1; 1Cor.
1:1, 4:9) and a father ‘in the Lord’ to the whole churches (1 Cor. 4:15’ 2 Cor. 6:15, 12:14-15) just to name a few, speaks clearly of his intentionality to serve and meet others at their starting point. Likewise, John Maxwell captures the core essence of leadership which he defines as a process, because it describes an action as oppose to naming a position or title. Further, Paul exhibited emotional intelligence when he became a nursing mother who cared for her children (1 Thess. 2:7), and one who understood the frailty of old age (Phlm. 9). By virtue, Paul made himself a salve to everyone, particularly the early Christian community so he could win as many as possible, not for himself, but for the building of God’s kingdom. Overall, Paul was very strategic by how he presented himself to the early Christian community. By reasons, he understood the forces of socio-economic and political oppression, for he too had persecuted Christians, prior to his Christian conversion. Now, in his call to ministry, he too experienced persecution for the sake of the gospels. This cultural intelligence awareness and understanding, led Paul to use his emotional intelligence of suffering, humiliation, rejection, and persecution to mirror what the early Christians had to encounter in the Roman world. This illustrated that Paul, was capable of understanding and managing his emotions in a way to lead and inspire others based on how Daniel Goleman describes emotional
intelligence.
“Therefore I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities for the sake of Christ; for whenever I am weak then I am strong.” (2 Cor. 12:10). Essentially, Paul’s own admission and leadership style, which reflected Christ, subsequently exposed the false apostles as impostors, who were leaders in terms of social influence and whose message and lifestyle indicated, they were Christian leaders, who were servants of Satan. (2 Cor. 11:13-15)
Paul’s servant leadership style was very evident in many aspects of his ministry. For instance, in the letters he wrote to the churches, Paul did not approach them in an authoritative manner, instead he greeted, taught, corrected, and encouraged the Christian community, displaying that he valued and cared for them deeply. This aspect of his ministry made it clear that he regarded them as co-workers with him, and that he was very interested and compassionate about their well being and social influence. Apart from that, we see Paul managing the Christian community by delegating the public readings of his letters (Col 4:16), arranging for the collection of aid (1Cor. 16:3), and sending others on errands (1Cor. 4:17). On the contrary, John P. Kotter would probably disagree with Paul’s dual leadership and management functionality, by making the distinction that, management is coping with complexities, practices and procedures to bring a degree of order and consistency, while leadership is coping with the changes. Evidently, Paul functioned under both disciplines effectively. By contrast, Paul’s leadership entailed coping with changes in an oppressive socio-economic political Roman world, as well as, establishing direction, to motivate and inspire others to growth spiritually in the Lord.
Another interesting aspect of Paul’s servant leadership style is demonstrated by the descriptions and titles he uses throughout his ministry, such as, a herald, teacher (1 Tim 2:7; 2 Tim 1:1), an apostle (Rom 1:1; 1Cor.
1:1, 4:9) and a father ‘in the Lord’ to the whole churches (1 Cor. 4:15’ 2 Cor. 6:15, 12:14-15) just to name a few, speaks clearly of his intentionality to serve and meet others at their starting point. Likewise, John Maxwell captures the core essence of leadership which he defines as a process, because it describes an action as oppose to naming a position or title. Further, Paul exhibited emotional intelligence when he became a nursing mother who cared for her children (1 Thess. 2:7), and one who understood the frailty of old age (Phlm. 9). By virtue, Paul made himself a salve to everyone, particularly the early Christian community so he could win as many as possible, not for himself, but for the building of God’s kingdom. Overall, Paul was very strategic by how he presented himself to the early Christian community. By reasons, he understood the forces of socio-economic and political oppression, for he too had persecuted Christians, prior to his Christian conversion. Now, in his call to ministry, he too experienced persecution for the sake of the gospels. This cultural intelligence awareness and understanding, led Paul to use his emotional intelligence of suffering, humiliation, rejection, and persecution to mirror what the early Christians had to encounter in the Roman world. This illustrated that Paul, was capable of understanding and managing his emotions in a way to lead and inspire others based on how Daniel Goleman describes emotional
intelligence.