Developing Your Discernment

Fred Smith asked the musicians of the New York Philharmonic Orchestra to name the most effective conductor. The conductor they named won hands down. They were asked why he was chosen and the answer was, “He could anticipate when you were about to make a mistake and keep you from making it.” He had discernment. Smith says that he has known many excellent leaders who were not given the gift of discernment. They could not read people. They depended on management skills and organization. Those that are blessed with some discernment could develop significant sensitivity and intuition. Smith’s thought is “If I could read my people correctly, I could make the most of their productivity and minimize their mistakes.” Smith writes, “Words are the windows to the mind.” In using discernment, first, you have to make sure you understand the meaning of words, both dictionary and colloquial. Slang is part of colloquial listening. Second, you must listen to the selection of words. Word choice discloses several things, including a person’s reasoning ability, his prejudices and desire to impress. The use of words and accents also gives a glimpse into someone’s past. People can have a public vocabulary different from their private. Sometimes they let a private word slip into the public expression, and that opens a window into the person’s thought process. Also it is important to notice the manipulation of words. You must be able to hear what they don’t say and listen for the tone, pace and rhythm. www.christianitytoday.com/global/printer.html?/le/1999/spring/912086.html

Walking in Step

In this article Ben Merold lists four elements that he feels are necessary for a leadership team to work together well. The first is prayer. This establishes with his leaders that no decision will be made until they first hold a prayer meeting. The team allows 20 to 45 minutes for prayer at the beginning of their meetings. The finding is there is a great difference between praying for God’s guidance in their decisions and making decisions and then asking God to bless them. The second element is fellowship. If elders and staff cannot be friends socially, it is a mistake to believe they can be friends in the decision-making process. It is necessary to create opportunities for fellowship among the leadership team. The third element is compassion. Overseer, one of the words translated as elder, can be defined as looking over with compassion. In developing a caring congregation, it is necessary to have a compassionate leadership. A caring congregation is concerned about evangelism and edification. More importantly, compassionate leading suggests that the leader will be one that desires to lead and not control. The fourth element is vision. Leaders must know where they are going. Too many leadership teams do not know where they are and where the church is positioned in the larger context. They may know the church’s average attendance, but not know how the attendance is distributed among age groups. It hinders them from knowing their ability to provide for future needs or take advantage of present opportunities. Ben Merold is senior minister with Harvester Christian Church in St. Charles, Missouri. www.christianitytoday.com

Surprised by Addiction These ministers faced their compulsions—and stayed in ministry. John W. Kennedy

John W. Kennedy discusses different forms of addiction and different pastors who were caught in some form of addiction but survived the process of healing to continue in ministry even when the form of ministry may have changed.

It is bold for a congregation to accept the pastor’s addiction and help them overcome it and return to vital ministry. It was refreshing that a congregation would reject the pastor’s resignation and hold him accountable taking over his role of ministry while he was in recovery. All believers should help each other in this way. As a leader Kennedy indicated that the pastor should be transparent in this situation where he had fallen and was healed, but also realizing that the strains of ministry where the pastor is isolated and held to a unrealistic standard is the real problem with pastors when they made choices which causes them to become addicted to something.

Kennedy also discussed that there needs to be a trustworthy place for pastors to go and receive help from addictions where they are not judged but helped and having people around them to walk with them through healing. We as pastors in the making need to be aware of those areas in our lives where we are susceptible to a problem in our lives where, if left in the dark, or if we become isolated, it could become an addiction which could derail our lives and ministry. We need to be aware of places to go when we realize we have a problem in our lives and get help early on rather than waiting for the addiction to gain complete control. I believe there is a point where a person knows the next step could take them on the downward spiral.

Post-Denominational?

In this short video Brian McLaren talks about denominations (short is an understatement, but regardless of the length I think he raises a good point to get many of us thinking). In the ages of the MP4, McLaren thinks denominations, right now, are in the LP record business. “They need to have a radical change in identity to say we are in the music business, and are not committed to a medium as much as we are to a mission.” This, for McLaren is the most important thing that is needed if we are going to see denominational transformation.

I think that McLaren raises a good point. For those of us who are planning on being leaders in a denominational church we must ask whether or not we are more committed to denominational distinctives or to a larger narrative. This is perhaps the single most important question people in denominations need to ask. It is my fear that if we side with the agenda of our denominations we will run the risk of become increasingly irrelevant. Regardless the position that one takes, for denominations to be transformed something must change. Whether a sort of post-denominationalism is needed or not we must ask these hard questions.

We Are Family

As Christian leaders, we often find ourselves so driven and committed to helping and serving others, that we lose sight of those to whom we are the most responsible. Brian Haynes’ wife approached him years back and told him that while he was shepherding everyone else, he was losing his family. His commitment to the church had usurped his commitment to his family. Haynes makes the interesting statement that the command in Deuteronomy 6:4-9 was not overridden or made null and void because of Matthew 28:18-20. Deuteronomy 6 is the command to instruct your children and Matthew 28 is the Great Commission. Our call to our family has not been negated due to our call to preach to the world. If was at this point that a massive shift took place within his church. They decided that they would seek to find a path of convergence for family and ministry. There had to be a common path that those who were involved with the church were being equipped as well as given the time to help nourish, shape, and instruct their families. This is part of their understanding of life and ministry. It is the two-sided coin that cannot be divided. They have decided to allow the family to be primary disciple-makers and the church comes alongside of them. This is the way that it should be. The church is to come alongside of those in need, but it was never meant to be a replacement for the family. Are they right in the family the center of disciple making?

The Leadership Plan Is Nathan McWherter

Brandon Hatmaker talks about whether we equip people to live on mission or do we just talk about it.

The church is

The church does what is

The church organizes what it does

The church is really defined by the things that we do and the organizational structure forces what we end up doing. So if the church is not structured to do something then they really aren’t that thing no matter what they say that they are. When you say you want to equip people to do the ministry you need to set up the churches structure to give time money and position to the mission. If you say you want to help the poor and you start to create a structure that reflects that, the process causes you to look at the what and the where and the how. It makes you donate resources to that mission and you become effective.

When I think about leadership in response to that it is healthy to look at what you do, what you spend your time on, and compare it to what you are supposed to be doing or what your personal mission statement is and you realize that you might need to restructure your resources. How are you going to live out your mission, when are you going to do it, and how are you going to spend resources of time energy and money to achieve that Goal.

Your Leadership Plan is

Your Leadership Plan does what it is

Your Leadership Plan organizes what it does

7 killers for Charismatic Leadership

This quarter we’ve talked a lot about charismatic leadership. There are some leaders who just seem to attract others to them. When this leader is excited about a new project, he or she is able to get those around them excited as well. In the book Laws of Charisma, Kurt Mortensen describes 7 charisma killers. These seven behaviors have a way of stealing both a leaders charisma and ability to influence others. The seven charisma killers are 1. talking too much, 2. showing how much you know, 3. getting too friendly too fast, 4. getting too comfortable too fast, 5. proxemics (not respecting personal space), 6. being one sided with you facts, and 7. arguing or trying to prove you are right. While this list certainly isn’t exhaustive, these are 7 behaviors that can definitely steal a leader’s ability to influence and receive respect from others. I really like number 6. If a leader is trying to bring correction to someone on their team, and they’re only focusing on one side, the person receiving the correction will simply not feel heard. A leader gains credibility with a team member when they are able to display that they understand what the person has been going through, or understand the situation that the team member is currently in. Steam rolling someone and not acknowledging the existing circumstances, problems, etc. of a situation will cause someone to check out fast. As we acknowledge the good things that our team members are doing, they are then more likely to receive correction well.

Kayak Leadership

A former pastor of mine, Timothy Teague, recently described his observations of a kayak guide in Tybee Island, Georgia. People of all ages, backgrounds, and experience levels came aboard the kayak not fully knowing what was in store for them. Yet, they trusted the kayak leader. One would think that the leader would do a bulk of paddling, but this was not the case. The trusting sojourners paddled for themselves. Most striking was that the guide was facing backwards while leading and giving instructions to his kayakers. The kayak leader did not have to turn around because he had been there before. He could determine where he was just because of the surroundings. The leader led the kayakers from their point of entry to their point of departure, while keeping them safe and helping them gain confidence and experience.

The whole scene he describes is a striking picture of what leadership looks like (or ought to look like). How many times do we define leadership in terms of “us up there” and them “down there?” Do we lead with our backs turned? Or do we want to be the center of attention doing all of the paddling? Are we empowering people to grow, or just to stay on the shore not risking anything? Are we creating an environment where people feel as though they will “return safely” and can trust our guidance? And do we realize that we have too have traveled through the river led by another “kayak leader” named Jesus?

Learning to Delegate

In this article, the author speaks about a leadership theories under Bass and Colleagues called delegative leadership. The author notes that first and foremost, delegative leadership requires a lot of trust and faith on the side of the leader to actually fully delegate tasks to his followers. A person cannot use delegative leadership without empowerment. Empowering your follower doesn’t just mean giving him/her the responsibility of the task, but also means that you give the follower of yours the competency to handle the staff, the resources to back the follower up, as well as the authority to execute whatever is necessary for the completion of the task. The first thing you have to take note when delegating a task is to ask yourself if the follower has the competency to handle it. Next, you must also ensure that he has sufficient resources to achieve the task. And finally, this person must be delegated enough authority that he may execute the task smoothly. They must be given the authority to handle everything within the project in your name so that the other team will understand that following him in that project is equivalent to submitting to their leader. This article illustrates how effective delegation takes a lot of effort, but is essential in a growing organization. We must realize that in the end, you will not be able to do everything yourself and eventually you have to learn to delegate so that you may be able to perform other more pertinent tasks for the organization.

The Leadership of Dwight Eisenhower

This article discusses the leadership of Dwight Eisenhower, a leading player in the U.S. Army’s World War II operations who would later become president. He is described as having “a gift for grand strategy, matchless interpersonal skills, infectious optimism, pluck, [and] luck.” The first leadership quality that he exhibited was a willingness to “take the blame when things went wrong” even when he did not deserve it. This showed humility and reflected a desire to stand in solidarity with those around him rather than to “hang them out to dry.” Second, despite his high position, he interacted with his soldiers man to man, showing interest in and taking time for them, which gained him their love and support.

Third, he engaged with those on the “outside” of the military (e.g. reporters) with “geniality and candor,” showing them respect and endearing them. Fourth, he was a good team-builder, uniting the American and British forces – “transcending national rivalries” – to fight the Axis Powers. Finally, he tried to reach consensus when making decisions, but was not afraid to make tough decisions himself if this could not be done.

These principles and qualities could also be translated and applied to a ministry context. As leaders in the kingdom, it is important that we: take responsibility for our mistakes (or those of others around us when appropriate), exhibit humility, openly communicate with insiders and outsiders (in relation to the Church), build effective teams, and foster/encourage unity. No doubt these can be found throughout the pages of Scripture and in the individuals whose stories they tell.

Leader Member Exchange

The focus of this online article is the Leader-Member Exchange theory. This leadership theory focuses on the relationship between the leader and those being led. There are two core groups identified in this model. The In-Group consists of those who go beyond what is required of them and actively work to help the leader. The Out-Group consists of those who do only what is required and do not interact much with the leader. Leadership is improved when those in the Out-Group can be grafted into the In-Group. To do this, the leader must determine what is motivating those in the Out-Group. Then, he must he must work to reduce things that hinder motivation. He must then work to build partnering relationships with these members.

This model of leadership has much potential for use in a ministry setting. Indeed, it seems to follow a basic pattern of discipleship, wherein one moves progressively outward to incorporate people into a discipleship network who are not already part of one. Furthermore, within a church setting, it is a matter of fact that there will be those whom a pastor finds more willing to engage with the work of the church and those who are not. Thus, this model provides a good theoretical method for getting this latter group more involved. One potential problem, however, is that there may be those who just do not care to become more involved and embrace the vision of the church. This model seems to assume the ideal, that the leader will just be able to change people’s outlook.

Postmodern Musings

In this article Kevin Miller explores the nature of postmodern leadership by posing a list of ten questions, or what he terms “pomo ponderings.” First, I should like to state that I do not agree with the label “pomo” as applied to people who have aligned themselves with a post-modern approach to life and ministry, as it is an off-handed reference to “homo,” which is a derogatory term in its own right. With that aside, this is a really insightful article into the nature of postmodern leadership. I thought the most important questions that Miller posed are as follows:  1) “What accounts for the overwhelmingly white, middle-class makeup of the postmodern-ministry conversation?” 2) Does the emergent “conversation” welcome business people and engineers along with their enthusiasm for artists? 3) Is there not something strange in saying that we are certain that everything is uncertain?

I found the first question particularly relevant because I once overheard a campus ministry leader, who had an Indian background, tell a white student who was obsessed with postmodernism that, “Only white people have time to think about that stuff.” I thought, “Wow, that’s totally true!” Then I thought about the nature of leadership and theology. The way we approach Jesus, or the Bible, can be so culturally-conditioned that no one outside of our culture understands it. Leaders of post-modern movements lead “away” from modernism, but probably 99% of the world doesn’t even know what trends characterized modernism. Do leaders only attract people like them? How can we attract people who are different?

5 Levels of Leadership

In this article, John Maxwell's five levels of leadership are discussed. Since we have already talked some about these levels in class, I have put some thought into what level I am currently operating at. I would guess that out of the five levels of leadership discussed in class, I am currently at "People Development." In this level, "People follow because of what you have done for them." I have empowered young adults and have given them value that they were not finding elsewhere. I have showed them Christ's love, while teaching them how to honor God with their lives. They follow because they are loyal to me, because of what I have done for them. I would love to get to the personhood level of leadership. In this level, "People follow you because of who you are and what you represent." Since I only devote around 6 hours a week to leading in this context, I have not been able to communicate completely who I am and what I represent. I feel that in a full-time ministry context, I would be able to align myself into the personhood level of leadership, which would ultimately be my preferred level. The question that remains is how to you get from one level to the next. As I look back on my ministry experience, it is clear to me that I have been through each of the levels to get to where I am now, but I am not sure how I got there.

Bi-Polar Priest

This article is an example of how God works through the brokenness in leaders to continue to bring His message to people. This priest was afflicted with Bi-Polar Disorder. He explains how he felt at the beginning of his journey with this illness. He, then, continues to share the journey as he fought through his treatment to return to wholeness with medication. The result of all of this is that he has realized that even with this situation in his life God can still use him as He intended to do. The realization of the author that he had to let go of his control over his life and let God take control has brought this priest to the ability to be able to lead as he was intended to do. We need to realize that this is the ultimate action that we have to take in our own lives no matter what the circumstances. By letting God take control of our lives we are then able to be used by God in leadership as well as all other aspects of our lives. Whether sick or well, unless we do this we will never reach our complete potential.

Brian Mclaren on Spirituality

In Brian's latest book, "Naked Spirituality: A Life with God in 12 Simple Words," he discusses the four stages of spirituality. The first stage is simplicity. A person desires to please an authority figure and believes that there are easy answers to every question. People in this stage want to know what is right or wrong, good or bad. Some people never leave this stage and their identity is in their leader or group. So preach with confidence. The second stage is complexity in which there is more than one way to do things. They see authority figures as coaches and focus on effectiveness or ineffectiveness. Their identity comes from a cause or achievement. People in this stage want knowledge, historical context, lists, steps, reason, goals, and examples. So preach with intelligence. The third stage is perplexity in which everyone has an opinion and they are not sure which view is correct. The people in this stage focus on honesty or dishonesty, authentic or inauthentic. Authority figures are seen as controllers trying to impose easy answers on the naive. When preaching to this group give both sides of the issues, share struggles, and preach with transparency. The forth stage is harmony in which the person focuses on the grand essentials. The focus of this group is whether something is wise or unwise. Their motive is to serve, contribute, and to make a difference. Their identity comes in mutual relationships. God is knowable in part, yet mysterious, present yet transcendant, and merciful to hold all the parts in tension. Preach with humility and depth.

"Leadership" in Winning by Jack Welch, pgs. 61-80

In this chapter, Jack Welch offers two important principles concerning leadership: (1) Live the Vision, and (2) Celebrate Followers. Welch believes that it is not only a leader's job to conceptualize the vision of an organization, but also to get followers passionately excited about the vision. A leader must consistently and creatively instill the vision within the followers DNA. So much so, Welch claims, that your followers should be able to communicate the organization's vision in the middle of the night when they are half awake (pg.67). Not only must vision be communicated to the core leaders, but to every member of the organization. A vision will not produce transformation within an organization until the entire organization both internalizes and is excited about the vision. In order for this to occur, Welch believes that the leader must always be talking about the organization's vision, "[even] to the point of gagging." In addition to vision, Welch also discusses the importance of leaders celebrating their followers. According to Welch, a leader must consistently ask the following question: "Do we celebrate enough?" (pg.78). Leaders who regularly celebrate their followers "create an atmosphere of recognition and positive energy" (pg.79). In my opinion, followers who are genuinely celebrated will feel valued and appreciated. Moreover, they will likely be more effective and loyal employees/volunteers. As a leader in your context of ministry, how effective are you at communicating your vision with passion and consistency? How do you create opportunities to celebrate the achievements of your followers?

Leading in Unstable Times

The title of this blog is a tad misleading. The author begins with the premise of how one could lead effectively in unstable times, but he actually digresses and spends time discussing leading through change. This is not a leadership blog for ministry, but the two crises of leadership discussed are very relevant to the church today.

First, the author briefly discusses the role of the leader when great change is needed. He gives the example of politics, where a party simply elects a new leader, rather than give the current leader leeway, to enact necessary change. Many of us may have been raised (or are currently serving in) congregational churches. Thus we know that the pastor faces this risk of the congregation simply ousting him or her from leadership.

The author accurately points out that this truly is not a good way to enact change within a congregation. He writes that when organizations (or nations) rapidly change leaders, they are just like consumers switching to a new brand “which has not let them down YET” (emphasis mine). From the perspective of the congregation, I wonder how we have been guilty of switching churches or simply worship services (which we all know can be simply another church-within-a-church)? From a leadership perspective, how often have we jumped from approach to approach, curriculum to curriculum, and so on? The author aptly describes change as a two-way street. The congregation must provide the leader time and space; the leader must provide the vision.

Distributed Leadership

I found this interesting because it is not an article, but a statement of the leadership model of this particular organization. It is meant for internal use, but provides a good definition of distributive leadership that is applicable beyond this specific context. Rather than reiterate the definition, I will highlight some insights from the description.

Distribute leadership is not delegating. It involves much more collaboration in terms of idea generation, problem solving, and implementation from all members of the team.

Distribute leadership is team oriented. The focus is on process that engages all members of the team with their skills, interests, and perspectives. Everyone shares a common goal and mission. It is built on cooperation and trust.

Distributive leadership values the individual. Everyone is considered an expert in their area regardless of whether they are a decision maker or not. The individual becomes more effective because of the model of the group.

Distributive leadership does not fear mistakes. Failures lead to new approaches. Controlled and reasoned risk-taking is expected and encouraged.

“The central goal of the approach is for individuals to succeed in a climate of shared purpose, teamwork, and respect.” In my opinion, this is an excellent model that could be easily transferred to the church, especially in the context of decentralized ministry. Everyone is valued and engaged. There is a common purpose and the community comes together as one in order to reach the larger goals and purposes of the body.

Messy Process of Change

As I consider the fact that leadership will often--if not always--deal with change, I appreciate Steven Furtick's reminder that change is messy and often slow. I remember a quote from Rick Warren, which I will butcher in my paraphrase here, in which he essentially said, "Growth always brings change. Change always brings loss. Loss always brings sadness. People--whether or not they want to be--are in a constant state of growth and change." We know that to grow into an adult means to also grow into responsibility; it is also the loss of endless free time and irresponsibility. Growth and change are facts of life. In my anticipation for the future and excitement for potential, I often forget that this new change will bring around loss and sadness for someone else.

And it is this sadness that requires a leader to be a pastor. A good leader will guide his people through this sadness. A bad leader would ignore it. A good leader will move slowly and deliberately in these moments; a bad leader would rush ahead.

I see this applying to the change in people's lives and the change we face corporately. It reminds me of the line from the play Julius Caesar, beware the voices of haste. In dealing with people’s lives—whether it be their personal issues or their church--no matter what the change, it seems that it is better to go slow than to go quickly.

We All Need to Be Transformational Leaders

Transformational Leadership

What Is Transformational Leadership?

By Kendra Cherry , About.com Guide

I do not know if I am a transformational leader, but I want to be one. This article provides a brief summary of the history of this leadership theory, and the four components of the theory advanced by Bernard M. Bass. The theory was introduced by James MacGregor Burns, who described the effects of this leadership as follows. “Leaders and followers make each other to advance to a higher level of moral and motivation.”

Who doesn’t want to be able to create a synergy like that? Boosting moral and motivation to achieve common goals will keep the organization from stagnation or death. It will also keep people who are part of the organization enjoying their experience instead of dreading it or not caring about it.

Bass’s four components of transformational leadership include “intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, inspirational motivation, and idealized influence.” Essentially these components paint the picture of a leader who encourages creativity in the staff team, gives individual support and welcomes feedback from staff, and articulates a clear vision that stirs a mutual passion. The leader also serves a “role model” for others in the organization and a mutual trust and respect builds in their relationships as they work together.

Whether or not this a natural leadership style, it is certainly one that I will need to adapt. Many of us will be serving in churches in need of revitalization, vision, and change. We need to be transformational leaders in order to be effective in helping a church regain healthy levels of growth.

Towards a Theology (not theory) of Leadership

"Manuals and courses on leadership tend to focus on personality strengths and various skill-sets for leadership. But the biblical narrative focuses on faith, obedience and vision. The effectiveness of our native gifts and skills as leaders depend on these. Without them kingdom leadership is not to be found. "

In this article, Sven Eriksson, a minister in the Mennonite Church of Canada, highlights the crucial difference between leadership theory and a theology of leadership. While he acknowledges the value of personality assessments and theories, Eriksson reminds us that, "when God chooses men and women for Kingdom leadership, there is something afoot that may not appear on a personality inventory." Eriksson cites David, the unlikely leader of Israel, recounting that God found leadership qualities in David that the world did not see.

Another poignant reminder brought by the author is that there is no Biblical personality or theory of leadership. The hall of witnesses in Hebrews 11 is a diverse group who carried out different tasks, but were united under a theology of leadership.

Eriksson sets out three building blocks of this theology:

1. Faith - believing what God has said

2. Obedience - taking risks, audacious behavior that counteracts societal norms

3. Vision - future vision "so profoundly compelling it gave them the ability to suffer and die for it"

As we step out into ministry this summer, I wonder, not only at the styles with which we will lead, but the theology that grounds them. What is your theology of leadership?

Redefining "Radical"

The issue of a consumerist Christian faith in the American church has been under attack for some time. There are numerous books out there that speak against consumerism, especially how it has turned our faith into a consumer product and our churches into a place that dispenses it to anyone who puts money into the offering plate. The reaction to this Christian consumerism over the past few years has been a call to a “radical” Christianity. This is the topic of an article by Skye Jethani entitled “Redefining Radical.” She observes that this has been the typical response recently, but wonders if it is necessarily the proper response. She argues that the call to “radical” Christianity, which is often defined by increased emphasis on missions, social justice issues, and/or poverty relief, is not any different at the heart of the issue than the consumerism that it reacts against. In the end, it is still Christianity that is based on works rather than simply being based in a relationship with Christ. As leaders, it is our responsibility to help people see that our works, whether it be dropping money in the offering plate expecting something in return or selling all our positions and moving to Africa, do not earn our salvation. She mentions 1 Corinthians 7, in which Paul tells the Corinthians that whatever they are doing, they need to be “with God.” People don’t have to be “radical” in order to be with God. Leaders in the church need to find a way to model this for the church.

LAST BLOG POST

This week you will make your last blog post for this class. However, this blog site now belongs to you. You can continue this discussion or do with it as you wish. My intention was to create a place where you could collect articles and resources that will always be available to you.

I hope you have come to value and appreciate this exercise and the interaction you have had with one another. I have enjoyed reading your blog posts. You have found some excellent resources on Christian Leadership.

Thanks for participating.

May the Lord be with you.

Dr. Dan Lawson.

You Will Suffer - Take Heart

You Will Suffer, watch this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--JiiuJNvt4&feature=related This is a video by John Piper that is very inspiring and gives hope in the midst of trials and suffering. I must understand this as I enter a life of ministry and leadership in Jesus Christ – I WILL SUFFER. I must realize this and not be surprised when it happens. As Christian leaders we will suffer. If we are striving to live lives that are in Jesus Christ, we must be ready to also suffer like our Lord and our Savior did. If you are a leader that is going through a hard time right now, take heart and know that you are not alone. I never understood why Paul rejoiced in His suffering. But see now I get it, suffering brought Paul closer to Christ. In the midst of Paul’s suffering it brought him closer to Jesus Christ and made him more like Christ. As leaders we will suffer. We must realize this or we will not make it in ministry. This sermon by John Piper is a wake- up call to remember that the life lived and journey taken with Jesus Christ is sacrifice, suffering, and service. Jesus was the ultimate servant and calls us to a life of servant leadership. Servant leadership that involves suffering. We as leaders will suffer and must put others first in servant leadership as Jesus Christ did. Are we willing to suffer and truly lose our lives in service in and through Jesus Christ? Read 1 Corinthians 6:3-10 take heart : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8ZuKF3dxCY&feature=related - Romans 5:3-5