Below I will briefly discuss four recent books I’ve read, along with a salient quote (or three) from each. Then, I’ll link to a few articles which are hard on the idea of “servant leadership”, viewing essentially as a non-sequitur. I’ll conclude with some thoughts that these (along with other works) have been stirring in my mind of late.
Man of the House
C.R. Wiley is one of the more interesting thinkers around today, in my opinion. In this book, he offers a “handbook for building a shelter that will last in a world that is falling apart.” Through a retrieval of the idea of household economics and an emphasis productive property, Wiley charts a vision for home/family/economy radically different from what modern America considers as “normal”. I didn’t agree with every jot and tittle, but I think he’s on to something important.
[His later book, The Household and the War for the Cosmos, gets into more of the philosophical/biblical underpinnings, and I’m glad I read it first. I may have been less open to what he says in Man of the House if I had read them in chronological order.]
“But being stuck can be a good thing—trees are stuck because they have roots. People benefit from having roots too. They’re good for kids, and for old folks too.” (31)
“Children were collected into schools, not because they were more conducive to learning, but because it was seen as more efficient to have a large group taught by a single person than to let children receive their instruction at home.” (37)
“This is why you [as a father] shouldn’t be shy about expecting the honor due to you—not because it serves as a kind of ego-trip, but because it is through you that the members of the household will learn to honor God and neighbor.” (96)
The Discipleship Gospel
In this book, authors Ben Sobels and Bill Hull argue that Christians (especially in America) have bought into a truncated gospel that doesn’t address the fullness of what Jesus taught. More precisely, they actually list a number of truncated gospels, from various forms of political liberation, to the political gospels of right and left, the prosperity gospel, to - most controversially - the “forgiveness-only gospel.” The authors argue that each of these truncated gospels presents a view of Jesus and the gospel which is insufficient for genuine, biblical, discipleship. People will conform to the story they believe, and if we don’t call them to believe the fullness of the gospel as presented in the Scriptures, then we should not be surprised when their walk with the Lord is lacking in depth, seriousness, joy, and fruit.
Of the various truncated gospels, I’ll focus on “forgiveness-only”: because if I fall into an error, it would be that one. The authors paint the forgiveness-only gospel as essentially telling people they are sinners and that Jesus loved them and died for them, and if they repent of their sins and trust in him they will go to heaven when they die. All true, insofar as it goes. Hull and Sobels argue, however, that the biblical gospel - the one preached by Jesus and Paul - contains 7 elements (drawn mainly from Mark 1, Mark 8, and 1 Corinthians 15):
proclamation of the kingdom
identification of Jesus as King
announcement that Jesus died in the place of sinners
announcement that Jesus rose from the grave on the third day
call to repent of your sins
call to believe in Jesus’ sacrifice for your sins
call to follow Jesus as your lord and King
The first four parts of this gospel articulation are declarative (God brings the kingdom, Jesus is the king, he has died and risen) and three are imperative (you must repent, you must believe, you must follow). The forgiveness-only gospel focuses only on aspects 3-6 (or, more frequently, 3, 4, & 6). In doing so, it leaves out the expectation that we are called no only to be sorry for sin and what it might have cost Jesus, but we are actually expected to change. Or, to use Jesus word: follow. To be a Christian one must follow Jesus.
They don’t really use this language, at least that I recall, but it is very reminiscent of the Lordship controversy from the 80s. At that time, many (most?) Christians, including pastors and bible teachers, had a category for the “carnal Christian”: someone genuinely born-again but living without reference to God. People like John Macarthur (The Gospel According to Jesus, The Gospel According to the Apostles) argued that such teaching was foreign to the NT idea of discipleship. Belief includes repentance and demands we follow Jesus in all that he commanded (Matthew 28:19).
What is ironic, though, is that many would articulate agreement with Macarthur and co., yet still articulate the gospel in terms very friendly to a forgiveness-only view. And while there were certainly parts of Discipleship Gospel with which I would quibble, it was a helpful reminder that we need to articulate all of what Scripture teaches about becoming a Christian. Jesus wasn’t really interested in making it sound easy.
“If people don’t respond to the gospel in the way Jesus calls them to, they won’t be saved. In other words, while we can distinguish between the declarative and imperative responses of the gospel, we must not separate them. They are critically connected.” (34-35)
“One reason…so many pastors aren’t making disciples in their church is that they’ve never been discipled.” (120)
“discipleship is evangelism—Jesus most effective method of evangelism.” (138)
Ordering Your Private World
My world - if judged by my desks, the top of my dresser, or any flat space that Andie isn’t allowing after or asking me to clean - is disordered. That was desperately the case six months ago. It still is true to some degree, but to the extent that I’ve seen progress and growth, one of the main reasons is the book by Gordon Macdonald, Ordering Your Private World. This is not just a book about a messy desk—but it isn’t less than that, either. Macdonald discusses practices of prayer, study, and rest. He dips into time management, and realizing that even as a leader you aren’t in the business of saving anybody, and so maybe you need to quit thinking and acting like that’s your job. The main thrust of the book is that if you would like to be used by God, you’d be wise to get your internal state under control.
“If my private world is in order, it will be because I make a daily choice it will be because I make a daily choice to monitor its state of orderliness.” (page 19 of the 1985 edition)
“The first step we may have to take is that of a ruthless self-appraisal about our habits of time use…When I am slipping into a state of disorganization, for example, I know it because my desk takes on a cluttered appearance. The same things happens to the top of my bedroom dresser. In fact, almost every horizontal surface in the path of my daily travel becomes littered with papers, memos to which I have not responded, and bits of tasks that are unfinished.” (64 of the 2017 edition)
Monsters from the Id
This book from E. Michael Jones was interesting. It traces the rise of the horror genre in connection with the various sexual revolutions following from the spread of enlightenment philosophy in Europe and America. The book was redundant in times (word-for-word repeats of arguments occasionally), and could have been streamlined substantially. I listened to it on audio, largely at 1.5 speed, which I almost never do. But it was simply too long.
That said, Jones has clearly done his homework, and while at times seemed to be stretching the facts to fit his case, on the whole I think it is more than plausible to see horror as the subconscious revolt of morality against the monster of untethered sexuality and the monsters it creates (monsters inside us).
Articles:
I have been interested in following the growing backlash against the idea of “servant leadership.” Aaron Renn has been an especially vocal critic of this concept as applied in evangelical circles, though others are expanding the critique more broadly.
While pushing together those two words - “servant” and “leader” - gives you two things which seem undeniably good, the argument being made is that the term “servant leader” or “servant leadership” actually becomes cover for a style of leading that fails to lead or serve in any meaningful way.
I don’t agree with every part of the critiques, but I think the issues they raise are important. I may spend some time writing on what I see as a more Biblical alternative - something like a “servant ruler” - in coming days.
Sheeple in Leader’s Clothing by Clifford Humphrey
The Problem with Servant Leadership by Aaron Renn
Against Servant Leadership by Joshua Gibbs