Would Jesus be a CEO?

I don't ask that to be provocative, but as a genuine question. What has relying on the corporate world for church models garnered the church other then expertise in satiating the fabricated 'needs' of existing Christians?

"I need a church with a strong child ministry."

"I need a church with a strong small groups."

"I need a church that will make me a latte on Sunday morning and feed my kids because I can't take the time to do it myself."

Where does it end?

'Believe what you're doing, and Do it' sounds like 7th grade self-esteem pep talk, not sound ecclesiology. When well we learn that attractional (corporate) models and power struggles only breed large-ego out-of-touch Leaders and co-dependent Christians?

David, You ask a good question but I think you were unfair to these two women and to Brandon's report. Their simple approach had nothing to do with the fabricated needs you mentioned. They saw people with legitimate needs who needed to be served and served them. A 7th grade self-esteem pep talk? I think it is more like the discourse Jesus gave in Matthew 26. Seems like you're much more anxious to take a potshot at Willow Creek than to thoroughly read the report.

David, isn't this what we find once again to be so interesting about the blogosphere? I would ask two things, that will help me to understand where you are coming from as a response to this post. 1: Did you or have you ever attended or listened to any of the sessions from the Leadership Summit? 2: If not, are you willing to?

This was my third year in attending the Summit, and I once again walked away refreshed, inspired and challenged to seek God, seek His purposes in being part of His kingdom, and humbly submit to how HE wants to lead His people.

I was inspired to set my face, my mind, my ears towards Him in EVERY SINGLE SESSION. I was challenged to be more concerned with being fully committed to HIM rather than concerned with myself, my leadership, ministries or projects or ideas that I am involved in. (That's just flat out good teaching!)

I was skeptical before I went to my first Summit. (And to be honest, Bono is what got me there in the first place. I was even a bit miffed that Bono was aligning himself with an organization I had been so skeptical of.) But here I am, surprisingly, wanting to defend the WCA cause and means in which they live out their mission. God certainly has a sense of humor wrapped up in ways of keeping me humble as I learn how to serve and follow Him.

Actually, to me "Believe in what you're doing, and do it" sound quite biblical: Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your heart. And: Fear not; have I not commanded you? If we believe God has commanded us to do something, then we "believe in what we are doing."

One thing I take from this post: "If you have done it to the least of these my brothers (and sisters), then you have done it to Me." Isn't that where the truest ministry lies?

I found much to rejoice in, thought Gary Haugen's talk simply excellent. Although the word "missional" was absent, the connection was made constantly - to lead is to connect through God's heart to a mission.

But I wonder about the frame, or lens, of leadership. The formula appears to be this: "Jesus was a great leader. To be formed like him is to be a heroic leader. Here are some examples of heroic leadership." Or perhaps we frame Jesus as leader because we are called to follow and followership implies leadership. But I wonder, in using this cultural frame, what we miss? The alternate cultural frame for heroic leadership is leadership as a quality of living systems. The biblical frame is discipleship (mathetes, learner). The wider frame is Eph. 4. Every lens distorts as much as it reveals, and I think we need to strongly recover older, pastoral, lenses.

"Would Jesus be a CEO?" This is asking the wrong question, and is missing the point entirely. A better question might be, "Was Jesus an effective, mission-driven leader?" And the answer is a resounding yes.

What can the church take from the corporate world? Leadership! Quality, mission-oriented, high-quality leadership.

What does the church most lack? That's right: Leadership. Many churches -- I started to say most, but I'll back away a little -- many churches live lives of utter insignificance, making no difference in anything, for one reason: bad leadership.

It's easy for do-nothing and do-little people, who don't lead, to snipe at those who have a vision of taking Jesus to the world, and are effectively living out that vision.

@melville
"David, You ask a good question but I think you were unfair to these two women and to Brandon's report."

Thanks, let me clarify. In no way am I calling into question the ministry of the two women. That said the, 'Believe what your doing. Do it.' paradigm is good advice, it's a good rule of thumb. But as far as biblical Christian Leadership I find it slightly lacking in depth is all, and too prone to the subversion of human will and rationalization. I can say I believe pretty much anything, doesn't mean it will build the God's Kingdom. I do agree with you that in their specific instance it is building the kingdom.

"I think it is more like the discourse Jesus gave in Matthew 26."

Are you sure you meant 26? I may be missing your intent here.

"Seems like you're much more anxious to take a potshot at Willow Creek"

This is not taking a pot-shot, this is an honest contention that many have with the methodology of Willow Creek and it's acceptance of the corporate leadership model as somehow applicable to the body of Christ. A pot-shot would imply a certain haphazard nature to my intent, and that is certainly not the case. I realize that my comments will be unpopular because of the transformational nature of the stories, I am not contending the validity of those specific ministries but I most certainly find myself at odds with the attractional church model that Willow Creek has and continues to embody.

@Kim
1: Did you or have you ever attended or listened to any of the sessions from the Leadership Summit? 2: If not, are you willing to?

This is a bit of a straw man question you are posing, I want to keep the conversation relative to this specific article.

My question is what place does a CEO have in the body of Christ? Where are we looking to for biblical leadership models? To use an overly simplistic analogy; how does a sailing guide help someone drive a car?

@Larry?
""Would Jesus be a CEO?" This is asking the wrong question, and is missing the point entirely. A better question might be, "Was Jesus an effective, mission-driven leader?" And the answer is a resounding yes."

If the point of Willow Creek wasn't to elevate the significant importance of the CEO/business paradigm, then why have so many speak? I only asked the question because Willow Creek has opened the door by the virtue of their keynote speakers. To ask if Jesus would use the CEO model if he were in earthly presence today is a very fair question.

Of course Jesus was an effective, mission-driven leader, especially in the sense that Jesus IS the mission. Your word's imply that somehow I am reducing the effectiveness of Jesus' leadership simply because I do not see the validity of the CEO/Business model as it pertains to the Body of Christ or God's Mission.

"What can the church take from the corporate world? Leadership! Quality, mission-oriented, high-quality leadership.

What does the church most lack? That's right: Leadership."

The job of the CEO of Best Buy is entirely focused on selling the public thousands of things they do not need. That is not biblical leadership, that is consumerism and materialism.

You are right many churches do lack leadership, but we must be careful of too easily turning to a corporate source.

"It's easy for do-nothing and do-little people, who don't lead, to snipe at those who have a vision of taking Jesus to the world, and are effectively living out that vision."

Now that was a bit unnecessary. You have taken this way too personally. Additionally we do note 'take' Jesus anywhere. I hate to tell you, but Jesus is too big for you to put into your pocket my friend, he is already out there leading, we all need to realize that and try and catch up.

David, I think the answer to your question would be if needed, yes, Jesus would be a CEO. I don't think a blanket statement "yes" or "no" can apply.

I don't think the church is relying on the corporate model per se, but on the Christian foundations that businesses seem to excel at applying.

I do agree with your statement that there are fabricated "needs" out there in which the church needs to wake up from and realize they are not needs at all. I believe this is where a missional church needs to step in and understand the people they are reaching out to and address the real needs.

I wish it were so simple. I'm not convinced that the problem boils down to bad leadership. We have created complex systems, and our diagnosis has to be accurate. What if I argue that the reason for our failure is not bad leadership but disconnection from the heart and passion of God. The prescriptions we offer are then weighted differently. But I wonder if our deeper failure is to live as authentic communities. But it's striking to me that the explosion in growth of the church in Asia came when all the leaders were killed or imprisoned. We could read this as a culling of "bad leaders," but we could also read it as a rediscovery of community and a new dependence on God.

Incidentally, Wilfred Drath argues (The Deep Blue Sea) that there are contexts which, depending on the lens we employ, strike us as either crying out for leadership, or as conflicts that are immune to leadership. He proposes that neither of the traditional lenses work in some new contexts (leadership as personal dominance or as interpersonal influence) and then argues for a new, third principle.

url, wasn't david's last reply longer than 1500 words? seemed like it to me. :)

what came to mind was, "thou dost protest too much."

Jesus, if a leader, was a SERVANT leader. and, believe it or not, there are actually CEOs who might fit into this category. unfortunately 'leadership' has an air of 'success' about it - primarily material success. so to many of us that just doesn't ring true when thinking about biblical figures.

but i cannot see how 'Believe what you're doing, and Do it' could possibly be unbiblical. 'belief' was the single thing that kicked the apostles into high gear, and 'faith' is the supreme trait listed in the hebrews hall of fame. i would dare say that most 'life purposes' which individuals feel in their gut - or even stumble upon later in life - are God-given.

one thing i would caution here: most of us - ok, some of us - on this blog will read what these two women have done and feel like worms in terms of our Christian service. but not everyone is called to do these kinds of things, nor does what we're doing in this present moment of time preclude us from EVER doing something like they've done. i have had to refocus my sights from an ever-present desire to 'change the world' - and, in all honesty, have my name in the history books :) - to realizing that my present calling is to provide for my family and see if God will use my daughters in some great way. and helping my employer set up an automated testing platform sounds 180 degrees away from what we'd consider 'living for God,' but it's what i'm called to do at the moment.

m.r. - fairburn, ga

I would agree with Mike.
Also, I'm a bit uncomfortable with Jesus as CEO...smacks of worldliness, with worldly solutions, and worldly business models, which is what got the American Church exactly where it is at right now,
AND THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING!

Also, yes, these two women are doing a good thing, and they're doing it for G-d, let them have their moment with G-d without us nodding in approval and...well...and lets resist the urge to Mother Teresa'ize them.
It's unseemly, and it detracts from the real meaning of their efforts.

Also, Mike points out that not everyone is cut out for missionary work.
I happen to be one of those.
I know exactly what I'm suppose to do. G-d pointed it out to me a long time ago, and so I turn down mission trips because
1: I know what I am suppose to do, and overseas missions ain't part of it...yet, so far...that may change,
2: So, just because I give money to others missions work doesn't mean I do not have a stake in those missionarys work,
and finally,
3: Larry, you should seriously consider your words before you commit them to print. Just a piece of advice from someone who's still learning to govern his own.

I retract and apologize for my last paragraph. It was uncalled for.

I thought the Summit did an outstanding job of presenting a variety of leaders whose message was not, "Lead like I lead and do what I do" or even "this has worked in my context and is the answer to the church's needs" but rather, "Find what God is calling you to do and go after it with passion, commitment, and sacrifice."

The emphasis was not on how to fix the church but on being the person God called you to be and doing what God calls you to do.

David, asking if you have listened to or are willing to listen to any of the speakers mentioned from the article is absolutely appropriate. It is as much in line with a response to the article as your comments about what the church "needs", as statements like those were not even mentioned in the original posting. (And if you were willing to listen, you would have heard some teachings at the Summit that actually agree with what you said!)

You posed a question, seemingly as a response to the fact that there were CEO's represented. Yet, if you did not listen to any of their content, how can you call to question the content of what was presented as if it was not Biblically based? That was simply my point in asking if you actually heard any of the Leadership Summit sessions. For me, if you are posing a general question such as "Where does it end?" - then sure, pose it, but I am not sure that it relates to the original article's summarization of the Leadership Summit.

Your other question: "When will we learn that attractional (corporate) models and power struggles only breed large-ego out-of-touch Leaders and co-dependent Christians?" is quite a statement, that again, if you are directing at the "relative artcle" I just flat out don't agree that it fits nor do I agree that it can summarize any of the sessions from the Summit.

Asking thought-provoking questions is helpful and needed. However, I cringed when I read your response because it seems as if you want to point your finger as well. Once again, are you willing to listen to the content before you pronounce how it will affect church leaders?

Your follow up question about where are we looking for Biblical leadership models...have you heard of Bob Briner and his book "Roaring Lambs"? What a great read from a man who took Jesus' teaching of being "salt" and "light" to corporate America and especially cultural fields. I learned from Bob Briner. I go to church with a man who is an executive in a manufacturing company. I learn from him about humility and servanthood. I was deeply inspired by Catherine Rohr and Gary Haugen, who willingly, joyfully, passionately have made some serious sacrifices to obey the word of God, and live out lives of service. I find leadership role models living lives based on Biblical principles and truths all around.

thanks to larry for apologizing. it isn't everyday we see that on this blog. kudos to your humility. refreshing to see.

Okay, I'm going to really seize this one by the teeth and throw it out there.
Biblical Leadership.
Why?
Isn't it enough that the Spirit leads us?
Isn't it enough that G-d is G-d?
Why does someone/anyone have to be "annointed" for leadership?
Why do we have this bizarre, and totally unbiblical desire for "biblical Leadership?"
Where does this desire for "biblical Leadership" come from?
Show me in the bible, I want to see these passages, because the entire bible, from Genesis to Revelations reveals that the only "biblical Leadership" we should be looking too is G-d!
Everyone else is to be a servant to each other, but thats not what I'm seeing...I'm seeing a whole lot of "me, I'm the one, follow me!" or "You, you are the one, lead us!"
Which says more about us allowing/wanting to foist responsibility on one person than corporately sharing responsibility...which...oddly enough, is the biblical model.

Kim. Thanks for your challenge. I will be more than happy to listen to any sessions you may recommend.

I was too strident; and admittedly I am not allowing for much nuance with my view of a CEO.

Larry, thanks for the apology.

Also as far as 'Believe what you're doing, and Do it' I am not arguing that this isn't or can't be a biblical sentiment, but it is too easily misapplied or taken out of context without the broader framework of the Gospel. I am not saying this is what the ladies in question have done. I am only saying that I have seen this concept misused by Christians, and that it should be validated within the context of God's Mission in the world. I hope that clarifies.

this has been a good discussion, reminding my that the bible is full of oxymorons:

- we lead by serving
- we receive by giving
- we live by dying (to self)
- we are healed through suffering
- we win by surrendering

and, of course, the weak shall be strong.

and the last shall be first.

and, the most important one of all: he who laughs last, laughs longest.

(wait - is that scriptural?...)

m.r. - fairburn, ga

Mike--Sounds scriptural, but I don't think it is. (Neither is "God helps those who help themselves"). It's an awesome idea, and a much-needed corrective for those of us like myself who tend to take themselves entirely too seriously!

Sheerakhan--I appreciate your point, but there still has to be "a leader". It'd be great if we could all do an amorphous, led-by-committee kind of church, but strong, bibically based leadership is a requirement, since, while amorphous sounds good, it works in only rare cases among exceptional people.

There needs to be structure for accountability and development, so that the local church can really make a difference in the world. Without the structure, who's to guarantee that the necessary work will be done, and needs will be met, both within the church and among those in its reach?

"...but strong, bibically based leadership is a requirement, since,..."

I'm sorry Alison, I can appreciate your viewpoint, but till I see scriptural support for this, I'm of the mind that this is a man-centered doctrine that needs to be dumped, ASAP.

Hi Brandon,
Thanks for sharing your reflections about Wendy Kopp’s presentation at the Willow Creek Leadership Summit. It was a fantastic conference overall, and we’re glad you found Wendy’s thoughts on the importance of service so valuable. We are so excited about continuing to grow our movement, and want leaders to join us. If you, or someone you know, is interested in learning more or joining our movement, please visit http://www.teachforamerica.org/jointhemovement.
Thanks,
Ellie Campisano
Recruitment Coordinator, Faith Community Relations Team