Leadership and Authority: Why We May Have It All Wrong

What gives you the authority to lead others?

Whether you're a CEO or a middle manager, your perceived source of authority is crucial. Anyone who has ever read anything on leadership understands that there are basically two sources of leadership authority: positional authority and relational authority. 

Positional authority is the authority we gain because of the position we hold. It is a delegated authority. It comes from the top down. The boss says you're in charge of all marketing decisions, so you're in charge of all marketing decisions. Whether the people under you in the marketing department like you or not, they know you're in charge. But, of course, since you're not a Neanderthal, you know that to be effective and productive you need to have your team on board; you need them to buy in; you need the chemistry to be strong. You know positional authority is not enough; you have to win their relational authority. 

Relational authority is the authority you earn from individuals because of their trust in you.(That explains why Michael Scott from "The Office" tries so hard to impress his subordinates, win their admiration, and gain their friendship.) Nevertheless, in almost every corporate environment, positional authority is granted first; relational authority is earned later. 

We learn early on that positional authority precedes relational authority.

And without even questioning this, we take it as a law of life, a veritable "irrefutable law of leadership." In the Church world, we apply it to our leaders, citing Jesus' declaration that "all authority in heaven and on earth" had been given to him, and therefore our authority as leaders comes from God. In essence, we are making the "positional authority" argument with God as the ultimate authority who delegates his authority down to certain leaders. 

This is harmless enough, until you start to probe the issue further. A whole host of questions arise:

Who says YOU are God's delegated authority? What gives YOU the right to be called "God's mouthpiece"? 

For a church leader, our opening question is more critical and maybe more complex: 

What gives you the authority to lead others?

The platform you stand on? The microphone in your hand? The title on your business card that says "pastor"?

Most in positions of ecclesiastic power will eventually get around to telling you that their authority comes from...GOD...(gasp!). Then they likely will proceed to defend it with stories of the tragic deaths and diseases that befell those who questioned Moses' authority so long ago. They might gently remind you how young David the refugee refused to "touch the Lord's anointed", and that we would be wise to heed his example. Strangely, all their examples will have one thing in common, the same glaring flaw: they are an Old Testament model of leadership. 

Not everything from the Old Testament is different in the New, but leadership underwent a severe overhaul. My leadership mentor, Paul Stanley, insightfully points out that in the Old Testament the man of God went up to the mountain of God to get the word of God and then came down and told the people of God what to do. But in the New Testament, we are all a Kingdom of Priests, each with individual access to God. This was God's original intent. It was the people of Israel who were afraid and refused, begging Moses to go for them. This inclination to have someone else in charge surfaces generations later when they plead with God, "Give us a king!" God wanted to be their King, to have each of them follow Him. But they refused. Strong human leadership is easier; it's more convenient, and far more efficient. Just put someone in charge and let him delegate authority down.

1 Timothy 3 contains the New Testament guidelines for elders and deacons. Here is just one line from the long list of qualifications, and this is one for deacons:

"A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and household well." (1 Tim. 3:12, NIV)

Who was the best and greatest king of Israel? No brainer-- David. Every other king is measured against David. For God's love for David, He wouldn't punish Solomon for his sins during his own lifetime. Even the best of the kings of Judah that followed couldn't hold a candle to David. He was the greatest.

Yet David would not meet this New Testament qualification to deaconship. 

What did deacons in the New Testament church do? Remember in Acts 6? Deacons were appointed to wait on tables to help with the care of the widows. Wait a minute. You mean David would not have been allowed to wait on tables in the New Testament church? Yup.

The greatest leader in the Old Testament would not have qualified for the lowest position of leadership in the New Testament.

Why? Because in the Old Testament, leaders got their authority to rule from "divine right"; in the New Testament, people get their authority to lead from earned trust. Every one of the qualifications in 1 Timothy 3 and even in Acts 6 when they chose the first 7 deacons has to do with trust. What kind of reputation do they have? Are they known for servanthood? Are they known for being people of wisdom, full of Spirit of God? Have they been tested? Do they have the abilities necessary? (Paul says specifically, "able to teach".) He doesn't ask if they've been prophesied over as children or if they have a calling on their lives or if they believe they are called to be a prophet to the nations or even if they're anointed. He asks what sort of reputation they have. In essence, can they be trusted? 

Trust is the currency of leadership in the New Testament era. And trust is earned by serving.

Jesus turned old notions of leadership on its head when he arrived on the scene. If anyone could have cited God as the source of his authority, Jesus could have. He could have repeatedly coerced people to follow or believe by dazzling them with divine power. Yes, Jesus does say that He only does what He sees the Father doing-- i.e., His boss is God. But He doesn't use that line to get people to follow; He uses it as an explanation for his decisions and as the source of His miracles and ability to forgive sins. Furthermore, every time Jesus appeals to God as the source of His authority, He's talking about an authority over demons or over their souls-- a spiritual authority. Likewise, when Jesus in Matthew 28 says that all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to him therefore, go, He's not saying, "Tell everyone that you're in charge because I said so." The authority He's talking about is an authority over hell and demons. It's the authority to heal and disciple and rescue people from destruction. It's a spiritual authority not a governmental or organizational one.

How do I know? Because in Matthew 20, He specifically tells His disciples not to lead like the Gentiles, exercising "authority" over them. Spiritual authority from God is not enough to be the basis for our authority over others. Just because a person can prophesy or preach doesn't mean they should be in a position of leadership. In John 13, Jesus shows us the most dramatic display of how a leader should use his spiritual authority.

"Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist. After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples' feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him." (John 13: 3-5, NIV, emphasis mine)

We learn a few things from that passage: All authority comes from God. Romans 13 confirms this. Jesus had all authority. Jesus chose to serve his disciples by washing their feet instead of using authority over them. It is a model of a new kind of leader. It shows how we use authority, but also how we earn it with others. OK, so you believe that God has given you authority. What then? You don't demonstrate it or make it public and actually earn authority with others by declaring that God has set you up as an authority in their life. You display it by washing their feet.

There are authority structures even in the New Testament church. It's not spiritual anarchy. The church in Jerusalem was led by a council of elders, the head of which appears to be James. Authority is not a bad word. Furthermore, all authority ultimately comes from God. The question is how God wants to establish that authority publicly in His domain, the Church. It seems that in God's Kingdom, you gain authority by serving-- the last shall be first, the least shall be the greatest. From the examples in Acts and from Paul's writings, the process seems to be as follows:

1. God works in an individual's life, giving him gifts and the desire for leadership.     


2. The individual gains the people's trust by his servant's heart and solid character.


3. He then earns the people's trust in his giftings by his faithful and skilled service  


4. The established leaders (who've already been through this process) lay hands on him in front of the people, confirming his calling and setting him in office  

So, by the New Testament pattern, relational authority-- gained by earning trust because of a servant's heart, solid character, and strong skill-- leads to positional authority.

This is a new kind of a leader. Technically, it's 2000 years old. But it's ironic that the Church, of all places, so often resorts to an Old Testament leadership model and process and not the one they pioneered back in Jerusalem in the 1st century. Maybe we can be the generation of leaders that revolts against our culture of business leadership models and return the original counter-cultural leader. 

A leader is one who demonstrates God-given authority by serving others and earning their trust. 

Your authority comes from God; your leadership comes from trust.

Comments

[David Works]

If one accepts the proposition that "the greatest in God's kingdom is the servant of all", then indeed, we have got it all wrong. This also shines the spotlight on the notion of the difference between God's kingdom and the predominate culture.

Austin-Sparks taught that this difference, the great distance between the man of the flesh and the man of the Spirit, is demonstrated in the entire "otherness of Christ". "It is eleven days journey from Horeb to Kadesh-Barnea..."

Perhaps we need to ask ourselves, "what would it look like if leaders were servants first?" By changing the lens of our perception we can open our hearts and our minds to conceive of a church and a culture conformed to the image of God instead of conformed to our own image.

Make no mistake about it. The transition from a leadership culture made up of driven, alpha personalities seeking the fulfillment of its own desires based upon performance to leadership that serves first and is at peace with God is likely one of the most radical changes imaginable. Not that it is impossible.

It is the great work of reconciliation. God came to live among us in the form of His Son, Jesus Christ thereby reconciling the world to Himself. If the Almighty One can humble Himself by laying it all down on the cross and if He lives in us, then surely not only is it possible, it is assured. Christ in you, the hope of glory.

The power of God is not in any great pronouncement nor in any great outward show of power for His kingdom is not outwardly observable. The power of God has always been shown in the power of the cross.

Not exactly what we see modeled for us everyday, is it?

[Gene Simmons]

I think it is great that your leadership mentor is one of the greatest rock guitarists from the greatest rock band of all time, Kiss.

[Glenn]

to David: thanks for stopping by. you are learned and wise. i am numbered among the transgressors on this one...it is a difficult leadership model to follow...leaders must be servants first and always at the core. otherwise any ministry that comes from them (and me) will be a reflection of our own ambition. i loved your thoughts. thanks be to God for Jesus...so this is not just a model we have to try to emulate on our own...it is Christ in us who will bring it about if we let him!

to "Gene": haha!! good one. and whoever you really are, thanks for the witticism.

[Sean B.]

Glenn, I am loving your blog. Keep pouring that brain of yours out onto the rest of us.

[Glenn]

sean: thanks so much, bro. it means a lot coming from your deep, rich soul. i enjoyed lunch the other day. peace.

[Sean McCarthy]

Glenn,

If there is one thing that I like about you the most it’s your knowledge about leadership. Every word you speak opens my mind to new possibilities if I became the type of leader you always describe, and encourage us all to be. I will always look to you as one of the greatest leaders in my life. And I thank you, even if you didn't realize, for all the moments I was around you to learn from.

Leadership is such a big part of ministry, and Christianity. But most choose, or even have been grown up and taught wrongly. Or maybe I should say, a least effective way of leadership.

This blog has challenged me to become a better leader, and to keep reading on the topic.

Thanks for the words of encouragement,
Sean McCarthy

[Mary Johnson]

It is so wonderful to know that there are other people out there that are seeking the truth in these same areas. I believe God is speaking and the ones that are listening are hearing the revelation God is pouring out. I do believe God is showing his people his "model" of what he destined the church to look like and it is not to look like "Babylon" ,which is a lot like our world businesses and churches. God will show us the way! He loves his children :)

thanks Glenn
really enjoy your writing and heart

[Jon Zondervan]

Hey Glenn,

Great thoughts on leadership. I've never looked at the difference between o.t and n.t leadership qualifications. Awesome insight and I really enjoy your blog.

[Marcia Alverson]

I really enjoyed reading this blog! it is a very challenging topic to tackle, but I think you're on to something.
It is brilliant to separate the spiritual authority from the leadership authority. While they often go hand in hand, they should be viewed as two seperate functions. Leaders serve both God and the people. We have to be willing to approach both in ways that work for us and for those we lead.
I think a large majority of most churches have seen these two elements treated as one in the same. If you can speak on behalf of God, then laypersons should follow you, hands-down. This has made it an easy "trap" for leaders...if they can still "hear God", people will follow, and they're okay. But its the relational authority that keeps our ministry relevant!
And having a ministry is not really relevant unless it serves both Christ and His Church somehow.
Undoubtedly in the NT we are all called as priests and kings. All have a certain amount of spiritual authority (potential) that has been given. But we still must have the reverence, respect, and trust in one another to allow our giftings to balance the whole body.
The perspective of our Savior is what made Him the greatest leader. He knew his ultimate goal on earth was to serve the people that His father loved, and to show them the way, even though all power was His to exert. His choosing to serve instead of dominate yields great authority in itself. Same for us!
Some of our problems today affecting our leadership:
1) we think success is defined by what we accomplish. God clearly blows this out of the water with his own methods of salvation for us:. Jesus could have stayed in heaven, God zaps the earth. Poof. Start all over again! The accomplishment would have been the same, but instead, God chose the redemption method that included dealing with the same "people", making Jesus the example of servanthood, sending him to walk a difficult walk,demanding nothing less than his life in place of ours. Through his example we see how to live selflessly (though full of power of God) for others.
Leaders in the church really exist to serve the people, NOT the programs. Yet, I have witnessed abuse of people to demand certain results and outcomes of church programs! If we are not serving the people to better them, to help them grow while helping execute our programs, then we're missing the point of leadership! God/christ is the head! He's got that covered.

2) We (the church)don't realize we are kings and priests already, and so long for the same as the Israelites: an earthly king. Maybe we've seen such abuse in the church because the church has refused to understand/embrace her own calling and has reverted back to her old unbelieving ways. (imagine that) After all, it IS easier to let a man tell us what to do than to try to figure out how to hear/follow an unseen entity while serving each other in the process!

3)While trust can be gained, it must also be maintained. A huge failure in the church that is obvious everywhere is accountability. While serving a brother may mean preferring his choice to yours, it may also include confronting him on an ugly sin you see in his life, because you know God is concerned, and because you love that person, and want their salvation as much as you want yours. No leader is godly enough, holy enough, perfect enough to set and leave up on that pedestal that we all put them on!
We have to be willing to sacrifice our pride, our comfortability, our own self-perception for the sake of others.
I dream of a church (the larger body of Christ) that can trust each other enough and be a team in the efforts to see the Gospel spread. Gone are the days of "stars" that dominate the Christian movement! True team work will become the effective method.
We have to lay aside differences, prefer one another, respect the God in each other despite maybe different methodologies, and be humble enough to allow Christ, the head of His body, to be properly acknowleged and honored, and follow His Spirit whole-heartedly! Maybe then the world will see... but I guess we've got to figure this stuff out in our own "Jerusalems" first, huh?
Blessings and I'm off to bed!
My ongoing quote: "People, not programs, (is Kingdom business.")