Not my President?

Not my President?

The election and inauguration of Donald Trump as US President has been accompanied by a vocal ‘Not my President” movement.

For some this slogan indicates a dislike and disassociation from the man and his policies. For others, it is a denial of his electoral legitimacy. Much the same greeted Barak Obama when he was elected. ‘Not my President” seems to have a bipartisan edge as the fringes from both sides of US politics reject their opponent’s election.

Likewise in Australia. When Julia Gillard was elected as the PM of a minority ALP government she was subjected to crude personal attacks including calls that she be taken out to sea and dumped. Some from the conservative side of politics denied the very legitimacy of her government. This reversed when Tony Abbott was elected as a Liberal Prime Minister - there was a new round of personal attacks and denial of legitimacy. Again, it’s a bipartisan rejection of an elected leader.

Such rejection is not only about the leader. It divides nations. It threatens the delicate fabric of civil behaviour. It turns conversations of robust debate and disagreement into shouting matches where entrenched positions are exchanged from behind walls of hostility.  Nobody wins.

I’ll say right now that Donald Trump is not my President in a personal sense. I dislike the man. Many of his policies dismay me. A misogynist and bully who trades off fear and threat cannot claim my affections. Likewise, neither Julia Gillard nor Tony Abbott were ‘my Prime Minister’ in the sense of a significant personal liking or policy approval.

However, I’ll say that Trump, Obama, Gillard and Abbott are ‘my’ President (or Prime Minister) in Christian perspective.

The Bible speaks of how God moves all things to his purposes in Jesus (Eph 1:11). Within this, h commands respectful submission to the governing authorities because ...there is no authority except from God and those that exist have been instituted by God (Rom 12:1). These last words were said of pagan Roman leaders who persecuted the writer of those words and his co-religionists. One example of this respect for unbelieving leaders came when an idolatrous Persian leader was described as God’s anointed servant or Messiah (Is 45:1-5). See my earlier post Was Lee Kuan Yew the Lord’s anointed? (31^st Mar 2015) for more comment on this. Similar words about respectful submission to (even evil) leaders are urged in 1 Pet 2:13-17 and 1 Tim 2:1-3 gives a positive edge to this in calling for prayers for … all who are in high position. This is not a personal endorsement of individual leaders, nor a denial of the evil that they may do, but rather of recognition of God’s providential rule.

In this sense Donald Trump is my President. He was he elected, confirmed and inaugurated under the constitutional arrangements of the US, just as the above named Australian Prime Ministers were. More importantly, he is President according to God’s providential will.

So, I will serve God and my nation by periodically disliking the persons and disagreeing with the policies of these leaders. I will also honour, respect, submit to and pray for them. In extreme situations I will enter into civil disobedience and seek the removal of a government. However, I will always respect that they are ‘my’ leaders by God’s appointment.

The ass of Antioch .. thoughts on church planting

The ass of Antioch

Let me tell you about the day I made an ass of myself.

Things were going well in our church at Antioch. The Jerusalem persecution that claimed Stephen’s life had proved a blessing as the scattering evangelists came to Antioch and the church began. A barrier was crossed when the gospel was intentionally preached to Gentiles like myself. As for leaders, Barnabas came from Jerusalem and stayed. What a gentle, encouraging and godly pastor he proved to be. It was no surprise that the church grew and grew. We soon needed a larger meeting place, more chairs, more food and more leaders to help teach and pastor the converts.  So Barnabas went off and recruited Saul from Tarsus. Some of us were a bit worried, given his reputation, but Barnabas reassured us. He was right. Paul had one sharp mind, honed by his rabbinical training but now employed in Jesus’ service. His grasp of the Scriptures was second to none and he was skilled in explaining the faith to believers, evangelising the lost and in defending the gospel against its critics. Some of us who had worked hard in the early days now looked forward to a time of stepping back and taking church life a little easier. Church was good.

Then came the announcement. One Sunday the chairman stepped up with a serious look about him. God had convicted the leaders that Paul and Barnabas should be sent to preach the gospel and plant new churches elsewhere. I was floored by this and was one of the first to stand and protest. “No good can come from this. We can’t afford to give key people away. The work here is at a turning point and will be set back if they go. And besides, what chance is there that the new work will flourish – those pagans out there are as tough as nails, won’t listen and will probably treat our guys like Stephen. Mark my words – this is a dumb move and will fail within the year.” There were a few murmurs of agreement to my words, but the leaders prevailed.

That all happened about ten years ago. At first we didn’t hear much from the mission team. Then the reports started to come in. Indeed there was opposition and some persecution. But there were also converts and new churches started to pop up, survive, grow and plant yet further churches around them. To top it off, there is even at church at Rome! And as I write now I see what an ass I was. Not only are there all these new converts and churches, but we flourished back in Antioch. Numbers are bigger than before and new leaders have stepped up. I was wrong.

Let’s leave the ass of Antioch to his large slice of humble pie and think about church planting.

Church planting is all the go in my circles and is seen as a key way to make disciples for Christ. I belong to a church that was planted with about 30 people a little over 20 years ago and which has now morphed into four congregations with several hundred members. Within my network there are two church plants starting in the next two months, another planned for this September and yet others in recent years. I’m on the interim leadership team for one of these new plants and it’s exciting to see a 2014 dream turn into a 2017 church.

Church planting means gathering people and money. It’s a lot of money! Funds are needed to employ and house a pastor, rent a meeting space and have money for ministry expenses. What about the people? It’s good people! A church plant typically starts with a team of about 30, but these are not slack pew sitters. They need to be people of Christian maturity, good ministry skills, energetic and very committed. It’s the best people who make the best plant teams.

Where do the people and money come from? The money usually comes from a mix of the plant team, church-planting agencies, denominational bodies and partner churches. What of the people? Well, they come from churches like Antioch, where they are already active, useful and integrated to the life of the church. Their departure leaves a hole.

In recent years I have twice been left behind at my Antioch. It’s with mixed feelings that I heard of the looming church plants. I watched with personal sadness as key leaders and friends joined the launch team and left. I noticed the empty seats and heard how finances were a little tighter.

I also notice something else. New leaders step up at our Antioch. The empty seats fill and new ones need to be added. The church that gives is a church that grows.

Review: Harvard Business Review 10 Must Reads 2017

-->

Review: HBR’s 10 Must Reads, (Harvard Business Review Press, 2017)

I’m not in a management role and generally not a fan of books on organisational behaviour or leadership. However, HBR 17 is on my radar – it’s the current priority in my “read something different for 30 minutes after lunch” routine.

As the subtitle suggest, HBR 17 is a collection of 10 selected articles that were published in Harvard Business Review during the previous year. The topics are diverse and of varying interest, depending on the reader. Length varies from upwards from 10 to about 20 pages, which makes them suited to a short break to read one article then put the book aside for tomorrow.

The material is accessible, in the sense of generally being written such that a serious lay reader can grasp the meaning. Each article has a helpful “Idea in Brief” overview which can either help prep for reading or act as a reference summary.

So, what’s appealing about the book to a non-management person? It’s the stimulus to a lateral transfer of ideas. For example the article Collaborative Overload (the first in HBR 17) prompted thoughts about collaborative learning projects in the classroom. Teachers like group activities and projects but they can draw harsh evaluations from students. The article gave me some understanding of why this may be so and some suggestions as to how to harvest benefits from group work and minimise the nasties.

I’ll be looking out for HBR 18 based on my experience this year.