It’s easy to submit to a Godly leader. When they have a servant heart, are humble and walk like Jesus did: laying his life down for those under his care. I think the problems arise when you serve a leader who loves God, but maybe doesn’t lead in the Biblical model – even if it’s in part.

Here a thought I’d like to add from my own painful experience!

Love believes the best.
I know when a decision is made, we can “assume” to know the motivation of those who lead us. The famous love passage says that “Love believes all things”. Do we love our leaders who aren’t always acting in a Godly way? If so – we will believe that their decision is one based on prayer, and a heart for God and us, and submit. (unless, of course, it requires us to break God’s Word) It’s easy to jump to conclusions – but I always try to put myself in their shoes before jumping to conclusions. It is not them vs us – we’re all on the same side.

There’s a great book which deals with my attitude towards submission: “A tale of Three Kings” by Gene Edwards – It’s an easy-read and I thoroughly recommend it.

Another bible verse to think about “He that would be greatest amongst you, let him be the servant of all.

How many religious leaders do you know? How many of them come to you and ask how they can better serve you?

Is the church member the servant of the pastor, or the pastor the servant of the churches members?

Tim

I think its a very very significantly misunderstood, and abused concept.

I’d like to hear someone analyse the historical and social construct that surrounds these two bible verses!

How do we explain this in relation to Jesus saying “I have come to turn the sons against the fathers” etc. (anyone pedantic enough to tell me i’ve misquoted is welcome to post the correct quote)?

What do we make of Bonhoffer? Evil criminal, or insightful servant of God?

Where does submission end? What sorts of things are we free not to submit to? What sort of things do we have a moral imperritive not to submit to?

So many more Q’s but I have to go down to SES.

All I can say in closing, is that I’m a Hawthorn supporter HAR HAR HAR HAR

well anyway I’m paying attention to my team for the first time in 10 years, but right now you’re pobably trying to forget yours exists

If I was the leader and everyone was giving things a go, I’d want to hear from the outset about any reservations that they’ve got. Reluctance, even if most of it is coming from where a particular person is at in their life, is something that’s worth talking about and worth managing. It safeguards against the obvious potential for disappointment on both sides if things don’t work out. It also gives the leader a chance to manage the feedback and to avoid “I told you so”, whether spoken or unspoken, down the track (which makes the ‘follower’ response closer to one of silence than one of submission in my view).

In some cases, laying down your desire to resist might be a healthy thing to do. I’ve been in a situation not all that long ago where I needed to do that for the emotional well-being of the person in the leadership position above me. That person simply wouldn’t have been able to handle it if I’d taken them to task over things that I, quite frankly, was better equipped to accomplish and could have done better. If you’re anything like me and you like to make sure that you get your point across loud and clear, I think it’s healthy to have a relational respect and care for the leader in that process. For me, that sometimes means keeping my mouth shut until I have something to say that’s going to be edifying as well as correct.

The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced that submission doesn’t just mean “ignore what you genuinely think and do what you are told”. I don’t think you can truly submit unless you can surrender your whole self, your opinions, your will and whatever else is it that you come to the table with. If you have something to say that’s preventing that from happening, then I’d say that it’s probably a priority to do so. The complexity there, is making sure you do it in a way that will be received well (otherwise you’re quite likely to feel like you’ve been told to shut up a second time). I think there are three different communicative responses you can have to leadership direction.

1) stay quiet and just do it because it’s your duty
(whinging in the process becomes #2)
2) rant, rave and carry on about how wrong everything is in an unconstructive way which is evidenced by a lacking in the fruits of the Spirit in your conduct
3) peacefully, gently and lovingly, showing self-control, bring your whole self into the discussion with your leader and work through any issues so that you can truly serve, with all of your cards on the table.

At the end of the day, if someone in a leadership position lacks insight and doesn’t get something perfect, that just makes them human. It might also speak to their effectiveness in their leadership role but those discussions are always highly subjective. There are always lessons to be learned for next time in anything a group of people undertakes. So, if avoiding mistakes is preferrable but not essential, maybe we should put most of the emphasis upon ensuring that we behave honourably along the way?

There’s been a couple of times where I’ve absolutely hated the idea of a particular activity, but out of respect/honour/duty have submitted to my leader, and found myself in a better place (with both the leader AND God) as a result:

What happens when, despite your misgivings, it turns out the leader actually DOES know better than you? How do you determine when that is? Are there times when it’s OK to give it a go and see?

It would be good to distinguish between one submitting to a leader’s decision about a corporate issue verses one submitting to their decision regarding the way you as an individual are to think/act/talk/dress whatever.

In regards to the later, there are times when I have heard a leader say things along the lines of “well, you need to submit and I/they will take responsibility for it” – that to me does not cut it: I am the one who is to stand before God and explain my actions, thoughts, speech etc and I can’t say “well you know I thought this, but my leader said that and so I submitted”

Third in regard to the position thing – I think it is over-played. Authority, ‘power’, honour are relational terms and function really well in good, communicative relationships, as was indicated by the honesty, pr comments above. You don’t submit because of their position, you submit based on the relationship where you know that they do love you and are serving your best

I think leaders have some responsibility for making sure that their plans are scoped out effectively and well communicated. In most cases though, I think people endorse a leader first and buy in to their plans second. If I trust the individual with the power and authority that their position gives them, then chances are I’m going to be a whole lot more willing to chill out when I have my own reservations.

From the leader’s perspective, I think that means there’s a public relations side to leadership. Being capable is one thing. Being perceived as capable is another. The point I’m trying to make: if you need to tell someone to shut up and do what you tell them, chances are that it’s not the task you need to be selling them on, it’s the leadership.

In the scenario that Geoff and I were talking about, a large part of the problem was that the channels of communication barely existed… so the discussion itself became a mammoth effort to initiate. When leaders (or at least those in authority) are being prescriptive in their instructions from a distance, it’s not surprising that their ‘subordinates’ might be hearing demands without feeling the freedom to reply.

If leaders have been quite strong in giving instructions, it wouldn’t be difficult to assume that they aren’t interested in discussion or debate. Furthermore, rather than go to the leader and say “Hey I feel like you might have got that one wrong”, sometimes it’s easier to get together with a bunch of mates and have a bit of a whinge instead. It’s even more destructive when you get to play the victim, moaning about how unfair it all is but asking for brownie points from your mates for doing the right thing and “submitting”.

I don’t think I’d be the first person to have made that mistake at one time or another.

Does submission, in actual fact, look more like approaching the person who has asked you to lay down your life and saying something that resembles this?:

“My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done.”

*clicks the ‘Submit Comment’ button, enjoying the pun*

In my experience, submitting has never meant silent, unquestioning agreement. It has always meant robust discussion, sometimes a good old fashioned argument, and lots of debate about the way forward.

At the end of the day, when the leader makes the final call, regardless of whether I agree with it or not, I get behind the decision 100% and do my best to make it work. If the decision fails, it does so because of some inherent problem, not because I sabotaged it.

The only time I wouldn’t submit was if I thought the decision was immoral, unethical or illegal.

This helps build unity of the team, it helps make the leader a better leader (which we have responsibility for, by the way) and gives the best possible chance for a good outcome.

It does, however, mean egos must be left at the door. That’s the hard bit…;)

Some leaders are sycophantic narcissistic self absorbed…etc Do we quietly divorce ourselves from them….leave the church…or do we warn others, and if so, how?
Then this verse which is helpful to me…
“Obey your spiritual leaders, and do what they say. Their work is to watch over your souls, and they are accountable to God. Give them reason to do this with joy and not with sorrow. That would certainly not be for your benefit”
Heb 13.17

Interesting that you come at it from the place of marriage Gaz – that’s what I started with to get to this point. Love what you’re saying there.