RT Article
T1 Pitfalls in ‘Biblical’ leadership
JF Verbum et ecclesia
VO 34
IS 1
SP 1
OP 7
A1 Kessler, Volker 1962-
LA English
PB Univ.
YR 2013
UL https://www.ixtheo.de/Record/1760772275
AB This article is about the pitfalls involved in writing a Christian handbook on leadership. By  analysing some elements of the Rule of Benedict it is argued that it is impossible to write such a  handbook without using non-Biblical sources. Moreover, there are typical pitfalls when authors  attempt to develop a pure Biblical leadership theory. The first pitfall is typical of Christians  representing Niebuhr’s type of ‘Christ against Culture’. As early as 1951, Niebuhr claimed  that in the field of leadership in particular the radical exclusive Christians reintroduced rules  from non-Christian cultures. Examples from the last decade support Niebuhr’s observation.  The second pitfall, referred to as reconstruction, is typical of those authors who are open  to secular sources but who seek to give Biblical evidence for their leadership theory. This  pitfall is illustrated by analysing the process in which the secular concepts of transforming  leadership and vision statements found their way into evangelical books on Christian  leadership. Reconstruction typically consists of four steps:  Perception (a secular model of  leadership becomes popular), Acceptance (this model is examined and accepted for the context  of the church) Assimilation (it is claimed that leaders in the Bible worked exactly as described  in the model, books are written about Biblical leadership, exemplifying the model. The secular  source becomes obsolete.) and Standardisation (this model of leadership is declared to be the  Biblical norm for every Christian leader). I argue that step 3 is at least problematic and step 4  is a fatal error.
K1 Christian Leadership
K1 Niebuhr
K1 Transforming Leadership
DO 10.4102/ve.v34i1.721