What is a leader?

I do remember being told that "you can recognise a leader by how many people follow them". The definition was completely flawed anyway, in the context, but it made me think about whether this is a good definition of the sort of person who should have responsibility in a Christian group.

I believe that within these criteria, the answer is no. What is more, I believe that the same applies on a wider basis.

Now I should point out that there is a need for figurehead leaders, but this does not mean that they should be decision makers or that this is the only form of leadership expected. It is a core problem of a democratic ideal that the best people tend not to rise to the top, but the ones who can command a following.

The problem I have, in the particular context it was raised, is that I do not want people to follow me. I want people to follow Jesus, I want people to explore my ideas and thoughts if they are useful, I want people to think for themselves, and find their own way. The last thing I want is for people to hold  me up as their example, their "leader", because that is not Christianity.

That is where my problem with this form of "leadership" lies. If you define "good leadership" by "people follow you", then clearly the aim of a church leader is a large church. The thing is, Jesus scared people away from him, telling them to seriously consider what following him meant. Towards the end, while there were lots of people who enjoyed the party, there were only 12 who followed him. And in the end, there only seemed to be a few of his friends and followers around the cross. If leadership was about how many people follow you, then Jesus was a lousy leader.

Of course, I don't want to go the other way either, and argue that a good leader is someone who challenges and excludes people - that would make Fred Phelps and his ilk good leaders, and that is also not the case. I think, in contrast, we need to reconsider the nature of leadership.

The best leaders I have known show two significant features, which don't fit with popularity measures:

1. Tolerance and acceptance of dissenting views and perspectives. This means being prepared to accept that other people may come to a different answer, to support and respect that direction, and allow then to explore that further. This means helping people do things that you do not understand or value, but they do.

2. Providing challenge that is not criticism or rejection. this means working with people, and providing acceptance with challenge. This challenge is difficult to provide, and is there to prompt and help people grow, not to get them to conform.

Of course, this is not very popular, especially amongst people who want to be told what to believe (or want their own beliefs unchallenged). This is not the way to be popular, not the way to climb the career ladder.

In fact, the most likely result of this is that you will end up alone. But - and this is the critical part - there will be people who have been made to think because of what you have said. Probably after you are dead.

That is true leadership - leading people to their own fulfillment, their own independence. Don't expect to be popular. In fact, people will probably crucify you.