People often look as leadership as benefit or a way to receive benefits. In a way that is true. It is certainly a privilege to be the one who gets to cast a vision and motivate others to work toward the accomplishment of that vision. The negative aspect of leadership is when you have a leader who considers that “getting one’s way” is the benefit that is their prerogative.

The biblical view of leadership is that it is a responsibility and not a right. Jesus, while settling the dispute among the disciples concerning who was most important and would receive the most honor dealt with it this way:

24When the ten heard about this, they were indignant with the two brothers. 25Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 26Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 27and whoever wants to be first must be your slave- 28just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Matt. 20:24-28

When a leader is faced with a dispute, either among others for whom he is responsible or a dispute that he is having with another, it is his responsibility as a servant to deal with it in an honest, straightforward manner. The admonition is that we would speak the truth in love, which is the mark of maturity in Christ according to Ephesians 4:11-16.

It is a sign of immaturity to be anything other than plain spoken, honest and loving while dealing with conflict. Avoiding conflict is also a sign of immaturity.

In recent days we have seen leadership that has demonstrated a maturity that represents this plain spoken nature and willingness to lovingly deal with conflict that is raging around him. That leader is Jerry Rankin.

In a meeting with the editors of the state Baptist papers last week, he opened himself up to any question that the reporters wished to ask. Of course, the first question asked (by Kentucky’s own Trennis Henderson) and the following bulk of the discussion was over the IMB’s new policy prohibiting anyone from serving as a missionary if they practice a private prayer language. The policy is controversial in Southern Baptist life for many reasons, but it is particularly controversial for Dr. Rankin because he has openly declared that he practices a private prayer language.

Some have questioned the motives of the IMB BOT in instituting this policy, suggesting that it is to embarrass Dr. Rankin and possibly to force him into early retirement. If it is true that the motivation for the policy is to accomplish the aforementioned goal, then those pressing for the adoption of the policy have shown a lack of mature, Christian leadership. A leadership that has been put on display by Dr. Rankin in the interview, reprinted in part below, but found in its entirety online at the Baptist Press. All emphases are mine and are what I perceive to be examples of plain spoken leadership or the lack thereof.

IMB president speaks plainly with state editors about private prayer language
Feb17, 2006
By Staff
Baptist Press
BANFF, Alberta, Canada (BP)–

RANKIN: What would you like to ask about? Go in any direction you want. You know I’ve been here before. I know you guys. We’ll try to help out in whatever you’d like to talk about.

Trennis Henderson(Western Recorder, Ky.) — Jerry, just to jump right into it I suppose — you referenced issues that are distractions. It seems like one of those distractions of recent has been the discussion of policies related to private prayer language. Private prayer language certainly sounds like something that you don’t discuss publicly, but [laughter from editors]

RANKIN — I’m impressed, you’re coming along. [more laughter]

Henderson — However, however, it seems that your practice of private prayer language has become a public issue. I know there was the discussion at the time of your election as well some discussion of what your current practice remains today. And just interested in a clarification from you to the extent that you’re comfortable, just about what your current practices are related to that area.

RANKIN — Well, I would really prefer to be very guarded in what I share. You know in our discussion with our board, just sharing — I do have a private prayer language, have for more than 30 years. I don’t consider myself to have a gift of tongues. I’ve never been led to practice glossolalia, you know, publicly, and I think the spiritual gifts clearly in the didactic passage of the Scriptures are talking about the public uses, edification and gifts in the church.

[...]

but like you said, I mean, I’ve been very open with the board. I don’t talk about it. I don’t advocate it. I don’t see it as normal or that I should propose that anyone ought to pray in tongues. It’s just what God had chosen to do in my life and maybe it’s, mine is just psychological make-up or my needs, but goodness, my morning devotional time — [it's] not frequent, but I just want God to have freedom to do everything that He wants to do in my life and I’m going to be obedient to that. I don’t see it as a public issue or something I should talk about. You know, it was all out there when I was elected. I mean, just go back and read your files, and some of you have. I mean it was headlines in all your papers –Baptists selecting a charismatic [some laughter]. Well, how do you define a charismatic? I don’t consider myself a charismatic. I know what neopentecostalism charismatics believe and I preach against that. But anyway –people where they’re coming from. But even in [the] recent thing, whatever motivated the board to move in this direction, you know, I can’t control that. I’m under their authority. They have the prerogative of doing what they feel is in the best interest of our board and our missionary work. They’re very conscientious about their sense of accountability to the Southern Baptist Convention and it’s not the first time, in fact, quite frequently; I mean, I clearly recognize if God has put me in this position to lead the international mission efforts of Southern Baptists, I do serve under the authority and submission to our board and to Southern Baptists and I have to recognize that that’s going to have an expression and parameters that I have to accept. I would never compromise or violate personal integrity and convictions. But every leader sometimes has to do things that they wouldn’t necessarily prefer to do or even be in agreement with. But there’s an accountability to implementing the policies of our board and carrying them out and I’m going to do that to enable us to fulfill our mission task. Yeah, we’ve shared my personal perspective openly, and as one trustee said, Trennis, said, ‘well, you’ve just told us you have a private prayer language so it’s not private any more.’ Well, I think it is because no one’s ever heard me pray in anything other than English so I think it is still very private and it will remain so, but it’s nothing to deny. You may have been asking more than that. Alright, having gotten that out, that pretty much opened the door anywhere you want to go.

[...]

Greg Warner (Associated Baptist Press) — A couple of your trustees and some other observers have speculated part of motivation was directed at you. That the policy was intended to scare you or force you out or in some way directed to embarrass you. Are you aware of any of that being true and if so or if not, what do you think about that? Is that –

RANKIN — I would just refer to the comment earlier, that I think one of the reasons that that allegation or at least suspicion was there is that it was so difficult to identify any compelling reason why we needed to do this. Certainly biblically it goes beyond the doctrinal parameters of the Baptist Faith and Message. It was restrictive in appointing missionaries; so whether or not that was a motivation, you know, I think it did create suspicion, you know, with that regard because of an awareness of my personal practice. But no one on the board has admitted to that. And uh, folks you always got to be guarded about judging anyone’s motives. I mean, you can see they do something, that’s clear. But why they do it, you just can’t go there. And so, it’s certainly not in my interest to go there. [some laughter] And, uh, in fact they’re now being confronted with that and saying, no, this isn’t an effort to get at Jerry. I kind of consider it as having assured my tenure for as long as I want to serve. [more laughter] I mean who’s going to stick their neck out and say it really was now you know and we want to use this against you. So, I think, I don’t think it’s a dead issue. I think there’s a lot of reaction momentum, uh, to the publicity and the reaction that’s been generated across the convention to revisit it and look at it. Is it really advisable? Do we need it? I don’t know, you know, they may choose to live with it, but I kinda sense that we’re going to continue to be dealing with this.

Jim White (Religious Herald, Va.): Just to clarify what Jim had asked — If I understand your response correctly, the personnel committee of board had said this is what we will — these are the parameters we will use and your feeling was that needs to be acted on by the full board before those parameters are set in concrete?

RANKIN — Right

White — So your taking it to board then was not because you wanted to get this out in the open for the board to act, so much as you wanted to see if the full board supported this narrow interpretation?

RANKIN– Well you know, you’d just seen two years of work in a committee that had kind of generated this, and I, along with others just wasn’t confident that that represented the conviction and consensus of the full board and we shouldn’t have to implement what is in essence a policy, even if they call it a guideline, you know, and then deprive most of the board members from being able to even speak to this. So, whichever way it went, you know, it just needed to be affirmed, voted up or down by the full board.

White — So, if board members were to say, ‘well, the only reason we acted on this was because Dr Rankin insisted on it,’that would be a little misleading wouldn’t it?

RANKIN — Well, yes, in fact, if that was actually said, you know, well, the only reason we’re doing this is our president wanted this adopted as a policy, not a guideline — I said, ‘excuse me [laughter] — it was not that I wanted it as a policy, but I just wanted the full board to vote on it.’

White — Well, I was one of those editors and I’m sure there were others, who was told that very thing?

[...]

Posts with related content

• No Related Post

TAGS: None