Skip to main content

Leadership and Loyalty

Loyalty, like unity (with which it is closely allied) is a leadership absolute, an imperative. It is something a leader should expect and on which he should be able to rely. Without loyalty, there really is no leader/follower relationship. A leader must cultivate and reward loyalty and must punish and expel those who are disloyal. This may seem harsh, but it is a leadership lesson of Jesus. Loyalty does not mean mindless, uncritical devotion. That is worship, and no one other than Jesus is worthy of worship. Leaders make a grave mistake when they exercise the kind of leadership which requires any kind of submission. When this happens, leadership has degenerated into paranoia. This is not loyalty. Loyalty is exercised primarily outside the group. Sometimes the most loyal thing a follower can do is to openly disagree with a leader to his face. Because he cares about both the leader and the mission, he is willing to say, “Wait a minute. I think we're making a mistake here. Please explain to me why this is the best policy.” These kinds of questions, openly asked of a leader, do not represent disloyalty. A wise leader should be open to answering honest questions and dealing with honest disagreements. This builds and sustains both loyalty and unity. Actually, the way disloyalty shows itself within the group is when questions and disagreements are not openly asked and discussed. This sows disunity and must be curtailed. An even more serious kind of disloyalty occurs when followers do not support the leader and the mission outside the group, especially among the competition or opposition...When a follower is disloyal and denigrates the leader or the endeavour outside the group, he is no longer a follower and should not be treated as such. Unless and until the disloyalty is dealt with and the person restored, he should be expelled from the group. A leader cannot—and should not—tolerate disloyalty. 
- Bob Briner 
(Source : Leadership Lessons of Jesus)

Popular posts from this blog

I Am Mother

I think it is true to say that the Netflix film I Am Mother is one the most disturbing movies I have watched for a long time. The film is set in a near future. Human life has been wiped out. An artificial intelligence (AI) called Mother is living inside a bunker where thousands of embroyos are stored. It selects an embryo and initiates a program to grow a baby within 24 hours. The AI then goes on to raise the child as its mother over the next few years.  After 16 years, the girl, who now goes by the name of Daughter (Clara Rugaard) is a teenager. She has never been outside because Mother has told her that the air is toxic. Her time is spend being home schooled in science and ethics so that she can become a perfect human being. The bond between Daughter and Mother is unusually strong. To our surprise there does not appear to be any mental or pyschological trauma of having a machine as her mother.  The strength of the bond between man and machine is tested when a nameless Woman (Hilary

What is the best preparation for preaching?

The best preparation is not to be too anxious about it. Anxious care hinders liveliness and efficacy. It leads to too little dependence on the Spirit. Be not didactic. Aim at the conscience as soldiers aim at the faces. Consider I may be preaching my last sermon. This leads to setting forth Christ as The Way, the Truth and the Life . .. Make Christ the prominent figure…Pay less attention to dear self. JOHN NEWTON

White Fragility, A Review

Robin DiAngelo has a sermon to preach. It is in form of a short popular book called White Fragilit y. Straight off the bat she tells us not to expect balanced analysis but a forceful argument “unapologetically rooted in identity politics”.  She understands identity politics as “the [political] focus on the barriers specific groups face in their struggle for equality”. The group she wants to save is black people, whom she blankets under “people of colour”.  So what is White Fragility about?  DiAngelo is sick and tired of white racism in the western world, and specifically the USA. She believes every white person, including babies, are guilty of racism by virtue of being white. So she wants to use her “insider status” as a white American woman to challenge this white racism by getting her fellow “white progressives” to force forward her thesis. In her words, “I am white...and I am mainly writing to a white audience”. I was immediately tempted to put down the book because being black Afri