Emotional Ecclesia: The Leadership Mystique
For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and we were all made to drink of one Spirit. Indeed, the body does not consist of one member but of many. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many members, yet one body. Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.
1 Corinthians 12:1-14, 19-20, 27
The metaphor of the people of God as a body, the Body of Christ, is a rich one, utilized frequently by Paul (in 1 Corinthians and Ephesians) and referenced commonly within the church as well. Paul describes the various roles of individuals and gifts given by the Holy Spirit for the common good (1 Corinthians 12:7). He likens these different gifts to body parts like eyes, ears, and feet.
But how much richer our understanding of the Body of Christ might be if we recognized that the “Body” also has an emotional component. As I explored Manfred Kets de Vries’ The Leadership Mystique: Leading Behavior in the Human Enterprise, I was drawn to the connections he made between individual and organizational change. “Change is hard,” he asserts, whether for individuals or organizations.[1] While that is certainly obvious, his premise is that how we navigate change is both cognitive and emotional— we “have to be affected in both the head and the heart.”[2]
It is the emotional side of the organizational body that I’m intrigued by, as emotional ethos is often overlooked—especially within the church. What are the emotions of the church? How does the spirit of the body respond to change?[3] As a person bringing a great deal of change into this congregation I’ve recently joined, just by my very presence, I’m sensing the emotional resistance to change. Repeatedly over the past few weeks I’ve received comments like “many older folks are having a hard time with all this change.” When asked to pinpoint “what changes?” the shift in how communion is practiced is often brought up—a shift that happened a year ago, before I arrived. “Tell me more; what other changes have been overwhelming?” I’ve been hard-pressed to be told other specifics. What I understand, therefore, is that just my very presence has been a significant perception of change for many. I haven’t actually done very much to change things yet!
So how can we help our churches navigate the natural and unconscious resistance to change, the emotional responses, and the way we perceive ourselves and how we imagine that others perceive us? Kets de Vries argues that the same psychological dynamics occur within both individuals and organizations. We need to be able to guide the church to recognize the value to itself in the change process—that a particular change is in their self-interest and supports their values.[4] Like with individuals, it’s okay for churches to mourn what’s lost—grieve for and idealize the past. But as with individuals who carry on with life, churches must accept a new reality, and recognize that change is constant and inevitable.
We often resist change because of fear—fear of the unknown, fear that what’s changed will result in loss—of good conditions, of authority or rights or privilege, fear that the cost will sink the church. But God didn’t give us a spirit of fear (1 Timothy 1:7) but the very Spirit of God. Can we help our churches recognize when fear controls us?
The process of moving a church through the recognition that changes need to be made, listening to and empowering members to imagine alternatives to the status quo,[5] and building in new practices all contribute to the health of the church. I’m grateful for the handy little boxes of questions included by Kets de Vries, and plan to start asking some of them amongst our leadership. Because I recognize that the emotional Body of Christ is something that can’t be ignored or overlooked, especially if we hope to build up the body into Christ-like maturity (Ephesians 4:12-13).
[1] Kets De Vries, Manfred. The Leadership Mystique : Leadership Behavior in the Human Enterprise. (Harlow, England: Prentice Hall, 2006) 137.
[2] Ibid.
[3] I’m not referring to the Holy Spirit here.
[4] Ibid., 146.
[5] a la Hirschmans’ Exit, Voice and Loyalty thesis.
About the Author
Katy Drage Lines
In God’s good Kingdom, some minister like trees, long-standing, rooted in a community. They embody words of Wendell Berry, “stay years if you would know the genius of the place.” Others, however, are called to go. Katy is one of those pilgrims. A global nomad, Katy grew up as a fifth generation Colorado native, attended college & seminary and was ordained in Tennessee, married a guy from Pennsylvania, ministered for ten years in Kenya, worked as a children’s pastor in a small church in Kentucky, and served college students in a university library in Orange County, California. She recently moved to the heart of America, Indianapolis, and has joined the Englewood Christian Church community, serving with them as Pastor of Spiritual Formation. She & her husband Kip, have two delightful boys, a college junior and high school junior.7 responses to “Emotional Ecclesia: The Leadership Mystique”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
So true Katy- “But how much richer our understanding of the Body of Christ might be if we recognized that the “Body” also has an emotional component.” This seems to be challenging for the American church to recognize the emotional aspect of its’ people. How would you suggest we encourage churches to validate and cultivate healthy emotional individuals?
Katy, do you feel like you were plunged into something that started before you showed up? I am sure God has placed you there with your gifts and abilities to handle the situation effectively and with Christian love. The other people who are there have a whole history that you are catching up on.
Anyway, I admire your courage. Your observation about the emotional component of the church is insightful. It helps each church to have its own personality. I think God wants us to rejoice in our uniqueness.
“But how much richer our understanding of the Body of Christ might be if we recognized that the “Body” also has an emotional component.”
This is an important observation. We often teach the body of Christ in a very dry way…our focus is utilitarian. Some people do this…other people do that.
You make a solid point, the church needs analytical people, deep feeling people, those who listen well, and those with zeal. Thanks for the reminder.
Nice post addressing the effect of change. Many of us in leadership have a vision that initiates change in the way we do things. We hope that the members would follow suit. I like the point that you asked questions of the member to determine the specifics. That is a great sign of leadership. When there’s a challenge we should gather the facts to make an appropriate assessment and response.
Another point to change is that we can’t change people only the holy spirit can. We can ask the holy spirit to make a change in us and to guide us in challenging situations.
Being in the new location have you asked God for changes in you when relating to your new flock?
Katy, you are to be commended that you have the self-awareness to sense the change that others are sensing even though you have not made the changes yourself. I would say this is the sign of a healthy leader. Not to mention that you have the strength—hear me say “nerve” (ala:Friedman)—to ask the right questions to get people thinking about the change. That too is a sign of a healthy leader. Sometimes we are change agents just by being present—I hate when that happens! But this is leadership as well—Friedman again! Be encouraged, you are leading. Enjoyed your post Katy!
Katy,
Great connection here and how much healthier would all of us be – and would all of our churches be – if we recognized and took seriously the emotional component of situations…….
This is a generalization that might get me in trouble, but this is one of the things that often is an advantage for women in leadership. Women are often used to having the emotional aspect of life integrated into the rest of their lives, while men are quite often told (both explicitly and implicitly, by culture, family, tradition, etc) that emotions are to be minimized and often outright ignored.
If a leader ignores these things in their personal life, how can we expect them to attend to them in their professional lives?
“We often resist change because of fear—fear of the unknown, fear that what’s changed will result in loss—of good conditions, of authority or rights or privilege, fear that the cost will sink the church.” This is so true. We have based our organizations and churches on an individual. In doing so, the pressure of leadership exposes the truth of humanity and our inability to be perfect. However, the expectation to be perfect is not dimenished by this truth. So many resort to leading with fear as a means to maintain their control or authority without having to make any changes.