The Shadow of Joy
In their book, authors Marcus Warner and Jim Wilder dare to be rare in their approach to leadership development, and diagnosing common leadership issues, particularly among Christian leaders and pastors. R.A.R.E. is an acrostic which stands for Remain relational, Act like yourself, Return to joy, and Endure hardship, and these habits are said to increase joy and lead to trust and engagement within communities, churches and organizations.
Warner and Wilder’s connections to Daniel Kahneman work in Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow are obvious since both pull from psychological theory and neuroscience, though I’m not sure they cite Kahneman—perhaps this knowledge is ubiquitous within the neuroscience world.[1]
This book creatively brings together the very different disciplines of Christian leadership and neuroscience. Key to their discussion is the concept of joy, which the authors advocate as the fuel that should power the leader in their work. This joy is infectious and a leader who is led by joy will cultivate communities led by joy as well. In one particular podcast interview, the authors described the concept of “joy mountain.” Joy is not always a mountain-top experience—there’s rough hiking, rain, hunger and other trials along the way. Even when leaders make it to the mountain top, they need to return to base camp eventually.
I’m grateful the authors define joy within a spectrum of highs and lows; however, I struggle with their dichotomy between joy and fear. The sense that joy is relational and fear is anti-relational is false. Working extensively with emotions such as fear in my research and project, Warner and Wilder’s definition of fear is not in fact fear, but more akin to the avoidance of fear. Fear is not the antagonist of joy; the antagonist of joy is avoidance of that which is real. Thus, joy is the result of engaging and integrating what is real. Their suggestion that fear leads leaders to rigidity and pain avoidance is simply false. In my research and work, fear can be a torch lighting the way forward, when made conscious in the presence of others. What we fear is often the very thing we must move toward, name, and deal with.
Overall, this book is conceptually helpful. I found myself reflecting on my experience working under two different senior pastors. These two pastors were quite opposite in terms of leadership still, strengths, and experience. The first ran a tight ship as an executive, with a top-down approach. He preached 90% of the time, and delegated efficiently. However, he had very little room for dissent and questioning. No one really disagreed with him until they left. He was the image of the “Sandbox Leader” the authors discuss; however, his beef was always with the kids in the other sandboxes (aka, other senior pastors). Conversely, the second senior pastor was young, inexperienced, and new to leadership of any form. I’ll never forget the time he stood up on a Sunday morning and said, “My name is [name] and I’m kind of the senior pastor here.” He often said his primary strength was harmony, but it was clear that his desire to please everyone was creating a leadership vacuum and ultimately weakening the community.
In both cases, I can see the RARE Leadership model being potentially helpful, but only in a behavior modification sense. To invoke Erin Meyer’s work on culture mapping, the RARE Leadership model leans heavily towards effectiveness in low-context cultures, like the US, where communication is highly explicit and precise.[2] My question is, are church contexts and the communication norms therein, built more on high-context communication? In other words, are people in churches listening to and watching what leaders say and do, or are they more so reading between the lines and vigilant for what is going unsaid, and unacknowledged?
The RARE Leadership model restores something, something good and essential, but it does not address the shadow. In fact, joy is so highly illuminated in this book that the model may serve to create an even larger shadow in leaders, and their communities. I find the leadership development and ethos of Frederick Buechner much more compelling in his book, Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy, & Fairy Tale. I will let Buechner have the last word:
“[Christian leaders] must address themselves to the fullness of who we are and to the emptiness too, the emptiness where grace and peace belong but mostly are not, because terrible as well as wonderful things have happened to us all. […] The task […] is to hold up life to us […]”[3]
[1] Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011).
[2] “The Culture Map – Google Books,” accessed February 9, 2023, https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Culture_Map/nWAHAQAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=the+culture+map+erin+meyers&printsec=frontcover.
[3] Frederick Buechner, Telling the Truth: The Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy, and Fairy Tale (HarperCollins, 1977). 4, 16-17.
About the Author
Michael Simmons
- Tennessee --> Oregon - Father to David and Bina, Partner to Liz - Portland Seminary Admissions Counselor - Spiritual Director - Companioning Center Leadership Team - Deep Water Board Member - Ordained Elder, FMC - Aspiring Jungian Theologian13 responses to “The Shadow of Joy”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Michael, thank you for your insightful commentary on Warner and Wilder and for enlightening me on the virtues of fear. Frankly, before now, my perspective on fear has been one that dismisses it as being undesirable because “God has not given us the spirit of fear…” as 2 Timothy 1:7 says. But I’m warming up to your perspective. You write, “In my research and work, fear can be a torch lighting the way forward, when made conscious in the presence of others. What we fear is often the very thing we must move toward, name, and deal with.” I’m especially curious about how you have seen fear “lighting the way forward” among the international students you engage, and your observations in this regard in South Africa during the Cape Town Advance.
Henry, thank you for engaging this quote. I love working with emotions like fear and anger and helping people see them as guides rather than adversaries. I think there is a difference between a “spirit of fear” and the emotion of fear. I imagine a spirit of fear being quite paralyzing rather than illuminating. Such all-consuming fear keeps us stuck rather than in dynamic motion and growth toward wholeness. When we engage our fear, it often leads us into relationship with vital parts of our humanity, and the humanity of others. When we allow ourselves to see what we fear outside of us, it often serves as a reflection of what we fear inside of us.
I see Tutu and Mandela as models of engaging fear. I think anytime some comes to me as an admissions counselor, there is a level at which they are allowing their fear to companioning them toward wholeness. The common Christian understanding is that we have to expel fear to move forward, or at least that the less fear we have, the more faith we have. But when they’re made conscious, especially in community, we can move forward with both fear and joy.
Thoughts?
Very interesting perspective Michael. I like how you weave in your work as an admissions counselor and Mandela and Tutu’s life work into this. Its a new area for me and I’ll definitely be giving it a bit more thought. Thanks
Michael, you wrote, “The sense that joy is relational and fear is anti-relational is false. Working extensively with emotions such as fear in my research and project, Warner and Wilder’s definition of fear is not in fact fear, but more akin to the avoidance of fear.”
Typically, I take Christian writers interpreting the Bible with one hand and speaking from their experience on emotions with the other. In the last couple of years, I have fallen headfirst into cognitive and social psychology to better understand what makes us tick as complex creatures. However, one of these guys is writing from a neuroscience perspective. Do you think common evangelical beliefs create such an indelible mark on one’s views that they sometimes allow a biased interpretation of scripture to prevent a more holistic understanding of God-given emotions?
For sure! When I tech my course module of emotions (fear, anger, sadness, and joy), I explicitly name all the scripture verse that we’ve internalized in order to bypass these emotions. 100% of the time participants can quote these verse, but 95% of the time, have no idea where they are in the bible. This wreaks havoc on one’s wholistic formation and their relationships.
I’ve often said, I would love to read a dissertation on the effects of evangelical theology on psychological health, particularly personality disorders.
What I wonder is how much our biases that Kahnman raises impact one’s hermeneutics? How do you see those biases impacting joy and fear?
Micael, thanks for this post. I especially appreciated your interaction and challenge to the book’s take on fear. I would like to hear more about what you discovered in your research for your project and how fear can serve a positive purpose. It sounds like perhaps you need to write a book in the future! Let me ask you a question based on this quote: “The RARE Leadership model restores something, something good and essential, but it does not address the shadow.” What steps beyond the scope of this book help people to address the shadow?
Yeah, that’s really good questions Roy! So the psychological approach RARE leadership falls under would be a blend of Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and Positive Psychology. These approaches can be effective on a number of levels of mild/moderate behavior and thought modifications. They write about the heart, but I’ve not found CBT or Positive psych to be all that helpful in the deeper work, which leaders often long for. Depth psychology, the umbrella of Jungian psych, addresses not only motivation, but one’s relationship to their inner parts and personalities. To me, it aligns much more with the gospels and the “psychology” of Christ.
Practically, I’d start by looking at the shadow hidden within the imperatives of the RARE acronym:
Remain relational: Where have you been relationally wounded?
Act like yourself: What parts of yourself have been cut off and disallowed from community?
Return to joy: What emotion are you experiencing now? It may have something to offer you.
Endure hardship: What needs have gone unmet in your pursuit of survival. How have you tended to think and act when met with hardship? What patterns do you see? Etc.
Michael, ty for your insightful and thought-provoking discussions. I was reminded of many examples of leadership I experienced in the past as well. In terms of sandbox leaders, I think lot of times fears within them create a certain leadership style. What are some reflective questions you might ask to leaders that can help them to see fears that are linked to their leadership styles?
Oh this is such a big question. I think Sandbox leadership is cultivated at the micro level by the family system of the leader, and at the macro level by the scarcity mentality of the Protestant work ethic and capitalism. I’d start with the individual leader and get into some Internal Family Systems work. Essentially, I’d try to shift the leader’s focus from warring with others, the internal warring happening already.
I may start with this question: What are you defending against within yourself?
Hey Michael, thank you for your thoughtful engagement with Warner/Wilder’s work and the connections you make to your own research particularly around fear and shadow. I’ve also really benefited from reading your responses to excellent questions raised by our colleagues. Much to consider. Your connections to Erin Meyer’s culture mapping work is fascinating. You ask: “…are people in churches listening to and watching what leaders say and do, or are they more so reading between the lines and vigilant for what is going unsaid, and unacknowledged?” I’m curious as well what connection if any you see between ‘reading between the lines/vigilant for what is going unsaid/unacknowledged’ and the fast system processes Warner/Wilder discuss? It seems to me they are encouraging leaders to reflect on their fast system processes in order to be more explicit (so actually using slow thinking)…but perhaps congregational members are assessing their leaders using fast system processes. If that is the case, how might leaders invite their congregations to also slow down to become aware of the implicit…both the joy and shadow sides? Sorry…several questions/statements there that I’d value your thoughts on :).
Always thought-provoking. So, where and how does joy fit in the equation of leadership development without neglecting the shadow side?
Michael: I’d love to better understand the definitions you use for both ‘joy’ and ‘fear’ — I’m wondering if there can be multiple definitions based on context. Coming from the academy, I feel like every discipline uses their own lexicon for the exact same terms 😉