Blog

Day 1: Shepherding at the Speed of Life

by Beav on April 13, 2009

To view with all comments click on this link.

Welcome to the 2nd annual Blogference!

Let me introduce you to myself if you’re just stopping by here as part of the blogference. My name is Brian Virtue. I’ve been on staff with Campus Crusade for Christ for 11 years. I graduated from UCLA and after ministry stops at Stanford University and the Worldwide Student Network (WSN), I know serve as the Associate National Director of Leadership Development for Epic – CCC’s contextualized ministry for Asian-American college students. Along the way I picked up a MA in Transformational Leadership from Bethel Seminary and am currently about 5 classes short of the MA in Divinity through Bethel as well. I started blogging a couple of years ago after going through Strengthfinders with a consultant and it was recommended I find some writing outlets for a couple of my strengths and it’s turned out to be a good thing for me. Hopefully it’s good and helpful for you this week as well

Servant leadership has become a passion of mine – academically as well as in terms of my vision for my life would demonstrate and what the church would reflect to the world and to one another. I’ve chosen the topic Leading God’s People: Perspectives of Shepherding on Mission to look specifically at how the leadership task of shepherding might be informed by a theology of servant leadership in missional contexts. I chose this topic because it may compliment some of the other topics in the blogference and raise some questions important to consider when in environments that are pushing the envelope and looking to be on the cutting edge of ministry in the 21st century.

Have you ever had the experience with a leader where you bring a struggle or share something painful or confess sin and they end up staring back at you with the look that says, “Hey man, why are you sharing this with me? I didn’t sign up for this. This isn’t part of my job description.”? Or maybe that description resonates with you as you have faced the challenge of coming alongside other people on their spiritual journeys.

This may be more true in evangelical circles than elsewhere, but ministries and churches with a strong missional focus can struggle with an identity crisis of sorts when it comes to what do we do with people’s needs and hurts when there’s so much work to be done. Evangelical culture promotes this because of its typical goal orientation and programmatic approaches to discipleship, but any ministry that leads towards tasks is going to struggle with the shepherding question. I’ve heard and seen leaders outside of a church context tell people with different measures of need, “You need to go to your church to meet …(your needs).” Sometimes this is true. We as sheep sometimes need to look to outside resources for help (extreme situations, significant grief, counseling, and in the case of some disorders and illness). But many times this mentality of deferring responsibility is a cop out from having to do the hard and emotional work of loving well. Regardless of who meets the needs or how a sheep gets cared for – it is the heart response of the leader to being a shepherd to real people that matters. As a member of a para-church organization it raises more clearly for me the question of where does the Kingdom of God intersect with leadership – no matter what the context or situation?

A great passage I’ve been looking at lately that speaks to this is 1 Peter 5:1-5. Let me include verses 2-3 for the purpose of today:

² Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; ³ not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock. (TNIV)

There’s so much in this passage worthy of reflection, but I want to draw your attention to the leadership mandate to be shepherds – shepherds that care for God’s people out of a sense of willingness as opposed to obligation. I think we can all relate to the importance of serving wholeheartedly as opposed to out of duty and obligation. We easily recognize those moments where we should be more engaged than we are and hopefully we’re quick in dealing with these heart issues. But what about when we as leaders are instead struggling to consider things important that we might not feel are that important when compared to the immensity of the goals and challenges before us?

When there is so much energy today within the ministry world with technology, strategy, and many other things – borrowing language from 1 Peter 5:2, what do we do with the sheep when we’re looking to gain new ground?

Leaders, with all of the demands of leading today, run the risk of ignoring some of the fundamental requirements of leadership in God’s Kingdom – and that is to be shepherds. Many with “leadership profiles” in our culture today don’t always gravitate towards the world of caring for people. In fairness – it’s not what they signed up for in their mind. But as a leader in God’s kingdom – it is what He’s called you to. This doesn’t mean leaders have to be all things to all people, but it does have an impact on how you respond to needy and hurting (read human) people. Leading “willingly” for Godly leaders includes not just serving out of an “overflow,” but it includes willingly embracing the full scope of what it means to be a “shepherd” of the “sheep” that God has given you. “Willingly” means seeing the needs of the sheep as part of their created design and not as a nuisance or unfair burden.

We sometimes can easily relegate shepherding tasks to people gifted in mercy or “counselor-type” people, but Peter’s exhortation is not geared toward personality types or gift mixes or strengths. It’s simple – if you’re leading as a follower of Christ and you’re leading God’s people in any context – you need to be a shepherd. And that means willingly and eagerly embracing the needs and struggles of the sheep as part of your calling as a leader. Some resist the shepherding concept because of a “calling” to be missional and out of a reaction to “Christian bubble” type mindsets. And in fairness – sometimes this is legit, but I would say in many said bubbles, there’s not real shepherding going on either. We can’t allow ourselves to get into a one or the other mindset.

The context of 1 Peter 5 is suffering and not giftings, meaning that when there is suffering within the body – leaders are called to respond as shepherds. A failure to do so is to open the door for the work of the enemy. Sheep are vulnerable creatures, especially to predators and Peter introduces the Predator in verse 8 – the devil who is roaming seeking to devour. Leaders who are shepherds in response their people’s sufferings are not just exercising “soft” skills or managing people – they are honoring and loving God and others all the while engaging in spiritual warfare. They are helping the vulnerable and the weaker members stand firm (v. 9) in the faith amidst pain, struggle, and suffering.

Technology is awesome (love my blackberry). Social media and other forms of networking and influencing is awesome. Goals and plans are awesome. All three have become a part of me in ways, but they can all be barriers to life-on-life discipleship and the timely caring and service of the people under your influence and care. Over time – this will hurt the overall and long-term witness and fruitfulness of one’s leadership and ministry, but will we as leaders be able to stop long enough to realize it?

Here are questions worth thinking through as you evaluate your own leadership:

Are things moving so fast you don’t have time to do life-on-life discipleship?
Have you fallen into the fragmented and cultural deception that you can be a missional leader without learning to walk alongside those younger in the faith and tend to their needs as is appropriate? Do you think you can really be a part of deep life change (self and others) without emotionally rolling up your sleeves when it is needed?
To what degree do you believe “shepherding”(i.e. caring for people) should be done by others who might have strengths that you may not?

Here’s a question to serve as a catalyst for your contribution today:

How do you balance the call to shepherd willingly with the call to continually see and respond to the needs of the lost in the world around you? How do stay engaged as a shepherd without losing the mission?

As you think through your response, consider the following quote I read this past week (bold emphasis mine):

“But the response of the church, to cut a long story short, is that if Jesus is the true Servant of the Lord, we, his people, are called here, in this community and every community, to carry on his work of setting things right – not in big, loud campaigns, or pretending that we know the answers to complicated questions, but in the quiet, steady work of coming alongside people in need or sorrow or pain, of praying for and with people in trouble or difficulty, of quietly bringing light into dark places and hope into sad lives. There is more to being the church than that, but not less. As the song puts it, ‘This is our God, the Servant King; he calls us now to follow him.’”

N.T. Wright, Christians at the Cross, pg. 18

May we as leaders, representing Christ, never rationalize or minimize our role in coming alongside people as agents of life and hope. May we be more than shepherds, but never less.

Brian Owen

I have two thoughts on this:

First, I’m wondering if “balance” is the best way to describe this challenge. A word like “balance” makes it sound like we give equal time at all times to shepherding our flock and enagaging with the needs of a lost world. Maybe it’s less about balance and more about harmony(?), more about giving more or less attention and focus to the mission and the needs of the flock, depending on the present circumstances.

Second, I think leaders are often tempted to focus on the mission instead of shepherding. Here’s why: The needs and hurts of the flock often mirror the needs of the leader’s own soul, something that those of us in leadership often do not want to see. It is extremely tempting, I think, for leaders to use ministry activity as a defense against seeing the true state of their own heart (hidden sins, struggles, needs, etc).

But leaders who are willing to turn from their “superman mentality” and face their own sin, weaknesses, vulnerabilities will be more willing and able to help those who are entrusted to their care. They will also be better equipped to carry out the mission of reaching a lost world.
Beav

Thanks for jumping in there Brian and getting things going. Hope Texas is treating you well too!

Great point about balance. I was thinking that “integrate” or “reconcile” might be better ways to communicate the challenge of bringing different dimensions of life and ministry together. Harmony would appeal to a lot of people, especially within Epic. Though I’m not sure it captures the integration component as much as I would probably like.

Loved your thoughts on the character dimension of leadership. That mirroring dynamic is so true. To enter into other people’s hurts and needs often means having to deal with our own emotional life. Oftentimes we’d rather just feel better by getting some things done and checking off some boxes. It’s crazy how things that are good and necessary can often become escapes and forms of self-medication in their own right.

As you think about your own context now that you’re a pastor – how do you envision creating a culture that is living by faith on the mission and that also is reflecting the kind of shepherding that the Scriptures point to? Curious about how you’re thinking about your new challenges.
A Jam C

Alex Costa
CCC Staff
Ohio State University

Excellent post. I think you have hit it on the spot in so many things, and it resonates a lot with what I have been learning lately.

A few weeks ago, I shared the Gospel with a student how came to the conclusion that he was already a believer. After we had talked, he looked at me, and asked “what should I do now?” I responded to him by saying “up to a month ago, I would have told you to read your Bible and get involved in a Bible Study, but I think that you need to start loving people.”

When I said that, my eyes awoke to something. In 8 1/2 years of being a Christian, I learned how to study the Bible and share my faith really well, but I either was never taught how to love others, or I just never listened when people tried to teach me.

I don’t want to put a neat little bow on your blog, but it seems like everything you said can be summarized by saying “as a shepherd, love your sheep well.” You then go into specifics on what that looks like, and your insight is appreciated… something I’m going to bookmark for sure.
Simon & Lillian

Simon Seow
Creative Communications
Singapore CCC

great post! It’s the very thing God reminded me that I’m supposed to be about… as part of his calling for me to give lead to my team.

It’s a heavy responsibility (that of shepherding the hearts of our team members) and it’s something that I feel we can need to inculcate as a team culture, so that we can foster a sense of authenticity among each other.

There’s often the temptation of wanting to be all there 1st before we begin pouring into the lives of those we lead. It’s important therefore that we lead with a paradigm of ‘Nothing to prove, nothing to lose, nothing to hide’. ie. we’re in this journey of faith (of becoming more like Jesus) together!

I’ve been reminded by a friend (and co-worker) some time back that as leaders, our role is to grow ‘in public’… with all our growth, challenges, mistakes and all. We are, if you will, models for our followers. =)

That, to me, is what it means to shepherd their hearts…
Beav

Alex –
thanks for your thoughts. I think many of us can resonate with your journey. The rate at which many of us picked up on the methodology of the ministry has often exceeded the rate at which we have developed the capacity to love people well in the context of adversity or challenge.

One thing I didn’t explore in detail was the question of “what does it mean to love well?” That would have my post unbearably long today, but it’s a question that needs some clarity and defining for some. Peter indicates that it includes caring for people willingly, with integrity, not pursuing dishonest gain, not abusing power, being an example of doing good… There’s a lot in Scripture that can maybe help us here in developing a practical theology of loving our neighbor.

Simon –
I loved that paradigm of “nothing to prove, nothing to lose, nothing to hide.” I’ve never heard that put that way before and I like it. I’ve used “nothing to prove” in working with leaders because of the significance of security and humility in leadership. Many leaders fall off the rails because they are trying to prove something that they do not need to. I first heard my dad actually begin teaching on leadership as “growing in front of people” about a decade ago and I’ve always liked that. That’s similar to what you mentioned. This speaks to the need for us to be good shepherds, but not forget we are sheep too.
brianbarela23

bv-glad you’re hosting again this year. the combination of theological knowledge and first hand experience definitely comes across.

i’m wondering how specifically the organizational layer sits on this biblical grid that you’ve shared.

my initial thoughts:
*I don’t experience an obligation to be a shepherd to all of my students.
*I do experience an obligation to be a shepherd to all of my staff
*I see my organizationally role as primarily apostolic, and secondarily as a shepherd. My thought is that if I’m primarily a shepherd, then I’m not at a core level being faithful to our organizational call. As you said, I don’t feel like I have to be all things to all people, but I do believe I am accountable to steward my time primarily in an apostolic manner.
*Our organizational structure naturally works against shepherding, particularly from the Local Leader and beyond. Not only geographically but the demands placed on regional leaders to maintain the org are heavy–some of their shepherding energy has been co-opted by the man.
*I see a vicious cycle in place that consumes even the most well intentioned and passionate people to shepherd well.

just wanted to fire off a few thoughts and get your feedback.
KelleyOtto

CCC Staff
Chico State

To piggyback off of my director (go BrianBarela!! I’m lovin your blogference brainchild), I had the same thought about not being compelled to shepherd every student in our movement. Perhaps I would say, rather, that it is overwhelming and humanly impossible to give individual response time to every life issue of every student.
Beav, what are your ideas about shepherding the movement from up front? Would you say that shepherding is primarily on request (if a student initiates with me over a need) or on my initiative (if I see a need in their life)? Do you think we have more responsibility to shepherd those who are more committed, say leaders, than the average student who comes to CRU? (I do, but what level of shepherding is called for and available to any student who asks?)
MollyZ

I am feeling Kelley and Brian’s pain about the organizational demands that challenge our shepherding roles.

Could you address the “s” word – selection of leaders – and how that relates to shepherding the people in our ministry scope?
Beav

B-
The questions you are maybe some of the most deeply felt struggles with regard to shepherding in today's context. Before I engage some of the specific questions, I'll give this disclosure: I'm not a shepherd in the gifting sense either. That might help anyone who might initially write me off as being a "soft leader." You know more than most that this would be an untrue and comical portrayal of me. That being said, here we go…

One point worth clarifying here is that when I'm arguing that leaders need to embrace the shepherd role is that I'm not advocating that the leader shepherds everyone. I think I mentioned somewhere that it's not about how people get cared for and shepherded (i.e. by who, how, when), but the leadership issue is the leader's heart attitude in responding to the realities of the people they are leading and their ability to show care in a way that resonates – when it is needed from the leader. In churches, pastoral care is often delegated to associate pastors, but the head pastor still needs to be a shepherd in the way they consider people's needs and realities and lead the community as a whole.

The main leader should never be the only one shepherding. But, leaders have to lead in light of people's realities or they end up out of touch and they lose trust. I'm not advocating that everyone takes on shepherding functions, but leaders need to strive to love well on a concrete level in their leadership (empathy, listening…) and strive to lead towards a picture in which the kingdom of God is being lived out – which involves people who are hurting and struggles or without power being cared for.

The goal is not catering to neediness in a codependent standpoint. I feel strongly we cannot let needy people manipulate or hijack the mission. But, as leaders with power we are to lead out of a concrete context which is made up of the realities of our people. For the Kingdom of God to be lived out requires a leader who is moving toward these realities rather than remaining distant, detached, or oblivious.

I see the organizational role question – I think the Scriptures would affirm you leading from your apostolic strengths, but I want to draw a clear line between leading from a shepherding role (organizationally or formally) and being a shepherd as Peter calls people of influence within the church. You may not be executing shepherding functions on a regular basis or only prioritizing a few people to shepherd, but we are always called to be shepherds who are taking care of God's flock – always. That's what 1 Peter 5:1-10 communicates – especially amidst adversity and suffering.

The question you may have to wrestle with and any leader must wrestle with is – does my stewardship of my own gifting trump the stewardship God's calls us to exercise in taking care of God's flock (more on this tomorrow!). To prioritize one's own gifting over the realities of the community when timely shepherding is needed is probably a step away from a kingdom ethic. Ultimately I believe in a corporate sense these two realities come together (1 Cor 12-14), but there's times where we may need to sacrifice our own preferences and passions in light of what is needed from leadership in the community. Shepherd leaders grow to understand and see what people need to stand firm in the faith (v. 9) which is needed for the sake of apostolic or missional activity. So much of this is heart and character driven and reflects a relational orientation versus a task or achieving motivation. I hear from you & kelly the natural question from a leader with a lot of responsibilities – shepherding like that involves a lot of work. It's seen as one-on-one meetings or maybe counseling or long drawn out team meetings where everyone is crying. People often think of shepherding in functional terms or as a "job." We need to see it as a calling, not a job so that the issue isn't on how we're practically meeting needs, but whether I care in the first place about those needs and if I'm moving towards this people in whatever way I can and using my power and influence as a leader in that community to create a culture which is shepherding and being examples of the Chief Shepherd to one another. To me, that's the difference between shepherding as a leader and someone exercising their gifts of mercy or shepherding or service. Are we using are power and leadership in the best interest of those we're leading as well as to be faithful to what God has called us to? That's what servant leadership is all about and why it fires me up.

Organizationally, you're right. While I like transferability on some level, the pragmatic culture of our organization does really work against shepherding and more specifically – against developing leaders who understand how to lead and shepherd people on the mission. It's why that question of the overwhelming realities of "shepherding people" doesn't shock me. Pragmatism, transferability, and other things can generate a sense of what our ministry leadership and even shepherding is to look like. As I commented before, people in this kind of culture pick up on methodologies at a much faster rate than they do develop into people who can lead in the context of real relationships and real people. That takes a comfortability and security with realities like loss, pain, struggle, and hurt among others. Leaders need to be connected to their people in their pain, but they do not need to be the primary agents of healing. Hopefully we're investing in empowering the community as a whole to meet those needs as well, especially those with gifts that can really serve in that way.

You guys talked a bit about this on your show today – when we rely on a tool or tools to the point where we can't engage the soul and needs of a person, our evangelism won't be effective. In the same way, leaders who rely on the tasks of the mission to the point where they can't engage the soul of people and the soul of the community won't be fruitful leaders over the longterm.

I better stop there, but I hope to get into some of this tomorrow. The main thing is that we look at our own leadership with a view as to whether we are following the example of the Chief Shepherd (1 Peter 5:4) and whether we are repoducing that example for God's flock (5:2).

Shepherding out of willingness as the Scriptures call us to may require a paradigm shift, it may require we learn about the proper use of boundaries so we are empowering and not enabling, but it definitely requires a heart orientation that can move towards the soul conditions of those we lead.
Ken

Brian, great post bro! Were we separated at birth?
You really captured some of the tension in shepherding God’s people. In 25 years of studying the Word with a bias toward spiritual leadership, I sense that excellent leadership happens when we constantly navigate the natural tension between cause and community, task and people. Remove either one and you are left with no reason to shepherd or no one to shepherd.
Beav

Molly! Great to hear from you.

Great question about selection. I’m curious what others would say. I’ve always struggled with this because it totally brings the organizational into a tension with a broader Kingdom ethic. Selection is huge because it is all about stewardship of the mission and the stewardship of young leaders.

I feel that tension though with people that are faithful people or maybe a little raw or whatever it may be that causes them to not necessarily be the wisest investment of our time and resources.

I would argue we can still shepherd these people well even if it means not giving them tons of our time. It might even mean walking them through the decision of leaving the movement to get involved somewhere else that provides a little bit more support and space to work out their journey with the Lord. I still think it comes down to being able to act in what is people’s best interest and even in hard situations like selecting or “de-selecting” their can still be a shepherding posture. Handling selection of leadership is a stewardship issue that influences both the mission and the community and those decisions need to be made. The way they are made and the process that a student or young person might go through is where the heart of the leader or organization is maybe communicated.

back on the organizational limitations issue:
Our shepherding has limits, we have limits, the community has limits. But our hearts should be for the souls of our people and not just the souls of the lost. Our call to be shepherds doesn’t mean that everyone will have their needs met all the time – but hopefully they know that we care and can believe we are working for their best interest. Being a good shepherd on the mission means often being able to absorb people’s disappointments and unmet expectations. This comes with the selection dynamic and it comes when people have expectations to be cared for that are unrealistic or all consuming. As long as we’re not using “unrealistic expectations” as a cop out from the work of empathizing and connecting.
Benson Hines

As a non-CCCer, I’m wondering if those in Catalytic contexts experience this tension differently than those in traditional staff-heavier contexts?

My guess would be that they would experience a greater difficulty (for the same reasons mentioned by those who were asking about how regional and other higher-up leaders get to shepherd). But that’s just a guess – so that’s why I’m asking!
Beav

great question…curious to hear from both traditional “staff campus” people and catalytic staff.

From observation, I’ve seen catalytic staff struggle less because there are different and less expectations. Campus staff in staff heavy situations have more time and resources and relational context, but they often feel more pressure to shepherd in a functional or discipleship sense.

This would suggest to me that one reason might be that catalytic staff have their boundaries set in some ways by the circumstances or situations. Staff campus have to to do a better job setting limits for themselves in their relationships which can cause an increased measure of angst or pressure.

Curious to hear from people who are living this out on either side of the spectrum?
Beav

Molly – (& others)

Thinking more about selection and Acts 6 came to my mind. What a great passage that brings a selection process into focus in the context of caring for the community. In fact, that's a great example of how the early church tried to take care of the sheep in the practical and necessary ways while at the same time seeking to be faithful to preaching the gospel and reaching the lost. Their solution was to select leaders to care for and shepherd the widows and take care of the needs while affirming their own selection as apostolic preachers. The 12 didn't do the shepherding themselves, they selected qualified people of character. The important thing is that they saw the needs and responded – but did so in a way that moved the community forward together and not in a way that brought it to a screetching halt.
Kelly Cain

I have a question just because we “shepherd the flock” doesn’t mean we do it on our lonesome. Correct? I mean, we could, shepherd the flock through setting up systems that allow us to shepherd well in a personal way. This would still be willing, I just think that we’re entrusted with our “12″ and I believe that God implores us to use strategy and that He wants to use people to reach people. I’ll share an excerpt from what I posted on Joe’s blog: We invest in our leaders by having advocates who have a few small group leaders in their care. It’s a discipleship model on a large scale. With about 50 advocates, 200 small group leaders, and 1200 who attend those small groups, the influence is exponential – spiritual (growth) multiplication, perhaps?
Beav

kelly,

Thanks for your thoughts. That’s been a theme running through the comments that we’ve been going back and forth on. I’ve tried to reinforce in multiple ways in my follow up comments that being a shepherd of God’s flock is about moving towards the realities and soul conditions of God’s people, not executing all of the shepherding functions.

So many people in our culture struggle with the concept of shepherding because they think they need to do it all and do it all well – so they don’t do it since they can’t do it well. I confess as I think about my experience and some responses here in this blog, it does amaze me how quickly we can hear an exhortation to shepherd and feel like it’s all on us to do everything. Maybe it’s a reflection of how much responsibility and maybe guilt we as leaders tend to take on ourselves.

The call to be shepherds is there, but there’s no formula. Peter’s mandate relates to people using their influence to freely serve the body and take care of the sheep in the context of sufferings and in the face of an adversary/predator. Any belief that leaders must be everything for their people is coming from ourselves or our culture – the Superman syndrome Brian Owen in the first comment mentioned. Scripture affirms the work of the body, selection of leaders, and the exercising of specific giftings to meet the needs of people. This frees leaders to lead for the sake of the whole of the community and for the mission.

I mentioned Acts 6 as an example which really speaks to me as an example of people shepherding the flock by selecting other men to do the bulk of the work so that the apostolic ministry could continue. The point is that they were moving towards the needs and realities in their leadership, not neglecting them for the sake of their goals or objectives.

The more I think here, there are some really strong cultural influences in our society that work to keep leaders from entering into the needs or emotional realities of people without feeling like they have to fix it. Perhaps it’s the leadership compulsion to “fix it” that is the greatest barrier to fruitful shepherding of God’s flock? Kingdom leaders/shepherds aren’t called to “fix it”, they’re called to love, steward, and be examples.

I know the “fix it” syndrome is an epidemic with male leaders (and husbands). I’m curious if women leaders feel the same temptation or pull towards fixing? Any thoughts?
brianbarela23

dude thanks for the clarifying comments.

i’m hearing this–that our orientation towards those we lead must be other-centered/servant/sacrificial. this orientation expresses itself as shepherding.

i think you are talking less about ‘caring more’ about people that are hard to love and more about growing in our capacity to lead out of empathy even when it’s inconvenient to the mission or our personal status/comfort/convenience.

Brueggeman’s chapter on Jesus in The Prophetic Imagination is my fave in grasping this reality. He does a great job of illustrating how the cross was the final step of dismantling the old order and ushering in the kingdom. The leadership step that was most needed was the one that cost him the most and was his most empathetic act.

great topic–adds a significant layer to my understanding of kingdom leadership.
Beav

thanks b – that really does a good job of capturing it. As I just commented in response to kelly, the “caring more” is similar to the compulsion to “fix it” or “shepherd more or harder.” That’s not the point at all, but it’s where we can so easily go today in our leadership.

I’m laughing as I consider the ridiculousness of the message that says “love harder.” But we often taken that kind of pressure and responsibility on ourselves to fix or be everything to the people or situations. Psychologically – this is what we feel like we have to do to control things to alleviate our anxiety. Theologically – there’s some self-focus, over-estimation of self, and maybe even some pride here.

Here’s a point I’ll push you on at least in terms of the language we’re using. I’m not suggesting that we choose to love well even when it’s inconvenient for the mission. I’m hoping to draw a clearer link between our actions as leaders among our “sheep” and the mission itself. The need to shepherd at times may feel inconvenient to our tasks or goals or agenda, but I would argue that it can’t be inconvenient to the mission itself – because it is part of the mission. That’s why I put that N.T. Wright quote in there. I know it’s a little bit semantics, but so much of what I’ve tried to communicate is how we can turn our “tasks” into our understanding of what the mission really is when in fact the mission itself involves shepherding, looking out for the sheep, and following the example of the Chief Shepherd as we exercise influence. That’s the point of 1 Peter 5 in my mind. It connects the shepherding role for elders/leaders with the mission of the church in the world. That’s why I’ve been looking at it in some detail for the last couple months (even in Greek Maybe it helps us expand our view of what our mission really involves. And maybe it means a little more kingdom and a little less organization Don’t quote me on that last one though – I’m still an organizational leader and have to live up to my position as “the man” or one of “them.”
Dan Birch

Great Blog Brian!

My name is Dan Birch I’m an intern at Chico state. I definitely connected with these blog about shepherding and had some thoughts.
In response to the 2nd question about “fallen in the fragmented/cultural deception without walking alongside those that are younger?”
I would say there are a lot of assumptions to what SHEPHERDING really is. and walking “alongside means?”. If the belief that shepherding consists of “meeting 2 hours every week, talking about my struggles, calling and encouraging every night, and texting bible verses” occasionally:) I would say that isn’t shepherding but maybe just 1 form of it.
In my case at chico-state I am so called being “shepherded by Brian barela my MTL” and within the movement I am “shepherding the leadership students below me” but in BOTH INSTANCES SHEPHERDING LOOKS REALLY DIFFERENT.
case 1 (brian): me and brian meet but the shepherding I get is really through a teaching aspect of the movement, and not so much my personal walk with God I have other guys who keep me accountable in that area
case 2 (students): I meet with students and really share in there struggles of sin, and encourage them, as well as help them figure out the vision of Crusade.

Both cases are shepherding but both look really different. SO here’s my conclusion. Ultimately in first Peter we report to the “Chief Shepherd” who is Jesus. I would are held accountability for the well being of the flock and the constant progress of our mission. But shepherding from the Chief Shepherd down to levels of shepherding are completely different. And I believe that as staff members are goal is to REALIZE what specific TYPE Of shepherding is needed in our specific role. Its not a matter of “emotionally rolling up our sleeves” but “opening up our eyes” and realizing what God has asked YOU SPECIFICALLY to do in this certain time and place for the gospel. Each member has a different gift but all gifts can be used to SHEPHERD THE FLOCK in one way or another. Always keeping in mind to constantly call “sheep” to repentance and look for stray sheep as the continue on there missional journey.
Kelley at Chico

Beav, I appreciate the clarification and even exposing the pride/guilt/need to be it all motivation to “shepherd.” You asked if female leaders feel the same pull towards “fixing it.”
I do at times feel that pull, but in the realm of relating with other women, specifically as a leader, I feel a greater pull towards “being there” for every girl. I think it is safe to say that women have high relational needs, and I can just see this question below the surface when girls talk to me: Am I acceptable? Am I likeable? Will this staff leader see me as worthy of building a relationship with?
It is this need in women that prompted my previous posting. Just last week a girl at CRU wanted to ask me some “theological questions,” but I could tell that behind that the desire was much more to be in a deeper relationship with a staff woman.
I am challenged with how to shepherd well in this situation. Especially with limited time on campus now that I’m a mom. I definitely agree and hope that my life is one of empathy and desire to meet the needs of the flock, willingness to set structure in place to shepherd well and not “do it all.” It is more in the requests of women to commit to deeper relationship that I struggle with the shepherding question. I am feeling more freedom to set appropriate boundaries, realizing my limitations, but definitely have room to grow…
Beav

well said Dan – we get into a lot of trouble when we try to impose 1 model of what we think shepherding is.

Maybe in its most simple form, Peter is telling us to find out what the sheep under us need to 1) stand firm in the faith; 2) follow the example of the Chief Shepherd; and 3) persevere in doing good (1 Pet 4:19). Then we need to live that out in our leadership given our personal, professional, & circumstantial limitations as best we can in light of whole picture of what we're called to.

My dad's always been fond of the phrase "if it's worth doing, it's worth doing poorly." It's one of his leadership maxims. I always had a hard time with it until a few years ago when it clicked. This is a perfect time where it applies. We might not be able to completely meet someone's need – but we can give them what we can. We might only be able to sit and listen for 10 minutes – that might be all that's needed even if the person would love those 2 hours. We might never meet our own desires of what we would want to do or the expectations of what others want – but we can offer ourselves in the moments and situations that present themselves. What's important is that we connect, are emotionally present (even if it's just 5 minutes), and are tuned in to the Lord and the person's soul enough to maybe see what God might have us do.

Shepherding can be very complex because people are, but maybe it's best to continue to work to keep it simple in terms of our basic framework for how our hearts are oriented to people's realities.

btw – enjoyed the part of the talk show I heard today. you guys did a great job. When brian and I were trolling around at UCLA I don't even think I had an email account. Now look what's going on.
Beav

Kelley -
great thoughts. thanks for engaging that question. I can see how that’s such a challenge given how huge of a heart you have. There’s an extra burden in these settings when one is gifted in empathy or mercy (as I think you are). The challenge of setting limits when you can get so invested is so challenged. I’ve thought before that maybe Cloud and Townsend should write a “Boundaries in Ministry” book because shepherding well requires them – both for ourselves and so we make sure we are empowering others rather than enabling.

I can write about Shepherding fairly easily and even cognitively at times because mercy is always dead last in any spiritual gift inventory I’ve ever done. Boundaries are fairly easy to set so in writing sometimes I assume that others can “shut it off” as easily as I can at times. But that’s just not true – and I’m glad it’s not. If I was the model shepherd, there would be a lot of sick sheep.

Love with limits. That’s what I think shepherding is all about. Some of us need to give more love, some of us need better limits. That’s truth and grace at work.
Beav

I've been thinking a lot in the past 24 hours and I want to add a statement for leaders to embrace as part of this discussion. Here it is:

"Being a shepherd as a leader does not mean being responsible to take away people's pain."

That's not what God does with us (as a rule). It's not what Jesus did (as a rule). As a general rule, it's not our job as leaders to approach people with the goal of taking away their pain (or fixing).

Yet some leaders might be confused by this though. So what are we supposed to do? We have to recognize the cultural influences that seek to tell us pain is always bad and it's our job as leaders to take it away. That's what are society does. The look to pastors, leaders, government, & businesses to take away their pain in one way or another and our legal system with the prevalence of law suits only reinforces this victim/savior approach to leadership.

True shepherding cares and empowers. Like the Chief Shepherd we can be present with people, listen, connect, empathize, communicate value & dignity, and help in the ways we can, and maybe even connect them with better places for them to work out their pain.

There's so much we can do when we lift that bizarre field of expectations that reinforces that the leader is to keep the flock dependent on them. This flies in the face of Scripture as well as good common sense. We are to be helping people mature and get equipped for the mission. Have an orientation towards taking care of the flock as a leader is another expression of servant leadership.

But when we talk about leaders as servants, we don't usually hear a lot of people arguing that leaders should be bring all the food to meetings, or doing all the administrative work. The emotional realm makes a lot of people nervous and it's true that our people mirror back to as as Brian Owen mentioned the condition of our own heart and our own capacity to love.

Great discussion everyone. It doesn't have to end here, but really appreciated everyone's contribution. These are realities that every leader wrestles with on a weekly if not daily basis.
Dan K

I appreciate you tackling the shepherding topic as I believe it is one of least understood concepts that Jesus taught. It is often misunderstood and thus misapplied because Jesus used an agricultural metaphor to describe the role. In Jesus' day everyone knew a shepherd personally and probably most of them had participated in it at some time. That is why there is little detailed explanation. Today's urban dwellers, which makes up 99% of the population and church, are totally removed from animal husbandry.

Prior to my 30 years in campus ministry serving in USCM and overseas, I grew up on a real working and "for profit" cattle ranch where we also raised sheep. In college I majored in animal husbandry (Animal Science). As a result I often cringe at many of the points I hear when teachers try to describe the real profession of shepherding. It is not so much the individual details that they get wrong, but they often miss the first and foremost purpose. Any real shepherd when asked what his purpose is would not say "balancing care and production". They would only say "production".

Before you call me a coldhearted heretical task master, let me explain. For most people their only connection to animals is their household pet. This is where their understanding of shepherding jumps the track. The objective of having a pet is to take care of it & love it. That's not the ultimate objective of a real shepherd.

The two competing elements that affect the level of production and thus must be balanced are as follows. #1) Care specific to each flock member's stage of growth and #2) strict adherence to selection criteria specific to that level of growth. Every shepherd knows the stages of grow, the key objective(s) and hazards to that stage. He also gives special attention to the transitional times between stages.

Finally, every shepherd knows and executes the selection criteria appropriate to that stage. He adjusts scarce resources accordingly. This includes food, attention, time, medicines and permission to multiply.

A good shepherd would say that in order to produce he must give constant skilled care (sometimes 24/7) balanced with non-sentimental (almost cold) sets of selection criteria. Ultimately the shepherd controls the future DNA of the flock. So if you balance care (love) and selection well, your flock will become an abundant producer.
Beav

Dan – thanks for those thoughts. very insightful and it really helps putting shepherding in its context – how people in the first century would think about it.

I like those thoughts because shepherding gets dismissed often for people who are “gifted that way” without really thinking about the nature of shepherding as the early church or Peter or Jesus would think of it. I was hoping to put the shepherding function of a leader into the its context as an essential part of the mission and your thoughts really bring a lot of clarity to that endeavor. Thanks!