The challenges of leadership

Yesterday I wrote about feeling under attack, so I was amused to see that my Thomas Gospel for this morning said the following: Jesus said, "Congratulations to those who know where the rebels are going to attack. [They] can get going, collect their imperial resources, and be prepared before the rebels arrive."

What if the good judgment that comes from this experience of feeling attacked is simply to know that it happens, that whenever you take on a position of authority there will be landmines? Perhaps the lesson to be learned is not to avoid positions of authority, but rather to know that they come with challenges like these, and to know that it is important to shore up your internal resources in anticipation.

Yesterday, in a discussion about this, our democratic and republican presidential candidates came up, and I found myself thinking about what kind of person chooses to risk attack for the privilege of leadership. And what I would hope is that they would operate from the principles raised by Donna Zajonc in her January edition of Politics of Hope. In an article (which I may have mentioned before) entitled "Is Your Desire to Serve a Calling or a Craving?" she says very clearly that "A calling is a desire to give. A craving is a desire to get."

The problem is that those of us who lead because we are called to do so may be more easily derailed by attack (don't you find yourself thinking "I don't NEED this"?) than those who lead because they crave the power; they DO "need this." But I also suspect that folks in the latter category may develop some rather bizarre coping mechanisms so that their needs will continue to be met under fire, whereas folks in the former category who have strong internal resources may be better at staying centered.

For some reason I am reminded of something my father said to me when I was in my early 20s, newly aware of population growth, and determined not to have children. "Great," he said. "You're smart, you know the world is a scary place to bring up kids, you know the population statistics, and you decide not to have kids. But if all the smart people decide not to have kids we'll be populating the world with stupid people."

Yeah, I know, this one is wrong on so many levels. But it stuck with me anyway. And it seems to apply here. If all smart, committed leaders back off from the pressures, then we'll be left with stupid greedy leaders. Perhaps today's lesson is that our response to attack should not be to cave, but rather to use the resources available to us -- prayer, meditation, friendship, retreats, study, eating well, exercising, etc. -- to beef up our "homeland security", our internal resources, our ability to rely upon self and God rather than craving constantly positive feedback from outside ourselves. Something to think about...