The Safe Distance
“Don’t let them get too close to you, otherwise they’ll step all over you. Always maintain a safe distance.”
Have you heard this well-meaning advice before? I’ve heard it in many contexts and given by many different types of leaders – organisational bosses, school teachers, church leaders, seminary lecturers, etc. It doesn’t shock, but it does make one wonder.
Especially in the context of the Christian faith. When Christian leaders maintain that a distance must be kept just so those under them will not take advantage of them, one needs to reflectively examine such an understanding.
For one thing, these leaders get it right that leading is a very dangerous responsibility to undertake. It is dangerous because it exposes one to the propensity of other people exploiting the leader if he is kind, gentle, and compassionate. But is the deliberate act of maintaining a safe distance the right response to this reality?
A very strong dimension of leading is found in who we are, because who we are is inevitably expressed through what we model in our lives. When a leader is cold and spatially hostile in his relationships with others, it speaks of an underlying refusal to engage in relationships which may threaten one’s sense of comfort and safety. When a leader engages with other lives with no holds barred, it speaks of the length he’s willing to go through to get connected with other lives around him.
Hurt though he may be by some people who will take advantage of kind and compassionate leaders, his struggle to rise above his injuries is the very dimension of his journey as a leader which will inspire others to be leaders of kindness, compassion and grace like himself. Judged though he may be when his flaws are noticed all too easily, his struggle to better himself challenges others to follow after his perseverance and long-suffering. Christian leaders who can’t model this virtue are perhaps better off leading in the cold hostile world where only efficiency, productivity and targets matter. They will always be seen as bosses to their subordinates, but never as superiors.
A leader can maintain a distance from those he leads. But a Christian leader, in humility and in following the way of his Master, cannot lead others without the vulnerabilities that accompany the appointment to model the life of Christ.
Comments (4)
I agree with you, SK about "a Christian leader, in humility and in following the way of his Master, cannot lead others without the vulnerabilities that accompany the appointment to model the life of Christ."
However your initial statement was “Don’t let them get too close to you, otherwise they’ll step all over you. Always maintain a safe distance.”
I guess the advice is meant as a warning about leaders being used, abused, exploited, and manipulated.
Your comments however brings to mind Christian leadership. As a human being, we can only sustain only so many relationships before we burn out. Hence in self preservation, some leaders keep a distance from some (but not all) of their congregation. This is especially true if the congregation is large, maybe more than 1000. How would you advise such a leader then?
Posted by Alex Tang | January 18, 2007 11:34 PM
My take on this issue is that the size of an institutional congregation should never be too large. Probably few people would agree with me on this, but I feel that a church of 1,000 people should be split into 10 smaller communities of 100 people each, whilst it may still remain a larger network of local communities in fellowship with one another.
Of course this means that pastoral leaders need to be raised for each community. But if a church of 1,000 people cannot manage to raise pastoral leaders for these communities, something must be amiss in the dynamics of its churchlife.
I think when large churches try to remain centralised under the leadership of a senior pastor who performs like a CEO and majors on management rather than spiritual formation and spiritual friendship, it's more an issue of power and control than it is about the Kingdom.
Even though many large churches emphasise the cellgroup system, cellgroups are seen more as a mechanism for further increasing the numbers than as a way to facilitate the organic life of the people so that they can walk in lifelong spiritual friendships with one another in life and faith.
Posted by sk | January 19, 2007 1:03 AM
Someone who works in psychology might be a better discussant on this issue, but I think you're overlooking human need for healthy boundaries.
Would you let someone make so many demands of you as a person that you have neither time nor energy for quiet time with God, or with your wife/parents/children/friends/etc? These areas would be affected if leaders do not keep "safe distances" from those around them. This is true not just of leaders, but it's necessary in every single human relationship. As Alex Tang points out, we are finite, fallen beings.
Additionally (and I'm just writing off the top of my head), sometimes I think it's good to let the other hurting person figure things out for themselves too. this is not always true, and we all definitely need to be more available to ppl in need. But at the same time, there are some struggles that we need to go through on our own.
And we need to learn that leaders/friends/etc will not always be there for us, and that we cannot encroach on their "safe" space to demand that they meet our needs.
Anyway. My random thoughts.
Posted by z | January 21, 2007 12:16 AM
Thanks, Z, for your thoughts. I do not disagree with anything you've posited here.
Posted by sk | January 23, 2007 1:03 AM