Category: Reviews

[rating:1]

(United States: Tyndale House Publishers, 2002, 2008.)

293 pgs

This book has been out for a couple of years now and so is not a new release. Nevertheless, due to its nature, I thought it might be good to review for the SLN. It is written to disturb people and it undoubtedly will. Frank Viola is the primary author, in partnership with George Barna. In a nutshell, the authors assert that practically everything the current church does is unbiblical and drawn from paganism, hence the title, “Pagan Christianity.”

This is not a new theme for Barna. In his book, Revolution, he wrote a scathing assault on the modern church and all but suggested that it be abandoned for a new form of church that he claimed was emerging. Viola backs up this effort with a sweeping study of every major practice in the church to repeatedly demonstrate that the practices so cherished by the modern church are nowhere to be found in the book of Acts.

You know that a book is going to transgress sacred beliefs when the publisher (Tyndale) actually includes a note at the beginning explaining why they agreed to publish a book that appears so condemnatory of the existing church.

Rather than evaluate this book page by page, I will focus on its key points and comment on the approach. It would take too much space to evaluate every argument put forth in the 293-page book.

First, it is helpful to critique current church practices. Much of what current churches do is unbiblical. So, I was intrigued with the title of this book and the approach it seemed to take. There are three general comments I would make at the outset of this review:

First, this critique is too sweeping. They argue: “”By contrast, a great number of the practices in many contemporary churches are in conflict with those biblical principles and teachings. When we dig deeper, we are compelled to ask: Where did the practices of the contemporary church come from? The answer is disturbing: Most of them were borrowed from pagan culture” (xix). Few would argue that worldly practices have crept into the church at various points. Yet the broad sweep that the authors argue that practically everything the church does is pagan, begins to seem like a stretch as the reader progresses through the material. Critiquing such things as the sermon as pagan, or churches being planted by people other than itinerant apostle-like leaders begins to sound like someone who is intent on thoroughly debunking the church with no stone left unturned.

Second, I am not familiar with Viola but one of the problems with Barna has been that he is neither a theologian nor a church historian. I suspect Viola isn’t either. Though they attempt to provide a wide-sweeping review of history, their footnotes reflect a heavy use of secondary sources. Likewise, the same sources are repeatedly cited. Clearly they have been influenced by a handful of radical writers and are now trumpeting their viewpoints. Despite the impressive looking footnotes at the bottom of the pages, closer examination leaves one with the impression that the writers have been unduly influenced by a couple of writers.

Third, after rejecting the existing church, the authors promote their own version entitled, “organic church.” They define this as: “simply a church that is born out of spiritual life instead of constructed by human institutions and held together by religious programs. Organic churches are characterized by Spirit-led, open-participatory meetings and non-hierarchical leadership)” (xix). The authors have a distinct vision of what the true church is like. It meets in homes and has no local leadership. They seem to feel that unless every person is actively speaking up in some way in the worship times, it is unbliblical. The authors do mention a couple of examples of attending such churches (though it does not appear that they promote such churches of which they are active members themselves), but they never mention a specific congregation. It comes across as extremely weak argumentation to criticize most existing churches and then to talk in vague terms of unnamed churches that get it right, as if the authors are protecting themselves from having their claims verified. The authors’ solution is a little too convenient. We have these idealized congregations described to us without any way of checking them out or visiting them. For people who have felt free to fire their broadsides at every church in their sites, it seems a little too easy to hide their own churches in a shroud of secrecy.

The following are a few statements I would challenge or question:

The authors begin by describing a fictional family that argues on the way to church and feels hypocritical dressing up to go to church on Sunday (3). The problem, it would seem, as they describe it, is not the nature of the church but the nature of people. The authors make it sound like people are bored and hypocritical attending traditional church but they would not feel that way if they participated in an organic church. They describe a family that argued on the way to church and now their spirits are not right as they sit in the service. Yet of course, it is naïve to suggest that people would not attend an organic church with improper motives or that people would not argue on the way to attend an organic church meeting. The primary issue is peoples’ hearts, not church structure. Of course we should be on the alert to do things as biblically as possible, but it is naïve to think the answer is structure.

I have participated in numerous church services where the Spirit of God worked powerfully and peoples’ lives were dramatically changed. To suggest that for the last 1600 years the church has been functioning incorrectly is to cause one to wonder how there are any genuine Christians in existence today. It makes me wonder what churches the authors have attended.

The authors claim that meeting in houses was a conscious choice of early Christians (15). This is clearly a stretch. The reason the early Christians met in homes was because their movement was persecuted and at times illegal. They were also generally drawn from the lower classes where money was sparse. To erect a building in the first century Roman Empire would have made it easy for officials to round up Christians for the local entertainment at the coliseum. As soon as Christianity was made legal, Christian churches began springing up everywhere.

The authors claim that early Christians avoided all contact with paganism (26). Clearly this is false. The first century world would not have been turned upside down if they had.

The authors argue that pews leave people as “mute spectators” (36). Certainly there are those who sit passively in church (in all churches). But pews were installed originally not to pacify the audience but so people could sit! There were elderly people in attendance. Certainly making church more comfortable is not clear evidence of introducing paganism into the church. Likewise, I am not sure which churches the authors have been participating in but pews are definitely on the way out in the majority of churches. The authors also argue that candles were introduced into the church from paganism (37). This seems to be a bit alarmist.

One of the chief concerns expressed is toward the sermon and the fact that the arrangement of pews forces people to look at the preacher rather than to each other. The authors suggest that people should be looking to Christ, the Head of the church, rather than to the preacher. Yet they equate looking at each other as looking to Christ. Anyone who has ever been distracted in church knows that it is far easier to be distracted when you are looking directly at other members versus looking to the front of the auditorium where the cross or other religious symbols are located.

The authors suggest that over 230 billion dollars of church assets are invested in church property that is generally used a few hours a week (41). Certainly this is a valid, though not a novel, comment. The authors go on to say there is not a “shred” of evidence in Scripture for church buildings (42). One problem is that the authors assume that everything in the Old Testament was cast aside once Christ came. The fact that Jesus regularly taught in the synagogues or that Paul made wide use of them seems unimportant. Synagogues could be founded any time there were ten Jewish men. This would have been the size of some homes. This was a place of teaching and regular meeting. While clearly the Church took on new forms, much of what was of value, such as regularly meeting for worship and instruction, continues to be important for Christians today.

The authors allege that the current Protestant order of worship comes largely from paganism (55). They also claim that the Puritans believed that the sermon was the primary way God spoke to people (62). Again, this seems a stretch. The Puritans upheld Scripture. What they did hold to was the biblical injunction of exhortation. Certainly the sermon is a powerful tool for encouraging people to obey what God told them in His word.

The authors charge much of public prayers with utilizing archaic King James English. This may have been true a generation ago, but again, such comments makes me wonder what churches the authors have been visiting lately. The authors state that the frontier revivalists focused exclusively on evangelism (65). Again, this shows a shallow knowledge of church history. The great revivals at Cane Ridge and frontier Kentucky occurred when itinerant preachers were preparing the people on the frontier to take communion. Their messages were on consecration for people presumably Christian who needed to prepare themselves before taking communion.

The authors also argue that many people in the church today are driven by pragmatism (67). They explain pragmatism as using whatever works “regardless of ethical considerations.” Clearly this is an exaggeration. Pragmatism in the church is often done without careful consideration of whether the behavior is biblical, but generally church leaders do not flippantly discard ethics just to build their numbers.

The authors claim that D.L. Moody was solely concerned with peoples’ conversion (70). Again, this is an exaggeration and demonstrates a weak knowledge of Moody. He was indeed the premier evangelist of his day, but even a cursory look at his life demonstrates a heart for more than evangelism. The authors also suggest that the first century Christians were not focused on reaching their world in their generation (71). This particular point seems a bit strange, especially in light of both how rapidly the church spread in the first century as well as the degree to which early Christians were willing to suffer to spread the Gospel.

The authors claim that Protestantism is highly individualistic and subjective (73). Interestingly their alternative is house churches where people simply begin sharing whatever song, or prayer, or poem, or thought comes into their mind. Perhaps one of the authors’ biggest complaints is that they believe verses such as 1 Corinthians 14:29 direct Christians to participate interactively in worship services (88). They suggest there should not be traditional sermons in services but rather, people should share what Christ puts in their heart and people should feel free to interrupt or ask questions. They argue that when people are not allowed to “preach” in traditional services, they are treated like “second class” members (98). They argue that Scripture exhorts each member to exercise their gifts and if they do not do so in the worship service, the church is not properly functioning. The truth is that not all of the gifts of the Spirit are public speaking gifts. People may have the gift of service or mercy and never speak a word in a public gathering. Yet they could be fully exercising their gifts. It is simply erroneous to think that every person must speak in a public worship gathering if the church is to function properly.

The authors debunk numerous other church practices such as ordination (123), paid clergy, and dressing up to go to church (148). That is an interesting one. In the authors’ eyes, dressing up to go to church is an effort to appear or to be “good” in the eyes of God (149-150). They completely neglect the reality that we, as creatures, are drawing near to worship our Creator. Surely there is room for preparing ourselves for such an encounter! Too often the authors suggest a church practice and create a straw man with particular motives only to deride those motives. This is not strong argument.

The authors also condemn the practice of tithing (171). They find an interesting antecedent back to feudal land leasing as the genesis of the church’s practice (177). Often, in such arguments, the authors’ footnotes suggest a strong dependency on limited and biased sources. Interestingly, the authors even condemn asking people to pray the sinner’s prayer (189). They believe that baptism was supposed to be the public confession of conversion. Yet is seems confusing how praying to repent of your sins and to be converted can be bypassed in favor of baptism. One would seem to lead to the next.

The authors also reject Sunday School, youth ministers, developing programs for teenagers apart from adults. They also argue that only itinerant church planters are biblically sanctioned to start churches. Finally, and almost comically, Viola argues that for 2,000 years Christian readers have been unable to understand the New Testament because they do not understand the order it was written or the context (239). Then he declares that finally it is possible due to recent studies. Then he footnotes a book he wrote himself! At this point in the book, the reader may well suspect that the authors believe that after 2000 years of the Church, Christianity has been blessed to have two wise Christians who have finally deciphered the Scriptures and now see how the Church is supposed to be run.

I began this book, curious at what these authors noticed in the modern church. I am not overly sensitive to those who critique the church. I am fully aware of many of its problems. But I have had a problem with George Barna ever since he wrote about “revolutionaries” who have rejected the traditional church. He writes as a sociologist with limited theological or biblical training. Viola attempted to conduct a thorough study of Church History but it becomes clear that he has a rather superficial knowledge of it as well.

I think this book simply goes too far. It certainly touches on issues where the church needs to be revived. Yet discounting everything the church does is too sweeping. Their solution is also dissatisfying. It may be one way to do church, but to suggest that it is the only way to do church is presumptuous. I think the authors touch on some areas that invite further investigation, but to charge so many church practices to paganism is too radical. I don’t recommend this book. It misrepresents history and Scripture and may be more confusing than helpful.

[rating:3]

( Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2009)

205 pgs

I enjoy listening to Crawford Loritts speak. He is always fresh and insightful. I recently had the opportunity to teach leadership with him for several days. He taught from this book and I was soon intrigued. For those of you who want a good book on Christian leadership, from someone who has done it for years, and who is honest about his own foibles and lessons learned, this is a good read.

Crawford worked for years for Campus Crusade and has spoken extensively around the world. Currently he is the senior pastor of Fellowship Bible Church in Roswell, GA. Interestingly, he taught a seminary-level class on leadership for years and used our book, Spiritual Leadership as his textbook.

Loritts states it well when he says: “. . . absolutely nothing of lasting value or significance will ever happen in life apart from leadership. Nothing is sustained or passed on from one generation to the next apart from leadership. God’s cause and purposes in human history is advanced through faithful, focused leadership” (10). He notes that, “there is no particular personality type that God singles out for leadership” (11).

Loritts suggests there are at least four common characteristics of leaders that can be found in people God uses. These are: brokenness, uncommon communion, servanthood, and radical, immediate obedience. Throughout the book he expands on these four qualities.

Loritts makes a number of great points, such as:

“And here’s the key: God’s priorities are so different, so supernatural, that only He can fulfill them . . . and he works predominantly through leaders who remember that truth” (25).

“There is always a gap between what you have and what God wants done . . . God loves to be depended on. So He gives imperfect, inadequate human beings impossible assignments” (40).

“Surrender is the leader’s response to brokenness” (43).

“The fact that you don’t feel qualified to do what you are doing may be the very reason why God has placed you where you are” (62).

“God is making a statement about Himself through the leadership assignments He gives you. And He does not want you to pollute what He is doing by relying on a counterfeit source, namely, yourself” (92).

“God is using what He has given you to do not only to accomplish His assignments but to make you what He wants you to become” (93).

“It’s a dangerous thing to follow a leader who has never failed . . . Unexamined failure teaches you nothing” (96).

“The Christian leader’s walk with God is always on display” (111).

“Dignity is God’s signature written on the soul of every human being” (146).

“I fear we are witnessing the erosion of the nobility of sacrifice” (161).

“We tend to project our negative experiences with authority onto God” (173).

“It is foolish to talk about courage apart from something that needs to be done” (190).

I enjoyed this book. Crawford has a great way with words. He not only is an outstanding leader himself, but he has been around a lot of great leaders. He also shares personal examples both of his successes, as well as his failures. I also liked this book because Loritts not only thinks deeply about leadership, but also biblically.

If you are looking for a good book on leadership from a strongly biblical perspective, you may enjoy this one.

[rating:3]

(San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2011)

173 pgs

Doug Conant is the CEO of the Campbell Soup Company. Since his arrival in 2001, Conant has brought a stop to his company’s decline and helped it to experience a significant turnaround in profitability and employee satisfaction. Previously Conant was an executive at General Mills, Kraft, and Nabisco. Mette Norgaard is a “teacher of leaders.” She is an expert on strategic leadership and learning and has worked with some of America’s largest companies. These two, a successful practitioner, and an innovative teacher, have partnered to produce this practical leadership book.

This book’s fundamental contribution is to focus on how leaders can maximize the numerous encounters they experience throughout the day with their staff and constituents. While these moments can often appear to be interruptions to their work, these authors suggest they are their work (xxxviii). They explain that “Touchpoints “describe the way that each of the many interactions leaders have with others during their workday gives them the chance to ‘touch’ someone: to influence, guide, provide clarity, inspire, create a sense of urgency, and shape the course of events” (xxix). The authors note: “Touch Points take place any time two or more people get together to deal with an issue and get something done” (2).

There are always three “variables” in a Touch Point: the issue, the other people, and the leader (3). “Every TouchPoint is spring-loaded with possibilities” (9). The authors note that using TouchPoints is “about gaining momentum instead of settling for compliance” (11). What makes these encounters so significant is that whatever you transmit in a TouchPoint is soon passed on to 5-6 other people directly associated with the person you dealt with (12). The key, the book states, is “to draw the line between not tolerating poor performance (which results in high standards) and not tolerating mistakes (which leads to compliance) (20). Readers are challenged that if they made twenty TouchPoints a week, they would experience 1,000 over the course of a year (24). What would be the impact on your organization if you had 1,000 meaningful encounters with those you led annually?

The authors suggest: “the average leader doesn’t change until the cost of not changing becomes greater than the cost of changing” (44). They also cite the insightful finding of Marshall Goldsmith that 70% of people judged themselves to be in the top 10% of their peers (88). Clearly there are people who are out of touch with their effectiveness!

The book has a helpful section on “Lead with Listening” (104ff). Clearly to experience meaningful encounters with those you lead, you must develop the ability to listen, and to hear what your people are saying. Interestingly, the authors encourage leaders to “forget about the PowerPoint slides and tell more stories” (116). Various studies continue to confirm that few things have the force of a well-told story.

There are three important aspects to a TouchPoint. First, we must listen intently. Then we must frame the issue. Third, we advance the agenda. All three are essential. Finally, the authors note that “ . . . when it comes to substantive issues, the final decision is seldom made in any one meeting” (134). For those of us who are driven to make decisions, this is probably good counsel. Overall, this book can be summed up with the question, “How can I help?”

This book addresses a significant issue in leadership: how to make your encounters with others significant. That is something I have been giving much thought to of late. Of course, Jesus was the Son of God, but do you notice how significant His encounters were? None were wasted! As a leader, how often do we leave people demoralized rather than inspired? How often do we waste an encounter by merely engaging in chit chat?

I found this book generally easy to read. It also focused on a specific leadership issue that drilled down into the subject. If there is a negative it might be that after a while you feel like the authors have made their point but still have more pages in the book to go. Nevertheless, this is a subject that every leader needs to be reminded of regularly. For those who may struggle with people skills or being inspiring or who regularly find themselves in conflict with others, this could be a good book to read next.

[rating:3]

(New York: Riverhead Books, 2009)

260 pgs

Daniel Pink addresses a subject that has intrigued me of late: why is it that some people seem motivated to excel and to make valuable contributions while others appear to be de-motivated and satisfied with mediocrity or worse? Pink writes this book from a secular, scientific standpoint. He cites numerous well-known behavioral studies. As with many secular studies, while it might not necessarily offer a definitive solution to humanity’s fundamentally spiritual needs, it does identify basic human needs that clearly are not being met in the ordinary work place.

Pink joins a growing trend of business writers who recognize that we are entering a post-Industrial age. The problem is that many businesses and organizations (including schools) are continuing to use industrial models to manage their people. Pink repeatedly laments that science has discovered truths about human nature that business and institutions such as schools have yet to properly adjust to.

Pink suggests that there are three fundamental levels of human motivation. The first, and most basic, is Motivation 1.0 This is our biological need for basics such as food and shelter. Unless these basic needs are met, the others will be superfluous (15). The second level of motivation involves what he describes as “carrots and sticks,” which are incentives of reward or avoiding punishment, labeled Motivation 2.0. Pink suggests that the Industrial Revolution used this motivational approach. Businesses and institutions assumed that people were unmotivated to work hard and had to be enticed through reward systems as well as monitored and supervised carefully so they did not slack off. The most common instrument of reward in the Industrialized Age was money. If you worked hard and were productive, you earned bonuses or pay raises. It was assumed that this monetary incentive was adequate to enlist desired performances.

Much of this Industrial Age thinking has been assumed as we have entered the age of the Knowledge Worker. Pink suggests we have entered the age of Motivation 3.0. Whereas Motivation 1.0 is an internal motivator (our grumbling stomach or parched, thirsty mouth), Motivation 2.0 is external in that it derives externally as someone dangles a carrot in front of us. Motivation 3.0 is internal. It appeals to our need for autonomy, mastery, and purpose.

Pink challenges conventional thinking on how to motivate people. He demonstrates through various studies that when people are offered money as a reward, their productivity can actually degenerate (8, 38). Further, in attempting to prevent negative behavior, applying punishments can actually encourage the very activity you are trying to discourage (51). Pink gives numerous examples such as citing the attempt to offer money in order to encourage more people to donate blood. What in fact occurred was that, once people were offered money for something they had been willing to give for free, they viewed their altruistic action as a job, and they were less attracted to do it. Pink also cites a study in Israel where parents were informed that they would henceforth be levied a small fine every time they were more than five minutes late to pick up their child. What in fact happened was that tardiness increased!

Pink notes that people have an innate desire for autonomy. As soon as it appears they do not possess this, motivation declines. He cites a study of artists whereby artists submitted ten paintings they had been commissioned to produce and ten they had created out of their own passion and enjoyment. An independent panel then judged the paintings without knowing anything of their background. Those paintings done autonomously were consistently rated much higher than those that had been commissioned by someone else.

Pink’s observation is that leaders must find ways to help their people work with as much autonomy as possible in order to develop mastery in their fields and to work with a sense of purpose. He notes that “profit maximization” cannot satisfy the way “purpose maximization” can (23). Pink also notes that goal setting can often produce undesired behavior (49). For example, if an auto repair company has a goal of a specific profit level, the mechanics will be tempted to overcharge or recommend unnecessary work in order to reach their goal. Schools often use the carrot and stick approach to learning, yet Pink demonstrates how this can often be demotivating and instead, merely encourage students to do what it takes to get ahead in the system.

Pink notes that performing algorithmic tasks that can be done mindlessly on an assembly line can be motivated to an extent with carrots and sticks. It takes little imagination or creativity and such tasks do not call for higher levels of creative and problem solving kinds of thought. However, Pink observes that much of today’s work calls for higher levels of thinking that finds new solutions and discovers new paradigms. To do this, one needs more than the possibility of a bonus. This heuristic thought is enhanced when people have the freedom to explore new possibilities without fear of punishment for not meeting quotas. Pink cites several extremely successful companies today such as Google that regularly allow their employees time to create new solutions and programs and to work on problems that they want to. Much of the best work being done by these companies is occurring when people are experiencing Motivation 3.0

Pink takes direct aim at modern management approaches. He notes that 33.7 million Americans presently telecommute to work at least once per week. He observes that the controlling, look-over-their-shoulder approaches to managing workers is becoming increasingly less easy or desirable to do (30).

He notes that traditional management looks for compliance and control (86). He notes that even the highly touted concept of “empowerment” is fundamentally “a slightly more civilized form of control” (90). He concludes: “In short, management isn’t the solution; it’s the problem. Perhaps it’s time to toss the very word ‘management’ onto the linguistic ash heap alongside ‘icebox’ and ‘horseless carriage.’ This era doesn’t call for better management. It calls for a renaissance of self-direction” (90).

Pink notes that money certainly is not bad. He suggests that employers pay their staff a decent wage so money is no longer an issue (33). He notes that once people are being paid a fair wage, money has more of a negative effect than positive when it comes to motivation. People will work for less money if they can have the autonomy to pursue projects that matter and that are personally fulfilling. Pink notes that rewards don’t work when they are “If-then.” That is, If you achieve these sales goals, then you will receive this bonus. Or if you do your chores, then you will be given your allowance. That is because when good behavior is purchased, we no longer do it for the intrinsic value of doing our best or contributing to a greater purpose than ourselves. Instead, our time and labor have been purchased and we are no longer masters of our own destiny, which is inherently demotivating (65).

Pink also distinguishes between Type A and B people and what he labels Type I (76). These are people who are driven by Motivation 3.0. Pink concludes: “We’re not designed to be passive and compliant. We’re designed to be active and engaged” (145). He notes that our current system in schools and business dumb people down to just following the rules and not standing out as being different. Interestingly, he also notes that at times, people who are merely driven to achieve their personal goals discover that they do not satisfy. Citing scientific research he writes: “’These findings are rather striking,’ the researchers write, ‘as they suggest the attainment of a particular set of goals [in this case profit goals] has no impact on well-being and actually contributes to ill-being’ . . the findings suggest that even when we do get what we want, it’s not always what we need” (142).

Pink’s book is divided into two parts. The first 145 pages lay out the tenets of his approach to motivation. The remaining pages are a “Toolkit” with various articles and materials for those who want to dig deeper into this subject.

I found this to be an interesting book. It surveys a number of behavioral studies and experiments I was familiar with, but he applied them specifically to the crucial field of motivation. He reminds me somewhat of Seth Godin in terms of his view of today’s workplace. He also utilizes interesting studies similarly to Malcolm Gladwell (who endorses this book).

I think every leader needs to rethink how they are motivating those they lead. This may be especially true for people who lead nonprofits. When we cannot offer money as a reward, we must be sure we are providing something of even higher value to those who volunteer their precious time. It was interesting to see how our commonly used methods of offering rewards and incentives to school children or even our staff could actually hinder the very behavior we are attempting to encourage.

Of course, being a secular book, there are times where you feel that he is observing the symptoms but cannot fully recommend the cure. He does not touch on the spiritual dimension of peoples’ lives, although this is becoming increasingly recognized as a major source of personal fulfillment today. This is not a long read as much of the page count is devoted to the toolkit. Because it is such a specialized focus, I won’t rate it as a 4 or 5. Nevertheless, it does address a subject of growing importance in leadership theory today and one that might well be worth giving some attention to in the days ahead.

[rating:3]

(New York: Portfolio, 2010)

244 pgs

Seth Godin takes a unique approach to things. He is a philosopher who makes you think about what you do and how you do it. In this book, Godin argues that the Industrialized Age has depended upon factories making large numbers of commodities at the cheapest price. In an assembly line, people were merely “cogs” who could easily be replaced. The key to personal success was fitting in. Even the school systems prepared people to fit in to the system. However, Godin argues: “Being good in school is a fine skill if you intend to do school forever” (33). Godin suggests that today we have the freedom to become “artists.” Godin defines art as “a personal gift that changes the recipient” (84).

Godin suggests that the recent economic downturn and high unemployment revealed how precarious it is to be a faceless “cog” in the industrial machinery. When times get tough, it is easy to let thousands of interchangeable employees go. The key to thriving in today’s world is to become an indispensable “Linchpin.” These are people who creatively produce gifts of their art that are valued by others. Godin argues: “It’s time to stop complying with the system and draw your own map. Stop settling for what’s good enough and start creating art that matters” (3).

Godin argues: “Our society is struggling because during times of change, the very last people you need on your team are well-paid bureaucrats, note-takers, literalists, manual readers, TGIF laborers, map followers, and fearful employees. The compliant masses don’t help so much when you don’t know what to do next” (7-8). Today, he suggests, the cheapest is not always going to be the best. The world is looking for creativity, passion, honesty, and caring. Employers desperately need people who will passionately go beyond their job description to develop answers for today’s problems. Godin notes: “Now the only way to grow is to stand out, to create something worth talking about, to treat people with respect and to have them spread the word” (26). Godin contrasts the difference between customer service representatives and flight attendants who go the extra mile compared with those who mindlessly follow their script. People who go the extra mile always stand out and are a blessing to the human spirit.

Godin challenges people to consider what they can be passionate about and to invest their life in it. He laments the phrase: “A day’s work for a day’s pay.” He retorts: “Are you really willing to sell yourself out so cheap? Do you mortgage an entire (irreplaceable) day of your life for a few bucks?” (87). He argues that a “cogs” stands and waits for their next instructions (76). People with passion, on the other hand, look for ways to make things happen (92). Godin notes: “The problem with meeting expectations is that it’s not remarkable” (69). The challenges the world is facing today, requires people to accomplish the remarkable and to share their gift with humanity.

Godin gives you much to think about in this book. I am intrigued by how many people are going to work every day, hating their job and counting the days until retirement. I am also concerned with how much mediocrity permeates society. Godin suggests that genius lies within each person at some level. Peoples’ gift to society is to discover their art and to share it. Godin gives some practical advice that I found helpful. He is a prolific author and he suggests that it does not matter what we are good at or passionate about if we do not “ship” our product (103). That is, we must meet deadlines. There are people with Pulitzer Prize winning books on their laptops that will be of no good to anyone because they will never make it to a publisher. “Shipping” is getting the product into the hands of people who can use it. Godin notes that there are a thousand distractions that will keep you from doing what is most important. He notes that activities like checking e-mail or Facebook or Twitter become obsessive to him whenever he has an important deadline looming (134). He suggests an “Internet Fast” where you set aside such distractions until you complete whatever important work you need to accomplish. He also suggests that you seek to produce one important work per year (135). At times, in our effort to accomplish much, we never achieve anything important. Godin also recommends: “Don’t listen to cynics. They’re cynics for a reason” (126).

Godin notes that sometimes the concept of “teamwork” is merely a means of controlling and repressing those free spirits who could bring an entirely new perspective on a problem (153). He also notes that leadership is not a gift. It is a skill that can be learned (48). He concludes: “You’re gifted. But you may not be gifted at what you are doing right now” (226).

Godin is not a Christian and this is not a Christian book. It is, in that regard, a humanistic book that believes in the power of the individual. That said, he has observed symptoms in people that are acute. Too many of us are acting extremely ordinary. We behave like the cogs in the machinery industrialists like Henry Ford created. We clamor for others to find answers to our problems. We wait to be led. We don’t nurture those God-given talents and passions within us, because they are not our job or we do not know how we could make money from them. Godin is correct: the world is changing. Those who keep hoping the world will eventually settle back down to being like it once was are sadly deluded. Society is waiting for those people willing to step up, stand out, and make a difference.

For those who like to have their thinking challenged, especially concerning how the world is functioning today, this will be an interesting read. As with all secular books, you ought to read this one with a Bible close at hand. The world often sees the symptoms but it does not necessarily have the proper solutions. In this case I believe the key to becoming a Linchpin is understanding that God is looking throughout for those He can strongly support, who will make a difference in their day (2 Chronicles 16:9). Godin asks a good question: Are you indispensable?

[rating:2.5]

(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010)

194 pgs

God’s people need to be reminded about God’s mighty deeds of old and inspired to seek God’s mighty deeds in the present. Hansen and Woodbridge have provided us with an interesting book on historical revivals. This small book cover revivals from North America, Wales, India, Korea, East Africa, and China. The book seems well researched and many original letters, sermons, and documents are reviewed. The authors try to present us with a wide-sweeping overview of God’s activity throughout the ages and conclude that there are no standardized approaches or procedures that elicit revivals as each one seems unique in their own way. In other words, God moves in response to specific people in specific places as He chooses rather than in response to some formula or technique people follow to cause Him to send His Spirit.

I am not so sure this book is about “God-sized visions” as it is about “revival stories”. Lengthy passages detailing past revivals are informative and even inspiring as God responded in the past to the prayers of His people in various locations around the world. In fact, this could be a primer for a college class on revivals and spiritual awakening, but there are many such good books already on the market.  Regarding “God-sized vision” the authors write, “In this tour of revival stories, we’ve seen how a diverse cast of men and women with a ‘God-sized vision’ have been used as catalysts for true, divinely inspired awakenings.” They conclude their book defining a ‘God-sized vision” as understanding that “gaining knowledge of God precedes gaining knowledge of man…it calls us to completely reorient our frame of reference through which we look at the world…A God-sized vision helps us to understand that the Lord really does love us and care for us. He provides for us. The doctrine of God’s providence gives us both courage and comfort” (P. 181). I am not convinced their definitions match the meaning of “God-sized” vision. I see how people pled with God for His Spirit to move in a mighty way, and how they truly sought Him through personal confession, repentance, and unceasing prayers. But the people and the revivals described in the book seem more to do with humility, devotion, personal sacrifice, and persistence than a grand vision.

If you are looking for a short summary of various revivals around the world, this book will do just fine. It is not an exhaustive treatment, but does offer a few insights I had not remembered reading previously. Having travelled through East Africa, I was interested in reading the accounts of revival and an honest look at its failure to prevent the genocide in Rwanda. There are some great quotes from these chapters. “Revival doesn’t come to respectable Christians…The basis of revival is men and women shattered by their failures – aware that all is not well, helpless to do anything about it.” (p. 133), and “Revival can never supplant the need for consistent, faithful teaching and discipleship. Without this follow-up plan, revival can promote mountaintop spirituality ill equipped to survive the valleys of life.” And, “the Revival doctrine of sin underestimates the power and depth of evil, and by focusing on personal/private morality is quite inadequate to tackle the hideous strength of structural evil and corporate sin manifested in an act of genocide.” (p. 135)

As much as this book reads somewhat like an adapted research paper, I certainly appreciate the research and work these two men have put into writing this book for us, but somehow I was hoping, perhaps even longing for more. There didn’t seem to be any bite at the end, only a fairly standard recommendation for achieving the ever-elusive revival. I have read many books on revival that are more lengthy and have greater detail, and all of them seem to have come to the same conclusion. They say in their own way what Hansen and Woodbridge recommend as we seek revival in our own ministries, that we are to Persist in Prayer, Repent from Sin, Preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and Serve God with Boldness (p. 182-185). I was hoping for a challenge, an exhortation, a rebuke, or something to bring conviction that we are falling short of what it takes. I have heard the quote over and over again, “The world has yet to see what God can do through one man wholly yielded to Him”, and I want to cry out, “Then quit quoting that and start doing it! Stop making everyone else feel guilty if you are not willing to be that person yourself.” So admittedly my bias is to not have another book on revival, but to have a fresh demonstration of God’s transformational power for the world to see. I would prefer to hear quoted a thousand times the prayer, “Lord bring a revival, and let it begin in me.” May we not only recall the mighty work of God in the days of old, but may we experience the fresh anointing and move of the Spirit of God in our presence today!

[rating:3.5]

(Colorado Springs: Multnomah Books, 2010)

231 pgs

(David Platt is the pastor of The Church at Brook Hills, a four-thousand member congregation in Birmingham, Alabama)

Although this is not a leadership book, per se, it has wide reaching implications for leaders who wish to take their church to a new level. In this book Platt invites us to join him on a journey where he attempts to answer two questions:

1. Was I going to believe Jesus?

2. Was I going to obey Jesus?

Platt spends most of his time identifying cultural issues in the American church that run against the Biblical teachings of Christ. He points out how we have watered down Christ’s mandate to take up our cross, we have made Christianity a social club void of any significant commitments or sacrifice, and we have settled with receiving rather than multiplying our faith in others.

His challenge to the “American Dream” is well noted and he does a good job of pointing out the disparity between the life of Christ and the life of the average American Christian in churches today.

“Biblical proclamation of the gospel beckons us to a much different response and leads us down a much different road. Here the gospel demands and enable us to turn form our sin, to take up our cross, to die to ourselves, and to follow Jesus…salvation now consists of a deep wrestling in our souls with the sinfulness of our hearts, the depth of our depravity, and the desperation of our need for his grace. Jesus is no longer one to be accepted or invited in but one who is infinitely worthy of our immediate and total surrender.” P. 39

Platt observes that the vast majority of Christians have failed miserably in following the Great Commission (Matt. 18:19-20) in that they are not making reproducible disciples, or disciples of any kind. We sit, observe, appreciate, enjoy, and go home without any thought that we are to be making disciples ourselves. In many contemporary worship services, “some people have their Bibles open, while others don’t have a bible with them. A few people are taking notes, but for the most part they are passively sitting in the audience. While some are probably disengaged, others are intently focused on what the preacher is saying, listening to God’s Word to hear how it applies to their lives. But the reality is, few are listening to reproduce.” (p. 102)

Platt further urges that our priorities are selfish, self-centered, and void of compassion for the hurting, the hungry, and the needing around the world. He points out a denomination newsletter that proclaimed victory in that 23 million dollars was raised for a new sanctuary for a First Baptist church, while across the page a small article mentioned that five thousand dollars was raised to help feed 350,000 refugees in western Sudan. “That’s not enough to get a plane into Sudan, much less one drop of water to people who need it. Twenty-three million dollars for an elaborate sanctuary and five thousand dollars for hundreds of thousand of starving men, women, and children, most of whom were dying apart form faith in Christ. Where have we gone wrong? How did we get to the place where this is actually tolerable?” (p. 16)

Platt concludes his search for answers to his two questions with five challenges and one year to carry them out:

1. pray for the entire world
2. read through the entire Word
3. sacrifice your money for a specific purpose
4. spend your time in another context
5. commit your life to a multiplying community

It is easy to point out faults and flaws with the church today, many have. But Platt actually puts his own church on notice and demonstrates for us what it will look like to live out this challenge. He is not all talk and all finger-pointing; he is action. He lives out what he preaches. He walks the talk.

In regards to leadership, Platt shows what a leader of God’s people can accomplish when they live by conviction rather than program. Platt puts his career and his reputation on the line for the sake of the Gospel. What is fascinating is how he was not fired by his mega-church for being so radical and “in your face” with his convictions as a pastor. They chose to follow this leader even though many of them would end up sacrificing their savings accounts, changing vocational directions, and giving up long-held dreams for a comfortable life in the US. Influencing people to sacrifice is not unusual, but they need something worthwhile to buy in to. Platt’s book does this. I will be interesting to see the follow-up book as they are still in their trial year.

This book is well-written, easy to follow and offers challenging thoughts. However, I wish there was more attention given to seeking God himself, spending time in concerted prayer times, and seeking God’s will rather than simply committing to five challenges. Although there is nothing wrong with these five challenges, it would be a mistake for Christians to think this is what God is asking of them. Like every revelation God gives a person, one shoe does not fit all Christians (unless it is from God’s book). There is a danger to settle for accepting Platt’s challenge rather than discerning for yourself what God is asking of you personally. He may have 8 challenges for you or 3, but they will be tailor-made for what He wants to do in your life, and not just jumping onto the next band-wagon that comes through town. I do not disagree with Platt’s challenges, but there is a danger of following another man’s idea of what pleases God rather than checking in with God Himself.

[rating:2]

(San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010)

220 pgs

Talk about an attention getter! This title is right up there! I like Lencioni. His books on meetings and the dysfunctions of a team are great. For those who have read his previous books, you are aware he writes in fables. This is not a detailed outline of leadership principles, but an entertaining story that makes you think. This particular style is not for everyone. Yet many people are driven by stories and for those who are, they will most likely enjoy his writing.

This particular book seems to drive home one basic thought: that those in the service industry must be relentlessly and unashamedly customer focused. He tells a great story in this book. It is humorous and suspenseful. I am sure many people will be able to relate to it. He also addresses an extremely relevant issue today: with the economy still far from robust, how do you enlist and keep clients? What makes this book unique in this series is that it describes Lencioni’s own business and draws heavily from his own experience.

While I like Lencioni and enjoy his style, I thought this book did not really offer as much material to take away as some of his other books. While being customer focused is crucial, much of his material seems somewhat self-evident. His “three fears” is his unique contribution, but even these do not strike me as profound new insights. I think this book would be a helpful read for those in the service industry. However, I think this particular book has more limited usefulness than some of his other books. As a result, I only rated it with a 2. For those seeking more detailed answers for their leadership questions, this is probably not the first book you ought to grab.

[rating:3]

(New York: W.W. Horton and Company, 2010)

276 pgs

Nicholas Carr has written a thoughtful, insightful, well-researched, and somewhat alarming book on the effect the Internet is having on society. We are all familiar with studies that show a correlation between such things as the use of video games and teen violence, or childhood obesity. But this study goes much deeper and in many ways is more disturbing. It suggests that the widespread use of the Internet today is changing the way our brains work. He presents a lot of compelling evidence.

Carr begins by citing Marshall McLuhan who famously wrote, “The medium is the message” (2).  He goes on to argue that computers which have been designed to make our lives easier, have begun to shape our lives and even change the physical nature of our brains. He argues, “The computer screen bulldozes our doubts with its bounties and conveniences. It is so much our servant that it would seem churlish to notice that it is also our master” (4).

Carr delves into far more science than this history major is used to reading. However, he draws out the findings of numerous scientific studies that demonstrate some troubling realities. He notes that our brains physically adapt to the kind of thinking we are doing. For example, it has been demonstrated that taxi drivers have a more developed area of the brain that is used to remember spatial information and to navigate distances. However, with the increasing use of GPS devices, that part of taxi driver’s brains is actually decreasing as it is no longer needed to the same degree.

Another study was done measuring peoples’ brains. Half the group was skilled at surfing the Internet, the other half were not. The experienced group’s brains all demonstrated greater development in the area that is related to such skills. Yet in only five days of practice, the novices’ brains had adjusted and changed through practice. Amazingly, scientists saw that the brain had physically changed in only five days of regular exposure to the Internet (121).

Carr points out that the development of reading dramatically changed society from an oral culture to a literary one (53). He notes “The written word liberated knowledge from the bounds of individual memory and freed language from the rhythmical and formulaic structures required to support memorization and recitation” (57). He concludes: “The achievements of the western world, it is obvious, are testimony to the tremendous values of literacy” (57). Our brains have been traditionally developed around reading and writing. However, that is now changing.

Carr notes that the natural state of the brain is to be distracted (63). It takes discipline to read deeply and thoughtfully. Yet he argues that such deep thought brings deep insight. He suggests: “To read a book was to practice an unnatural process of thought, one that demanded sustained, unbroken attention to a single, static object” (64). “’Deep reading . . . is by no means a passive exercise.’ The reader becomes the book” (74).

Carr then cites numerous studies that reveal what we know intuitively, that the Internet is designed to constantly interrupt and distract our mind rather than to allow it to focus deeply on subject. He quotes numerous people, some who are authors and college students, who confess they have great difficulty reading an entire book any more. They have become so used to blog-length articles or computer screen lengths of text, that to flip through 300 pages seems like an eternity. Furthermore, the Internet text is filled with hyperlinks so that after less than a paragraph, you can click on the link and transfer to a related cite with interesting, new material that also has hyperlinks that take you still further from your original text. An hour later you have barely dealt with the text at hand but in the mean time you have glanced through several other articles, checked several incoming e-mails, read several Facebook messages, and ordered a new magazine from Amazon. The Internet is a master at distraction! What is most alarming is not that the Internet does this as much as that our brains are being re-wired so that we come to depend on this and to be unable to turn our focused attention on the traditional exercise of actually reading a book, thoughtfully.

Carr cites studies that demonstrate that our “working memory” can only retain up to seven items (124). After that, items are lost. Yet the typical computer screen is flashing various alerts and incoming messages to us constantly while we scan its pages. Interestingly, he mentions studies that show that students who were exposed to audiovisual presentations actually remembered less of the material than those who simply read from a book (131). He also notes that studies have shown that people who read Internet text typically read less than 18% of what is on a page (135). This, even when doing academic research. He concludes: “Once a means to an end, scanning is becoming an end in itself” (138). We are becoming a people who merely scan texts without thinking deeply about them.

Multitasking has become so prevalent today that it is having a profound impact on how we think. He notes: “What we are doing when we multitask ‘is learning to be skilled at a superficial level’” (141). Even more troubling, “Intensive multitaskers are ‘suckers for irrelevancy’” (142).  Carr explains how our mind transfers short term memory into long term memory. This is best done when we focus. Of course, the nature of the Internet is to distract us. Again, he argues that the Internet is preventing us from remembering the same amount of information we retain when we carefully read a book.

Carr also challenges the modern assumptions that the Internet, with its vast store of related sites and links makes the educational process far more effective. It seems archaic to ask modern students to memorize passages when Google can find whatever they want instantly. Yet he concludes: “We don’t constrain our mental powers when we store new memories. We strengthen them. With each expansion of our memory comes an enlargement of our intelligence” (192).  He argues forcefully that the nature of the Internet is actually dumbing down our brains. He cites studies that demonstrate that students who solved problems with high-tech software actually retained less information and understanding than those who had less computer assistance. He concluded: “The brighter the software the dimmer the user” (216). He also notes that with the prevalence of search engines such as Google, today, research is made easier in many ways. However, search engines “Tend to serve as amplifiers of popularity” (217). Rather than taking researchers to obscure sites and lesser-known articles, it takes you to the place most often travelled by other researchers. Again, our tools are determining what we learn and how we learn it. He suggests: “We program our computers and thereafter they program us” (214).

Finally, he demonstrates how the Internet is even affecting our emotions. He shows how our minds can only process so much information at once. If we do not have time to reflect on information, we cannot determine how we feel about the data. We do not focus long enough to form an educated opinion. As a result, we are accustomed to surface reading and surface feeling. He warns: “We shouldn’t allow the glories of technology to blind our inner watch dog to the possibility that we’ve numbed an essential part of our self” (212).

This book is not for everyone. It is filled with scientific studies that may take you past your biological and technological expertise (as it quickly did for me!). Carr also comes from an evolutionary perspective. At times he can sound like an alarmist.

However, it would be naïve to assume that the prevalent use of the Internet and electronic media is not having an effect on us. Just think about your own reading habits. When was the last time you read a 400+ page book on a serious subject? Are you reading more Online than from physical pages these days? When was the last time you read an article or book that pushed your level of understanding and knowledge? Leaders must be thinkers. We must solve problems. And, today’s problems require more than shallow, surface thinking. Could it be that, with all the benefits that result from technology, that it is also enslaving us to a level where we no longer are able to think as deeply as we need to? Could our tools be in the process of becoming our master? This is an interesting book and one that raises some provocative questions.

[rating:2]

(Carol Stream, Illinois: Tyndale House, 2010)

230 pgs

I don’t read a lot of sports-related leadership books. I generally find them to be relatively surface level as far as leadership insights go and more anecdotal about famous sports characters we all like to know the inside story about. Generally I found this book to fall into this genre.

That said, I do respect Tony Dungy. He is clearly a sincere Christian who has experienced success and is highly thought of. He has managed to maintain his integrity both in professional football as well as on television.  His agreeing to mentor Michael Vick after his jail time for animal abuse showed real character and courage.

For the most part I did not find anything in this book on leadership that was particularly insightful or unusually deep. What did attract me to this book was his focus on mentoring. Dungy suggests that it is possible to lead without mentoring (117). But mentoring is adding value into peoples’ lives (193). He suggests that ultimately, the most important thing in life is relationships (5).

Dungy gives numerous examples from football, especially from his time with the Pittsburgh Steelers as well as when he was a coach at Tampa Bay and Indianapolis. For those who follow the NFL, this provides great insights into well-known athletes and coaches.

However, although there are obviously some great leadership principles inherent in guiding a football team, I have always felt like much of the thinking that comes out of football somehow carries the feeling of a pep rally. At the end of the day you are trying to motivate and organize highly paid athletes to get a pig skin across a line more times than the opposition does (Hopefully this is not showing my bias for hockey too much!).

Some statements by Dungy could be challenged. Such as that Jesus sought to get the “right” people around him. Obviously Judas would not have fit in that category! Nor were the rest of the disciples particularly noteworthy. In reality, Jesus made those men the “right” kind of people! I am sure Dungy would agree with that, as he advocates mentoring. Dungy also classifies “character” as a competency. I am not sure I would use the same categories as Dungy.

He does note that we are all serving as a role model for someone. He also places great emphasis on investing our lives intentionally into other people. That resonated with me. At times we can be so busy getting our own jobs done, that we neglect the invaluable investment of helping others achieve their maximum potential. I was challenged by his descriptions of veteran athletes who help out rookies even though they realize that the rookie will one day be challenging them for their own job. That shows real character and a concern for others.

Dungy adopts Maxwell’s definition of “Leadership is influence” which I have always felt was inadequate. Dungy clearly has thought much about leadership and has demonstrated it. But generally he adopts the teachings of popular leadership authors without seeming to critique them very deeply. I believe his focus on investing in people is sound and needed. I have always been uneasy about the concept of “mentoring” for at least two reasons. For one, it is not a biblical term. That in itself is not crucial, neither are many other things that are helpful for Christians to practice. But secondly, traditional mentoring involves one person teaching and training another, one on one. I don’t think one on one teaching over time is a healthy biblical model. Traditionally, discipleship was done in groups. Even the apostle Paul noted that he had taught Timothy in the presence of others (2 Timothy 2:2). The problem with one on one is that you can share your strengths with someone else, but you will invariably also pass on your weaknesses and blind spots. That is why it is better to have more people in the process, so others can make up for where you may lack.

That said, Dungy is not really presenting a book describing the traditional model of one on one mentoring. He seems to be focusing on the mindset of investing ourselves into others whenever the opportunity arises. With that, I can fully agree.

This is the kind of book you read when you need something a bit lighter than the heavier fare we have reviewed in these pages. If you are a football fan, you’ll enjoy the numerous stories you would expect from such a book. If you have not given much thought to mentoring, this may encourage you to be more intentional about it.

Overall this would not add a lot of new information to your leadership library but you may still want to read it to be encouraged by how one high profile person has consciously chosen to share what God has given him with others.