At the outset I would like to say that these thoughts on leadership are not about "them" and what "they" ought to be but about us (me) and what we (I) must be if we are going to be faithful to what God has called us (me) to be. Also what I will be saying is not about a particular layer of leadership because every reader is to some extent or another a leader because leadership is ultimately about influence.

These thoughts on leadership are not about leadership in the sense of leadership as a genre. The terms of reference will be Seventh-day Adventist leadership. I say this because if we are only talking about leadership per se then we could use as our examples Lee Iacocca, who some years ago is credited with leading the Chrysler Corporation out of bankruptcy, or Bill Gates the founder of the Microsoft Corporation.

Furthermore these thoughts will not be about Christian leadership per se, or we could use Bill Hybels, the pastor of the Willow Creek Community Church or Rick Warren, the pastor of the Camel Back Community church as models of leadership. These thoughts will be about leadership in the context of being a Seventh-day Adventist leader in the 21st century.

This is important because I once heard someone say that the adjective that we use to describe ourselves is who we really are. Let me explain. If I say that I am a male Christian. It means that I put my maleness first. If I say I am a white Christian it means I put may race first. How we describe ourselves as leaders reveals the leader we are. To describe ourselves simply as leaders is not enough. It is essential that when we talk among ourselves on the subject of leadership that we qualify it by adding the words Seventh-day Adventist.

As I begin this article I must share a deep conviction and that is if we as leaders ever come to the place when we no longer believe in the 28 doctrines of faith of the our church we have a moral and ethical responsibility to find employment elsewhere. I believe that if the time should ever come when I as a Seventh-day Adventist minister no longer subscribe to what this church teaches, I am at that time, no longer a Seventh-day Adventist minister and should resign. Some may not agree, but if I worked for a company and found myself no longer loyal to its policies, there is little doubt in my mind the company would make sure that I moved on.

As a church we have a mission. This mission is not just a mission or any mission, but it is a pre-defined mission. Our mission is our message and the purpose of the message of this church is to prepare a holy people to meet a Holy God. Whatever else that we are doing that is not fulfilling that mission is not relevant nor is it the raison d'etre for which our church was raised up. It is critical that as we emphasize the importance of fulfilling our mission that we don't take for granted that everyone knows what the mission is. In the church of the 21st century we must take nothing for granted. In past generations becoming a Seventh-day Adventist was not something that usually happened in a ten-day reaping meeting. Those who became members of the church had more than a passing knowledge of what being a Seventh-day Adventist was all about. In recent years however, significant numbers of those who are joining the church often have little practical knowledge of the significance of the commitment that they have made.

There is among us as leaders an oft-heard debate as to whether in our evangelistic preaching we should emphasis the "doctrines" or the "gospel". Inasmuch as the Cross is, in and of itself a doctrine, there is potentially something more fundamental taking place in the discussion. I hope I am mistaken, but I suspect that the real issue among us as leaders- evangelists, pastors, and administrators, is how much of our unique Seventh-day Adventist doctrines shall we preach and promote.

Some will doubtless disagree, but in our enthusiasm to grow the church we have turned to leaders in the evangelical circles who though they preach a gospel it is not a relevant gospel because it is not one that is preparing a living people to meet a living God. Nevertheless, as leaders we have admired their church growth and have invited their experts to teach us how they do it. To put it frankly, we have as Seventh-day Adventist leaders become followers of the leaders of other faiths which are shot through with fundamental error.. These men and women have taught us the secrets of their success but they have often left something that we didn't request and that was their view of what constitutes the Gospel.

Though we could hope it weren't true, the leaders of the first day churches have a vested interest in seeing the church that God raised up with a special message for the last days of earth's history put out of business at worse or at least emasculated. The impact of the Three Angel's Message on the first day churches can easily be seen by them as being seditious- after all our message does teach that they are Babylon.

As leaders of a church with a message we must never forget that our unique message was not given to members of the Seventh-day Adventist church. Our founding fathers and mothers were pork-eating Sunday keepers. They were totally committed to the Lord Jesus Christ and their names were written in heaven. The Three Angels message would not give them salvation but it would ensure that they didn't lose their salvation in the time just before the close of probation when there would be deceptions so well crafted that it would deceive if possible the very elect. Let me put it another way. The message that God so gracious gave to this church would not be so much to save the lost ( John Wesley's message did that) as it would keep the saved from being lost.

I smiled when I heard a friend of mine once say, "There go the people. I must follow them for I am their leader." Later I read that there is no such thing as a leaderless society. Someone is always leading. If it is not the ones who are the appointed leaders it will be someone else. I mention this because as leaders we need to ask ourselves the question who is really leading our church at the present time. Is it we who have been called to lead our have we as leaders surrendered our leadership to others and in effect have become instead of leaders, followers.

During the past twenty five years or so the gold standard of attainment in our church is to somehow become an administrator. To be a church administrator is seen by many to be the pinnacle of success in Adventist ministry.

There is no doubt that administration is a necessary function in the church. Administration is after all organization -- in the strictest sense of the word we must all administer even our own lives.

The question, however, is administration the same as leadership? Put another way; Is an administrator automatically a leader and conversely are successful leaders always necessarily effective administrators?

The reason I am concerned is that though we may be efficient administrators there is the ever-present danger that the leadership of the church has in reality passed to other hands. To cut to the chaise, those who are the true leaders are those who are casting the vision. As the appointed leaders we must ask ourselves the question, who are the real leaders of our church? Remember the little ditty, "There go the people, I must follow them for I am their leader".

Some years ago I was talking with a colleague of mine in the conference office. We were discussing our roles as directors of departments. He shared with me that when he sat around the ADCOM table he was there to represent his particular assigned constituency. I don't think he is alone in his perception of what he is supposed to do. In my many years of ministry at nearly every level of the church organization I noticed that those around the table were often interested in little more than how the particular topic under discussion would affect either them or the constituency that they represented.

While this may be how it is suppose to work in the House of Representatives, I do not believe that it is what being a leader of the church of God is about. Though I sit at my desk and serve a defined constituency, when I sit at the larger table, my interest as a leader in the cause of God must be to a larger picture; one that even transcends the larger constituency. After all, although we were chose by men and women to be their leaders we are first and foremost called of God to represent Him and the interest of the kingdom of heaven.

If you will excuse me digressing here and I do so with tongue in cheek, you have noticed that at constituency meetings it is customary to appoint a Parliamentarian. This person assures that the meeting conforms to parliamentary procedure- usually using as reference Robert's Rules of Order. I have often wondered if we would do well to have another parliamentarian at our constituency, yea at all of our administrative counsels to assure that what we are deciding is in harmony with the Word of God!

Earlier I mentioned that we are chosen by a particular constituency to be its leaders. About the time of constituency meeting it is not unusual for a leader to become nervous as to whether or not they will be re-elected. It is my conviction that as leaders in the church of God we must not be as concerned if we are pleasing our constituency as we are if we are pleasing Him who has called us to lead His church. And we need to remind ourselves from time to time that it will be fatal to us and to those we have been called to lead, if our leadership is directed toward those whom the Bible describes as having 'itching ears.'

Undoubtedly, one of the greatest concerns we have as leaders is our young people. We have more than an organizational interest inasmuch as we are not only leaders of the church but parents and grandparents as well. Some years ago I wrote a book entitled, Lord, Keep Your Mansions, Just Save My Children. Betty and I have four children and eight grandchildren. One of our children at this time is out of the faith.

The question therefore is not do we want our children and the youth of this church to be saved. Rather the question that faces us as leaders is how will this be accomplished?

I was talking with a youth leader. He said, "Dick, we must take you the church of yesterday, with us the church of today and together we will forge the church of tomorrow. " Calling him by name, I said, I am the church of today.

If we are to see our youth saved we must not just see them as the church of tomorrow. If we do we may, without realizing it, create a new church that is not the church that God has ordained that it should be. It is possible- God forbid- that we could create a church for tomorrow that had little in common with the Church as we know it- a wash out of the message without which we have no reason to exist.

It has been announced that the Toyota Motor company is soon to be the largest automobile manufacturing company in the world. This was accomplished by them raising the standard, not lowering it for car manufacturing. I am convinced that if we are to see our youth saved, we must resist the temptation to lower the standard of the Christian life. We could concievely lower the bar, as it were, to the point that we no longer needed Jesus to jump over it!

There is an implicit and explicit pressure on Adventist leadership and those who are applying this pressure have taken hostages- our young people. The message is clear and it is that unless we lower the standards and play down the doctrines we will be responsible for our children leaving the church. Friend, I have more faith than to believe this. Though I have a son out of the faith, I believe that God can and will save him without us as leaders having to give a discount on the message that this church has been called to give to the final generation.

As leaders we are not making history, we are repeating it. Our friends in the evangelical churches seem to be having the success that we thought the Lord had promised to us. You may disagree, but well-intentioned or not, our colleagues in the first day churches are not preaching a message that will prepare a people for the close of probation and for the time of trouble. They have fatal errors in their teachings that will cause those who persist in them to lose their salvation.

We are not making history we are repeating it. Constantine meant no harm when he 'Christianized 'his army by marching them through a river to baptize them. As a Christian leader he only wanted to make the Gospel user friendly. Oficializing Sunday sacredness was only an attempt to save "unchurched" Publius.

As leaders in the church of God, whether in the home, the local church, the conference or other levels, we don't need prophets to tell us where we are going, we need historians. We must study history and learn from it.

I don't need to remind us that there are probably 2000 denominations which claim to following the Bible and the Bible only. How thankful I am that God graciously gave us the Spirit of Prophecy which illuminates the truth of Scripture which, as darkness covers the earth and gross darkness the people, is a lamp. Regrettably, the ministry of the Spirit of Prophecy has to some extent been taxidermied.(hollowed out) by some, even among our ranks. If we as leaders reject this divine gift we effectively put ourselves and our people at high risk to be deceived by the enemy of our souls.

In conclusion, as leaders God has called us to the kingdom for such a time as this. As leaders we are called to send people into the battle against the enemy of our souls but to lead them into battle. We can lead a person no closer to Christ than we are ourselves. A possible problem is that we have practiced what we preached and that our preaching has fallen short because a person's theology tends to be a reflection of their personal morality. That which has brought revival, reformation and renewal into the church has always been the call to repentances. As leaders we must again give the call to repent and as we do model it in our own lives. As leaders we will be judged because we looked to others than Jesus to lead us. As leaders we will be judged if we become administrators and leave the leadership of our families, churches, conferences and all the rest to those whose' vision is narrow, agenized or not based on the final, unique message that God has given his people in these final hours of earth's history.

Ours is a mission, but not just any mission. It is a sacred mission that is driven by the most solemn message of all time. The Three Angel's Messages which are a message that will prepare a living people to meet a living God. Any mission that does not have this message as its driving force is irrelevant and unless we as leaders accept our responsibility to cast the vision for this special message to those, for whom we are responsible; be they our family members, church members or other constituencies, we are redundant.

The Apostle Paul was a leader with a mission driven by a message. Yet he was concerned and his concern should well be our own as leaders in the 21st century lest that by any means, when I (we) have preached to others, I (we) myself (ourselves) should be a castaway. 1 Corinthians 9:27. I close with a personal question to us as leaders. Who or what is our leadership model? Will it be Microsoft, Camelback Community Church or will it be Jesus? It is my prayer that we who are leaders in the 21st century will cast aside every worldly model and become leaders after the Divine model. Every day looking unto him who is who is the author and perfecter of our leadership.