“No
man is an island, no man stands alone.” This is one of the common expressions
that we always hear when we talk about the history of society. This expression
also affirms our human nature—social, relational and complementary beings. For
Plato, the origin of the state is a reflection of people’s economic needs. He
said, “A state comes into existence because no individual is self-sufficient;
we all have many needs.”[1]These
needs require many skills, and no one working alone can acquire all of the
genuine necessities of one’s life. In order to resolve this difficulty we
gather together into communities for the mutual achievement of our goals. This
succeeds because more things will be produced and the work will be easier and
better done if everyone specializes a specific craft. The concrete result of
this desire would be a society composed
of many individuals, organized into distinct classes according to their role in
providing some contribution to the common good. From here, the idea of
leadership takes its place as a product/part of societal demand so as to preserve
and promote peace, order, and unity among the members of the community.
Leadership is a familiar term.
Sometimes, because of its familiarity, we often take for granted its real
essence. And convincingly, we can clearly observe how this term is being abused
or taken for granted by most of our renowned leaders nowadays, not to highlight
only some of our corrupt government leaders, but also, to some of our leaders
in the church. We are already introduced to what leadership is. In fact, there
are many proponents with regard this topic. For Plato in his ideal society, he
has proposed for the ‘Philosophers’ or the ‘Philosopher King’ as the governing
body of the community. He advocates for competence as qualification for
authority.
Since
a state does not decide what is just for justice is one of the forms, it needs
leaders who can contemplate justice as form. And those leaders should be
Philosophers—persons who after an extensive training and progressive education
can very well contemplate and identify what is really true and good.[2]
For John Locke, he proposes for
leaders who are capable of protecting individual property and liberty—life,
liberty, and estate. Man is then entitled to a ‘social contract’.
State
of nature is one of peace, good will, mutual assistance, and preservation.
Civil society desires from the consent of its members the right to make laws
having penalties involving preservation of property for the public good.
Government is nothing but the natural power of each man resigned into the hands
of community.[3]
For
Hobbes, he stresses the need for leaders who would initiate the ‘social
contract’ in order to avoid “war of all against all”. Since he is not a democrat, he believes that
only a king who has the totality of power would be able to identify the common
good. Should he fail to serve the common good, the king would be opposed.
If
all natural rights were exercised, society would be impossible, he declared,
for as he pointed out, all men seek unlimited individual power; If left alone
this could result in what he described as ‘war of all against all’. Since such
war would have produced an impossible social situation, Hobbes proposed for a
natural transferring of right in that which men call ‘contract’ to be centered
with so much liberty against other men as he would allow himself. The very existence
then of society suggests that men voluntarily enter into a contract to transfer
the use of power to the state, in which they could then live peacefully
together.
Not to mention the countless quotations that
one can easily browse in the virtual world like:
If
you would not be forgotten, as soon as you are dead and rotten, either write
things worth reading, or do things worth the writing. —Benjamin Franklin; A
leader takes people where they want to go. A great leader takes people where
they don’t necessarily want to go, but ought to be. —Rosalynn Carter; A great
leader’s courage to fulfill his vision comes from passion, not position. —John
Maxwell, etc.[4]
More
importantly,our Lord Jesus Christ has His own conception of genuine Leadership.
He has exclaimed in the gospel of Matthew that whoever wishes to be great among
you shall be your servant. Whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your
slave. Just so, the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and give
his life as a ransom for many.[5]
These are some of the many conceptions with regard to
leadership. They vary on their unique historical contexts. Some might be mere
theories, but most of them for sure are true to life story. However, why is it
that it seems like there’s still no difference at all? If given the fact that
man is offered all the necessary tools and techniques to be a good leader, why
there are still corrupt leaders in our society? Why there are still protests against
our leaders? In the book entitled “Why he leads the way he leads,” written by
Chris Lowney, he points out the emerging issues of the world today. For him,we are
experiencing a capitalistic economy—a world driven by profit and money. We are
facing a consumerist and materialistic world wherein money and careerism are
considered the new gods. We are in the world which has the mentality: “to be is
to have”. People nowadays are not just exploited, but worst of all, excluded.
We are in the world centered and focused on the ‘self’. And this is the common
pit where leaders fall. Perhaps, this is the very reason why leaders become
corrupted and why injustice is still present in the world. They give more
priority to themselves than the needs of others.
Too
often, those in leadership positions seem preoccupied only with their own
status or income. They are unable to inspire us; they are not imaginative
enough to solve the seemingly intractable problems that plague us; and they are
insufficiently courageous to lead us through challenge and drive change.[6]
Pope
Francis has addressed these issues by setting himself as a good example of a
genuine leader. He visibly demonstrates the paradoxes of a good leader: 1.)
Inner grounded, but outer driven; 2.) In the world, but not of the world; 3.)
Grounded in the past, grabs opportunities in the present, and creates the
future. In his first appearance as the pope, he has brought out a stunning
statement by his action. He has dispensed himself with tradition: he refused
the traditional red cape; makes his own phone calls; hopping onto a bus instead
of the papal limo, wearing the iron pectoral cross instead of the gold, etc.
And also, during the world youth day at Rio de Janeiro, he exclaimed, “I want
you to make yourselves heard in your dioceses, I want the noise to go out, I
want the church to go out onto the streets, I want us to resist everything
worldly, everything static, everything comfortable, everything to do with
clericalism…”[7]
This is a concrete manifestation of a true leader, unafraid and determined for
a change. Knowing that our culture is becoming increasingly self-absorbed and
fascinated with superficial pursuits, he is striving to focus us beyond
ourselves, on the struggle of the neediest brothers and sisters around the
world.[8]
A
very recent and concrete example of how the humble Pontiff showed genuine
leadership is on the issue of that Palo, Leyte municipal mayor who was
reprimanded by the Holy Father for her attempt of hiding the real situation of
her town after the 2013 Yolanda tragedy. She relocated families who were still
unable to recover from the catastrophe to a place that is hidden from the
public view so as not to become an eyesore to the pope’s eyes when he comes on
January of 2015. The pope, angry at the situation, gave a strong remark of
reprimand to the lady mayor through a letter saying, “What part of ‘visiting
the typhoon victims’ do you not understand? That is the primary reason I am
coming to the Philippines. Do not displace them just to impress me because I am
not that easily impressed, especially by those who are not truthful like
yourself.”
The
Holy Father doesn’t want leaders who are not truthful, most especially to the
people whom they are serving. It is widely known that the successor of St.
Peter is not a man who loves lavish lifestyle, not a man who sits and eats with
the elite, not a man who rides in luxury cars, not a man who sleeps in luxury
rooms, not a man who lives a luxury lifestyle. He is not a man who is easily
impressed by lavish and extravagant preparations. What he wants is what is just
there, as it is, plain and simple, true.
Genuine
leadership begins with the self. Well-known leaders like St. John Paul II,
Mother Teresa, Pope Francis, and the like, people gets attracted to them not
because of their integrity but primarily because of how they lead their lives.
“One must be comfortable with his own skin.”[9]
One must accept who he is—one who errs, who has unique gifts, and called fora
reason. One must have the courage not just to be himself, but the best version
of himself. This is the foundation of self-leadership, and eventually the
common ground of good leaders. One must do the work to know who he is. However,
Pope Francis would add: “The call for leadership embeds not only
self-acceptance but the acceptance of the accountability to become the best
possible version of ourselves with on-going commitment for self-improvement.[10]
He wants to stress out the value of accepting one’s mistakes and the
courage/determination to avoid committing the same error again. It also true to
Richard Gula’s statement as regards the importance of knowing the self in
relation to one’s vocation, he said, “we should know ourselves and our gifts
better, for if we don’t, tendency is we easily let other voices outside of us
determine what we should do—family expectations, opinions from friends, etc.,
and thereby letting ourselves become what we are not.[11]This
is the kind of leaders that Pope Francis wants us to become. And he is
conveying this through his deeds. Moreover, he is calling us all. He wants us
to experience ‘metanoia’ to ensurejustice in the world, wherein everyone is a
subject and not mere object for use. We must be ‘Pro-poor’. We must be humble
servants. We must not be self-possessedand money-obsessed, rather, we must set
our minds that we are here to serve the world and not the world serving us. For
the church’s leaders, we must smell like our sheep and be messy with them.
But
sometimes, there are many questions that pop-up spontaneously in my mind: Are
we really capable of doing this? Are they really attainable or just ideals? If
they are, how long can we sustain them? Is it really possible to omit
self-interest? Is there really exists a kind of ‘pure intention’? Is doing
something even if it doesn’t matter at all not tiring? Is there still really
hope? Can we really change the system? How? Is it acceptable not to worry with
these things?
More
often than not, these questions frequently put me down. They weaken my foundations.
However, Margaret Wheatley would always say, “Opportunity-based rather than
deficit thinking.” This always gives me hope.I am reminded of our assistant
parish priest in my pastoral assignment in one of our jamming sessions when he
talked to us about his exposure with the ‘Mangyans’ at Mindoro. He said that
‘Mangyans’ has this principle in life: “The lands own us”. This is the reason
behind why they keep on transferring from one place to another. They rely and
depend on what nature would provide them. They are never afraid of tomorrow for
they are firm in their belief that nature would never disregard them. Most
likely, the assistant priest said, this should be the attitude that priests
must have: never afraid nor worry or tired even if what you are doing doesn’t
matter at all or it seems not to achieve anything, for God always acknowledges
what we’ve been doing. We just continue doing the right thing and what is ought
of us to do as ministers. Leave the result to God. By this, I felt enlightened and
was reminded of our discussion about inculturation.
Inculturation
happens only when the hearer biased by his cultural screens opens himself and
accepts the teachings of the preacher. Then it would level up to the second
stage: the dialogue between the hearer and the Holy Spirit. The moment the
hearer becomes convinced and converted through his self-evaluation and
reflection, and in return becomes the preacher himself, inculturation is
actualized.Like the original preacher, in connection to what the assistant
priest told us, he is not after for what would be the result of his preaching.
He just does the best that he can and leaves it to the Holy Spirit to touch the
heart of the listeners.
Similarly,
my TheologicalFramework would be everything that has been expounded above. I
would use the concept of Pope Francis about Leadership. It is really necessary
to know yourself first, especially your strengths and weaknesses, and
familiarize your gifts so that I would know where to place myself in the
ministry. Moreover, I will always remind myself that I am here to serve and not
to be served. I will always try to attune my heart to the poor. I will love the
poor so long as I can so that I can avoid the trap of ‘Self-absorption’. The
more I share my life to others; the more I arrive at my real self. I will never be alienated to myself because I
will never let myself be consumed by material possessions and selfish
ambitions. Like Pope Francis, I will try to be a true warrior who understands
my interconnectedness and entanglement to others. I will always try to be
proactive rather than reactive. I will always try to be ‘opportunity-based’
person rather than a deficit thinker. I will never worry about the result of
what will I do in the ministry because, I am convinced that, by doing it, I am
fulfilling my identity and mission in life even if it will never matter at all.
The more I am aware of myself, the clearer the boundaries that I can set. The
more I handle myself better, the more I influence others (Personal Power). I
will always be a humble servant and instrument of God. Thus, genuine leadership
begins with the self!
[1]Stumpf, Samuel Enoch and Fieser,
James. Socrates to Sartre and beyond: Eight Edition. (New York: McGraw-Hill
Book company,2008), 59
[2]The Cambridge Dictionary of
Philosophy: Second Edition, Ed. By Robert Audi (Cambridge University Press,
1999), 556
[3]Feibleman, James. Understanding
Philosophy; A Popular History of Ideas. (New York: Dell Publishing Co., Inc.),
115
[4]http://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2012/10/16/quotes-on-leadership/ retrieved on October 1, 2014 at
7:50 pm
[5]MT. 20:26-28
[6]Lowney,
Chris. Pope Francis: Why he Leads the way he Leads. (USA: Loyola Press. A
Jesuit ministry), 3
[7]Ibid., 5
[8]Ibid., 7
[9]Ibid., 28
[10]Ibid., 34
[11]Gula, Richard. JUST MINISTRY.
(New York: Paulist press, 2010), 12
