As I was preparing to teach a class on the concept of a Christian leader not being “self-willed” (Titus 1:7), it occurred to me, having grown up as a preacher’s kid, and now being a preacher myself, that I could recall numerous occasions when churches had been fractured and split because of self-willed leaders.

In the “old days” such splits most often occurred because some self-willed leader “ruled the roost.” He set himself up as the judge, jury and sometimes even executioner of the flock. It was “my way or the highway.” His opinion was law. His interpretation of scripture was infallible. In the “men’s business meetings” the deck was stacked. Those who opposed such a leader might not even be informed that the meeting was taking place! He forced his particular agenda by intimidation. He usually had a very strong personality. If you disagreed with his agenda, you could leave. Many did! … Such was the self-willed leader of yore.

However, today I’m not hearing so much about this kind of leader. I don’t mean he doesn’t exist anywhere, but smaller, rural churches are not as numerous as in yesteryear. Or maybe they’re just “not making the news.” Maybe, too, we are a generation removed from those who donated the land for the building …or signed the note to build the building. Our buildings are paid off and his kids have moved across the country.

But there’s a new gunslinger in town. He’s much more sophisticated. He doesn’t use the same bullying tactics. Today’s self-willed leader is not the intimidator; he the liberator. He not Saul; he’s Absalom. He works behind the scenes for months… maybe years, before he makes his move. His agenda is about freedom. He despises authority. He appeals to the younger crowd by criticizing the “traditional church.” He likes to joke about “Church-of-Christers.” He’s not a sourpuss; he’s the friendliest guy in church. He is typically young, professional, financially successful and has a background in the church.
He likes to “push the envelope” as far as possible… and then become indignant when he faces opposition- usually from the elders. At this point he has others who have bought into his agenda and it’s time to start another group. Regardless of how many other congregations may be located nearby, a new one must be started. Everything possible is done to elicit the church’s blessing in some form before the group leaves. This, it is felt, will legitimize their new group.

The irony is- They have now become the very thing they criticized and mocked regarding divisiveness in the “traditional church.” When all the rhetoric has died away, they have split the church. Their particular agenda was more important than the unity of the church. They are no different than those they criticized.

That’s why leaders must not be self-willed. Is it more justifiable and acceptable to the Lord to split the church over legalism or freedom? Both went home justified in their own mind.

May the Lord deliver us from self-willed leaders!

Ken Stegall