Two New eBooks at Amazon Kindle!

FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponRSS Feed

We know that good people do good things and bad people do bad things. That’s common sense based on experience born out everyday.

So it seems logical to say that leaders with good character will be successful, will choose and achieve (good) goals, and in the end leave positive legacies. It seems equally a no-brainer to conclude that leaders with bad character will be unsuccessful, will choose bad goals, likely will not achieve them, and in the end leave negative legacies.

But reality is not so simple. Truth be told, sometimes leaders evidencing good, even exemplary, character do not choose wisely, do not achieve, are not successful, and leave tarnished legacies. Meanwhile, strange as it may seem, leaders who are “bad people” back and accomplish good goals and eventually leave their leadership role lauded for success.

FDR apparently conducted at least one affair until the day he died; yet he is regarded as one of America’s great presidents. JFK apparently “carried on” in the White House in more ways than one, including with Marilyn Monroe; yet he is remembered for his vision and for his strength in staring down Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

LBJ was a womanizer, and he was arrogant and crude. But LBJ helped enact both the Civil Rights and the Voting Rights Acts of the mid-1960s, changing race relations for the better at long last and forever. Nixon campaigned as the “Law and Order” candidate, than orchestrated a break-in and cover-up precipitating a constitutional crisis. Finally, the law and order man resigned in disgrace.

Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush are clearly men of deep and abiding Christian faith. They are men of good character. But both, though accomplishing some things, walked away from what many consider failed presidencies.

So people of lesser character sometimes accomplish good to great things and people of higher character sometimes accomplish very little or even falter or fail. Hmmm. Why?

Character is still a predictor. It’s just not alone in its influence. Too many other variables are at work to isolate on character (which the Right and which religious voters tend to do) and use it as our one and only assessment of a leader’s potential.

Another reason character is not in itself a predictor is that leaders are not “all good” or “all bad.” All human beings are made in the image of God; yet all possess a sin nature. We are capable of nobility and ignobility. We are an enigmatic mix of good and evil and, under pressure, in the wrong moment, who knows what will come out?

In addition, to state the obvious, God is sovereign. He works in mysterious ways. The heart of the king is in his hand and God turns it wither he will. Sometimes what we call lack of success or utter failure fits within the plan of God. Sometimes he allows leaders with bad character to flourish, and sometimes God allows leaders of good will to endure hardship. Why? Only God knows.

So it’s possible that a would-be president with multiple divorces and affairs on his record just might turn out to be a good leader. It’s equally possible that a would-be president with an exemplary reputation just might turn out to be a poor president. It’s hard to tell based on our finite assessments of their perceived character—and that’s another consideration: “perceived” character is not always “actual” character. Things are not always what they seem.

Don’t get me wrong. Character matters. But using it as a predictor of leadership success is just not as easy as we might wish.

 

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2012

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.

It's that time of year again. You know, when presidential candidates dash about the country declaring why they and they alone should be elected the next POTUS. (If you've missed this I'm guessing you just got back from Mars.)

One of the resume items candidates most like to cite is their fidelity to God, religious faith, maybe Christianity specifically, or just faith in general. No one, at least no one yet, seems to want to run as an atheist. And there's good reason for this, atheists may vote, but there are not enough of them to fill a good-sized polling booth.

But religious folk? Now that's a different story, at least it still is in America. Something like 98% of us say we believe in God, even those of us who turn around and live like the Devil. And us religious folks vote. So is it any wonder reasoning-if-not-always-reasonable candidates want to align with "people of faith?"

But what does it mean when political candidates claim they "have faith"? And how should we evaluate this claim or respond? That's the subject of this video.

 

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2012

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Frank R. Wolf has served in the United States Congress for Virginia’s 10th Congressional District since 1981. In that time he’s become known as a tireless worker on behalf of the oppressed, downtrodden, suppressed, poor and hungry, and marginalized the world over.

This book, Prisoner of Conscience: One Man’s Crusade for Global Human and Religious Rights, was written by Frank R. Wolf with Anne Morse and has just been released. Stories from Congressman Wolf’s career form the outline, with chapters focusing upon famine in Ethiopia, Romanian political oppression, prisons in Russia and China, suppression of rights and religion in Tibet, tribal missions in Ecuador, genocide in Sudan, and more recent adventures in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Beijing Olympics. He ends the book with a chapter called “Our Fiscal Time Bomb,” followed by a conclusion discussing America’s potential for collapse or rejuvenation.

There’s no question Rep. Wolf is a kind of modern-day Wilberforce. Wolf is consistent in his Christian faith, wants not just to be but to do, tries over and again to change the world for the better, and most of all, works to advance human rights and the strength of the United States of America in whose founding ideals he still believes.

I first encountered Congressman Wolf in the mid-1990s when I was writing my first book on legalized commercial gambling. At that time, few people understood the negative social and economic potential hidden within gambling's gleaming temptation. Yet Congressman Wolf was, at that time, one of the earliest and is still one of the few national leaders to speak against the advance of legalized commercial gambling. I cited him in my book, Gambling: Don’t Bet On It, first published in 1997 and revised and republished in 2005. While most Democrat and Republican leaders have fallen over themselves assisting Native American tribes and localities in installing this perceived panacea for all fiscal crises, Rep. Wolf knew better then and now. I salute him for this.

Congressman Wolf’s conscience, his concern for the freedom and wellbeing of others worldwide, is rooted in his Christian faith. He is a man who understands his Christian worldview and its implications and he’s never shied from speaking up, speaking out, and speaking truth to power when he felt he needed to do so.

I enjoyed reading this book. It was in some sense like a trip down memory lane, for it catalogs many of the political issues I’ve read about and followed in the past twenty years. Some of the reading wasn’t fun in the sense that gulag oppression doesn’t make for light reading. But the tale that’s told in this book needs to be told.

This book is not just about one man’s work. It’s about what we all need to be, know, and do in the service of the Lord and others.

 

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2012

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Kirk Cousins is the next Tim Tebow. In all the good ways—what media people now call “intangibles”—Cousins, like Tebow, evidences a consistently outstanding character rooted in overtly and regularly expressed Christian faith, superior leadership skills, team spirit, and personal maturity.

Kirk Cousins is Michigan State University’s graduating quarterback. Today he led his team to victory in a three-overtime win over the University of Georgia in the 2012 Outback Bowl. During his football career at MSU Cousins won more games than any quarterback in program history, and he goes out a winner in every way conceivable. In today’s nationally televised performance he put himself on the map.

“Intangibles” is the word ESPN commentator Jon Gruden uses to refer to Kirk Cousins as in “His intangibles are off the charts,” and NBC “Sunday Night Football’s” Al Michaels uses to describe Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow’s on and off-field character, as well as his ability to lead.

“Intangibles” means all the things you can’t really measure, things other than athleticism or football knowledge, experience, and skill. For success in a football career, especially as a quarterback, possessing the capacity to lead is critical. Personal character is a bonus. Intangibles.

Tim Tebow is a leader, whatever you think of his passing skills. He’s also what he seems and claims to be, a young man who lives his Christian faith and walks the walk. His attitude and his actions say, “Good role model.”

Kirk Cousins has done the same thing since his secondary years at Holland Christian in Holland, Michigan, and throughout his years at MSU. Cousins lives his Christian values openly but not offensively. He is a leader with the ability and desire to motivate those around him. He praises team members, speaks articulately about higher standards and brings to whatever he does a great work ethic and never-give-up attitude—all quite Tebow-like.

In what may be the worst year for collegiate sports in many a decade (scandals at Penn State, Syracuse, Miami, Ohio State and more), Cousins is a bright light of hope.

Kirk Cousins says he’s going to give the NFL a try. I hope he does. We need more of his ilk in professional sports. I wish he and Tim Tebow well.

 

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2012

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Ambition is often misunderstood. But its absence is, eventually, noticeable and negative.

Whither Ambition

Along the way I’ve heard a sermon or two castigate the idea of ambition. I think the well-meaning speakers equated ambition with selfishness, selfish ambition, or a grab for personal aggrandizement. They took one generally listed meaning of ambition, “a desire to be successful, powerful, or famous,” and rejected the word because they looked upon success, power, and fame pejoratively. For the speakers, success, power, and fame are suspect at best, so a person with ambition for these things must already have started on the broad road to destruction.

So…”Thou shalt not be ambitious.” It sounds good so it must be in the Scripture somewhere. But the thing is, while God provided plenty of examples of how success, power, and fame can warp human perspective, he never said, “Don’t be successful, powerful, or famous.”

And God certainly never said, “Don’t be ambitious.” In fact, the Apostle Paul said it had always been his ambition to preach the Gospel where Christ was not known, and later, Paul advised believers to “make it your ambition to lead a quiet life.” Only “selfish ambition” is condemnedrepeatedly—in Scripture.

Meanwhile, ambition is generally defined as “something a person wants to do or achieve” or as “a desire to do things and be active.” It’s a forward-looking attitude imbued with hope. Ambition is similar to aspiration: an aim, a goal or objective, a strong desire. Ambition is a longing to accomplish something small or great but either way, meaningful.

American Ambition Asked

I submit to you that American culture has lost its ambition. We don’t have a sense of Manifest Destiny, we’re not saving the union, we’ve already built a transcontinental railroad and the Panama Canal, we’ve not set out to make the world safe for democracy, we’re not working, if painfully, to achieve MLK, Jr.’s “Dream,” we’re not trying to put a person on the moon, and terrorism or global warming or debt reduction notwithstanding, we’re not now mutually engaged in any kind of national purpose.

America, and too many Americans, have lost any sense of ambition, don’t know why, don’t know how to rediscover it, and don’t even know if they want to find it. Political leaders are not much help. They’re focused on re-election, picayune details, hyper-partisanship, and each other. And we’re not hearing much of a grand ambition (vision for accomplishing something) from academia, celebrities, or even religious leaders.

I don’t say this so much with criticism as concern. This is my country. I’d wish better for it.

Individual Americans, of course, can be found who are exceptions to this rule. Surely there are a few ambitious visionaries out there. We just lost one: Steve Jobs. Not that his personal life was much of a model, but his ambition for greatness in his profession was a stellar example.

Meanwhile, pundits are talking about terminal adolescence, boomerang kids, Millennials without life goals, the working class with a growing sense of alienation, and the middle class confused and angered by its lack of prospects for a better future. And worse, there is the so-called underclass (I do not mean this word disrespectfully) whose lives seem adrift and hopeless without some help from the rest of us.

American Ambition Answered

What America needs is not a good 5-cent cigar but a new American ambition, and what a lot of individual Americans need is a forward-thinking, hopeful, goal for their own growth and contribution to family and society—they need ambition.

We don’t lack for ideas:

*The United States ranks 28th in the world in average Internet connection speed. We’re way behind Asian countries that have made this a national priority. Focusing upon becoming Number One in the world in Internet speed would benefit education and the economy, which is to say everyone. 

*The U.S. is ranked 14th in reading, 17th in science, and 25th in mathematics. These numbers are embarrassing, yet we continue to claim we have the best universities in the world. To regain academic performance among the nation’s youth is to regain economic prominence tomorrow. It’s not rocket science—or maybe it is.

*Even debt reduction could be a positive American Ambition if presented as something more than “Woe is me, we can’t do this anymore.” Cut yes, but to what end besides no debt? Don't just retrench, reposition. Build for the future.

I could identify other kernels of ideas capable of growing into a national ambition. But the purpose of this piece is not to list every possibility, rather to raise the issue.

Ambition isn’t bad. If governed by time-tested character values ambition is decidedly good.

Reconstructing an American Ambition capable of blessing the world should be itself a national priority. What is our destiny? Find it, go for it, do it. Inspire us to Aspire.

 

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2011

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Years ago one of our sons returned from a date with his girlfriend. They’d gone to a movie and decided to walk out because the film proved to be less than worthy.

What was interesting to me at the time was his exasperation when he got home—something that turned out to be a teaching moment for me and what he later said was a maturing moment for him. Remember, they’d walked out because the film got nasty. I was proud of them for doing so. But when we talked about it at the dining room table that evening he said, “But Dad, it was PG-13. It was supposed to be OK.”

Yeah, it was supposed to be OK. He’d wisely checked the ratings, as we’d taught our kids to do, to assure he wasn’t taking his girlfriend to a raunchy movie. But the film’s language and sex scenes belied the rating.

The teaching moment was this: “Checking the ratings was a good thing. But a rating of PG-13 doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a good movie, or one that’s worth your time and money. Hollywood or critics may say it’s a good movie, but that doesn’t mean it actually is. A rating is one indicator. It helps, but you still have to think. You have to exercise your spiritual discernment.”

Through that experience my son learned to think more carefully, purposefully, and thoroughly. He learned to apply his Christian worldview and to flex his Christian critical thinking muscles. He took another step toward mature spiritual discernment.

Thinking, particularly the kind where we apply knowledge of the Scripture to life’s everyday issues and events isn’t what it used to be. In my estimation, as a culture if not individually, we give over too much to a host of pretenders we let do our thinking for us—celebrities, politicians, preachers, athletes, super models and super stars. Meanwhile, we forget how to think.

But God created us to think. He created us as reasoning if not always reasonable beings and he entrusted us with the responsibility to think well and wisely. This we must do to care for our selves, families, country, and world. God wants us to think, to discern as the Scripture calls it.

Spiritual discernment is rooted in Philippians 1:9-11. It’s the act of using biblical principals and values to decide what is best so that we may live the Christian life the way God intended. It’s about holiness, Christian liberty, independent judgment, and mature decision-making. It’s the act of living “in the world” while being “not of the world.”

We’d do well to rediscover how to “think Christianly,” as philosophy professor Arthur F. Holmes (who just passed earlier this fall) used to say.

What, for example, does Christian spiritual discernment suggest about these thorny issues?

Immigration; religious professions or protestations of presidential candidates; gay rights; respecting Muslims while disagreeing with tenets of Islam; deficit spending and debt; global warming; cohabitation without marriage at any age; healthcare; welfare.

The list of issues needing, nay crying, for Christian thinking is virtually endless. So I say, learn to discern and think Christianly…about everything.

How do we rediscover and reactivate thinking Christianly? By learning biblical doctrine, by understanding the principals and values we’ve drawn from biblical doctrine, by learning about real world issues—not just reacting, and by integrating our biblical, Spirit-guided discernment with real world concerns.

As long as we breathe, we can never “not think.” We live, we are Christians, therefore we (should) think Christianly.

 

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2011

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.