Of Useless Leaders

I will continue irritating some of you by writing about politics and political leadership.

Let me start by asking a simple question.

What do you use to gauge a successful parent?

A successful parent is simply one who has raised all his children to independence.

Success of the children is not enough for the parent if his very educated and jet set offspring are always coming to him to beg for sustenance. It is frustrating if his very successful children are refusing to leave home because the world for them is a hard place. It is not success if all his sons and daughters are bringing him children to raise. It is not success if he must be consulted before the smallest decision is made. And it is not success if the successful children use their success on immorality and substance abuse.

The mark of a successful parent is foresight.

He will get a child who can do nothing for himself and over time transform him into someone who is raising many others to great heights.

A leader is (or should be) exactly the same.

It is very sad that many of the people who love being called leaders are lords of poverty, to borrow from one of them.

They thrive in fighting to maintain poverty levels so that they can buy support and votes very cheaply.

An empowered populace is a very dangerous thing for them as they will have nobody to ‘fight’ for.

Let me mention security.

A functional country is not one where police patrol to deter or fight criminals because then we will need a policeman for every five or so people.

A functional state is one where someone can leave their gate open overnight without worrying whether anything will be stolen from their compound. And that will happen when everybody is empowered and can comfortably live.

In our country, only the armed forces are allowed to carry weapons. It is therefore illegal for me to arm myself to protect what is mine.

The state will not make me safe by placing a policeman at my gate at night. They will do so by ensuring that none of my neighbors sleeps hungry or is unable to raise his children.

Disparity is a normal thing. Remember God saying that the poor will always be with the Israelites, unless they choose to follow His commandments and instructions?

But disparity has its limits.

When some rich are stinking rich (meaning they smell bad for their riches), and the poor are hopelessly poor, then we have a huge problem in our hands. The balance has been tipped badly.

In my childhood we were poor and there were some who were better.

A neighbor drove a lorry (Americans call them trucks) for a wholesaler in town and once in a while would have it stay overnight at his place.

The next morning the children from the whole village would be gathered at his gate.

Do you know why? He would carry all of them to school.

That vehicle ‘belonged’ to him. But it was the responsibility of the whole village to protect it because it served them.

Let me give you another story, again of people I know.

This family was very rich (according to those times) as both the husband and wife had cars at a time very few people had shoes.

But they were also proud.

They therefore did not offer anybody a lift in their vehicles as they would dirty them. They were reserved for the family, for many years.

Then one day the man of the house had an accident and the vehicle lay on him, for lack of better words, not far from his home.

Do you know what the neighbors did and said?

We are sorry we do not want to dirty your car. Let us run to call the ones who will not dirty it.

They then ran to the mzee’s home to call the ones who were there.

Of course the weight on him could not wait for the deserving people to arrive and that is how he died.

You might think the neighbors were wicked.

But think of this person who had to trek for hours with a sick child to the nearest place they can get some transport. Think of the person who was rushing to an emergency and the vehicle blew dust on him and refused to even acknowledge his raised hands. Think of the mother who delivered on the roadside as the same vehicle passed them struggling. Think of the person whose loved one died because the way to hospital was too long.

Unlike our situation, those vehicles did not belong to the community. And that because their owners did not belong to the community. As such none owed the other anything.

It is such situations leaders should be seeking to rectify by making sure that the disparities are not so extreme and that the community is not so fragmented.

A leader who invests in his and his cronies’ betterment is worse than useless. He is dangerous to society, and of course to himself.

This is because he will be increasing the disparity to dangerous levels. The gap between citizens and the ruler and his cronies will reach unmanageable levels because they are the ones eating all the taxes whereas the ones paying those taxes get nothing in return.

It will eventually reach a point where the populace will become desperate. Then even if the army protects them and their wealth, it would not make much of a difference as they will essentially have nothing to lose.

The last time I posted on leadership I mentioned the fact that compared to our neighbors, animal feeds are too expensive as to make animal farming feasible. Farm inputs are too expensive as to make crop husbandry also unfeasible.

The fact that we must import so much food from neighboring countries, countries whose weather is not different from ours; the sad fact being that their food is many times cheaper that what we produce even after transportation.

For this I will give an A for uselessness in leadership.

Another thing I will say that makes me call our leadership useless is the fact that though we produce our own power, people and companies are shifting to solar and investing billions to do so.

All because we have a utility power company that eats and eats and eats without caring what those they are eating from are getting in return.

That a company without competition can operate at a loss is a clear indictment of the government and its leaders. It goes without say that they are the ones eating the utility company.

In a short while we will be asked to bail out the company again because they have too much power without consumers because they chased them away.

In the past we used to buy crude oil and refine it. Now we have oil and the leaders are telling us that it is not feasible to refine it ourselves.

We must therefore sell it crude and buy it refined.

If that is not folly, we must look for another dictionary.

Why should I sell my unshelled maize to my neighbor to later buy it after he shells it?

These are some of the things I am challenging people to look at when considering who to vote for.

A leader worth his salt is one whose leadership reduces his influence by empowering his populace and not the other way round.

Just look at David.

He started with useless rejects but later was comfortable having them making decisions for him, with some even rebuking him and he did not retaliate because he had accomplished his leadership mandate.

David made his people richer and was the better for it. Solomon made Israel richer and lost the kingdom due to that as his people were the ones who paid the price for the same.

You never go down by lifting others, especially those way down the ladder.

Infrastructure without corresponding people empowerment is for me the epitome of greed as the leaders want to have the best for themselves, even roads that only they can use as nobody else can afford to use.

I am Christ’s minister and not a politician and must say things as I feel heaven needs them said.

In Perspective

And there were some that had indignation within themselves, and said, Why was this waste of the ointment made? (Mark 14:4)

It dawned on me why Jesus rebuked the people who were protesting the ‘wastage’ of such a precious and expensive perfume.

Why were people remembering the poor?

Why were they saying that it ought to have been sold? Who to?

Let us ask ourselves a simple question.

What was spikenard for? Why was it made? What was it intended for? Who was supposed to use it and how?

I am convinced that its container was made to be used exactly the way the lady used it. It was supposed to be broken so that it spreads its perfume just as it did.

The problem was in the person for whom it was broken.

It was supposed for the person who could afford it. Simply speaking it was supposed to be broken for the person worth its value.

It was meant for a king because he deserved it since he was sovereign. Or probably a very rich person because they could afford it.

In the eyes of those people, Jesus was not worth that perfume. That is why they called his anointing wastage.

Their reasoning went thus. If that perfume was sold there would be so much money that the ministry could have progressed and much would be left for the poor.

But was Jesus worth the perfume?

His breakage (crucifixion) is the only thing that would raise incense acceptable by God. (This is a figure like the Bible always says)

But we also know that Jesus is the King of kings and so is way above every other king. And as the creator of all things, we know He actually owns everything and so deserves not just the best (spikenard) but everything and everyone.

Let me address the question to you now.

Was the spikenard being wasted by being poured on Jesus?

Judas was so incensed that he immediately went to look for compensation from the priests.

But look at what Jesus said.

Wherever the Gospel will be preached what the lady in question had done will be mentioned in her memory.

A simple application (one among many) for that is that her ministry will be replicated by the people who will learn from her example.

And what is her example? That Jesus is worth the best that there is. He is worth everything we have.

Let us go to the Old Testament.

Remember the Shunamite woman?

She saw value in a dusty and weary old man who used to pass by her place long before she knew he was a prophet.

This was the same old man younglings made fun of when he had just received his commission and died. And he was then not tired or dusty or as old. Only bald.

We love focusing on what she got but I think the focus of the Bible is in who she was.

She saw value in what looked useless. Like the lady in our discussion, she released value to a person only she saw and probably left other people complaining.

Do we have an application for our instruction? I believe we have.

Incidentally many times we are even worse that those people rebuking that giver and her gift to Christ.

Do we see a holy man of God inside a dusty, weary, withered old man who is not even trying to get our attention? Do we look for ways to ease some of that weariness and fatigue? Do we seek to refresh him? Do we want him to be invigorated before he gets to his next destination?

How many have heard God telling them to minister to someone before they started seeing anything useful in them? Did you obey?

Our generation is fixated with visibility to the point that we refuse to hear God speak to us about the invisible.

I am almost sure that if Elisha was passing by our gates in the condition the Shunamite woman saw we would most possibly share his picture to show a man who lost his moment and wasted his life.

We wait for someone to become successful before supporting him. We actually question the logic of supporting an upstart without asking how those successful cases began.

Nineveh saw a man of God in the stinky, smelly and peeling man saying things in a strange accent. We see a man of God when he is prophesying to us things that we want to hear.

We many times are like people in Jeremiah’s time; so full of the right leaning prophets yet suffocating and persecuting the men God has sent to prophesy to us. We are so full of messages that are blessing our lives yet none that are showing us where we are falling short of God’s standard. We are suffocating those ‘prophets’ with motivating prophecies with gifts and praying that the ones giving us uncomfortable messages and rebuking our worldliness will disappear and stop disturbing our peace.

We do not give when there is no compensation, or at least a chance for the same.

We do not give when we do not see compensation.

We do not have issues breaking the spikenard container. We only insist that it must be broken for someone worth it, but in the material, especially financial.

That is why churches, ministries and ministers who have ‘reached’ are the ones enjoying more than adequate giving, giving that many times goes into irrelevant and unspiritual things.

Such a ministry will buy their main guys the latest (and probably most expensive) fuel guzzler when they have a missionary crying for a motorbike to be able to reach the large swathes his mission field consists of. All the while as their missionaries are crying for increased support to be able to effectively minister in those forgotten regions.

You see, the pastor is visible and his ‘work’ ‘tangible’. Who knows whether the missionaries are doing anything apart from enjoying the little support the church gives them?

It therefore makes more sense to make the pastor of the right class comfortable because that will attract the right combinations of givers.

We can’t waste our spikenard on missionaries because even in the event that they become successful, chances are close to nil that their ‘ministry’ will ‘benefit’ the church sending the missionaries.

In short, missionaries are a waste of spikenard as it was in Jesus’ day.

How many ministers do you know that are not on the rolls of any organized spiritual organization?

Do you consider investing in (or supporting) them as a waste of your spikenard?

Are you like those who argue that all your giving should go to the house ‘feeding’ you?

Who than do you think will take care of those whose call requires them to invest their all in barren lands?

Like I always ask, do you think God stopped calling people when your pastor (or spiritual superstar) responded? Must He then look for permission from the said superstars to validate a calling?

Before I crush your spirit (I give you a small break) I will give you another example from Jesus.

Remember when children were being brought to Him and the disciples sought to block them?

What do you think was the reasoning of the disciples?

Children are a liability to effective ministry. Their presence will only waste Jesus’ ministry to those with a capacity to appreciate and receive it.

Ministry to children is simply a waste of Jesus’ spikenard.

But that is not what Jesus saw.

Jesus saw them as a very key cog in His ministry to the nations.

But are we any different?

Do we treat our children like Christ did even at the home front?

As you think about that, let me try to close this discussion by asking a few questions.

Suppose you were in Jerusalem the three years Isaiah walked stark naked.

Or was Hosea’s neighbor when he married a harlot, twice.

Or Ezekiel’s when he behaved as if nothing had happened when his wife died.

Would you have considered them as God’s servants, leave alone prophets?

Would you have supported them when everybody else turned against them?

Would you have fought for them and hidden them when the community sought to deal with them?

I know that you are probably arguing like the Jews. Those people were bad. We are different.

But how many ministers do you support before knowing they are so? How many children have you opened you heart for?

You see, the worth of the nard’s recipient does not depend on you and your eyes, however good your eyes are. And not even when they are enhanced with equipment.

God is the only One who can see the worth of the recipient of our nard. And we are safest when we depend on Him to see as He does. But then we must allow Him to guide our eyes.

You see, the woman with the spikenard saw what everybody else was not seeing. The Shunamite was able to see what I am sure some of the beneficiaries of Elisha’s ministry couldn’t.

I have been ostracized, even demonized because I did something whose only reason for doing was God had ordered me. I have severally been told that I was wasting my spikenard on some people and organizations when I decided in obedience to minister to them.

Later, however, the same people were falling over each other to access what that ‘waste’ was able to produce as the nard penetrated.

Cast thy bread upon the waters: for thou shalt find it after many days. (Ecclesiastes 11:1)

In reality, casting of bread to the waters (rivers, oceans) is basically wasting it.

But it stops being so when it is in obedience to God.

Jeremiah bought land to make a point to Judah. It was land that he would never use as the seventy-year captivity was beginning and he had no children to inherit it.

In our eyes it is wastage.

But not to God.

Will we ask God to open our eyes and hands to be able to ‘waste’ on His priorities?

Will we ask Him to show us who we should be building a study and rest room even before understanding who they are and what we do like the Shunamite?

Will we ask Him to show us the person to break our very precious spikenard for even when it looks foolish and wasteful to everybody else?

Do not look for the viable ministry and minister to give that car or house. Do not look for the sensible project and projector to write that cheque.

Ask God to show you clearly the person He had in mind when prompting you to give.

You could be giving to an Elisha. You could be ministering to an Isaiah. You could be refreshing a John the Baptist.

Let me close with this verse.

Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. (Hebrews 13:2)

Are we together?

Doctrine Test

I have been wondering at the flood of doctrinal posts on social media.

Some are from people I know; ministers I have some history with.

Some of that doctrine is spurious and some of it is misleading.

I could highlight the error but over the years in ministry I have come to appreciate the fact that it is rarely the right thing to correct someone publicly.

Jesus said we deal with them privately first.

But even that is not always productive.

I have written elsewhere of a time I was ejected from leadership for confronting a false teacher privately and even opened dialogue doors. He is the one that leaked my communication with the leadership that was comfortable with his error.

False doctrine is arrogant as it is aggressive. It is never open to another opinion or even reason.

That is why I have thought to help us examine our doctrine, sensibly. Call it a self-test of doctrine.

As we know, truth is self-perpetuating.

It spreads through the people living by the same.

It has no fanfare. No trumpets. No media outlets.

Truth is complete on its own.

The force of truth is in the ones living by it and the benefits of the same.

But a lie is aggressive. A lie must be heard at all cost. A lie seeks prominence. And a lie needs supporters.

Whereas truth doesn’t seek fans and supporters, a lie will suffocate to death if it lacks them.

Before I get to doctrine let me give an example or two of the same.

Ever seen someone looking for recognition when they are married right? Ever seen a wife parading herself all over to demonstrate that she is married right? Ever seen a faithful wife or husband trying to prove they are truly married or faithful? Ever seen rightly married couples fighting to have their marriage legislated into law?

Yet look at the concubines and clandestine lovers and harlots and homosexuals.

They are all over parading their perversions and fighting to have them recognized.

The next is a tad controversial but I will mention it anyway.

Look at this virus.

We believed when we were given the ‘facts’ and followed the guidelines.

The problem arose when the narrators started commanding us to stop thinking.

Then they started blocking questions and anything that does not agree with them. Then blocking any post that has the name of the virus not in line with their propaganda. Then closing accounts of people who question their narrative. Then dealing with prominent persons showing the slightest success in helping people think. Eventually criminalizing anybody who disagrees with their narrative.

We were created to question. That is the essence of choice.

You cannot tell me to choose if you do not allow me to examine available choices.

Those of us questioning are not questioning the virus. We are questioning the narrative that wants us to stop thinking or looking for alternative information or solutions.

They say that even the vilest must have their day in court. Why are the ‘vile’ in this case dumped in the dungeon without even being given a chance to admit guilt or otherwise? Why are they condemned even before their plea is taken? Why are they given the sentence even before they are taken to court? Why are their defense attorneys killed or blocked from getting to court?

Truth never fears being challenged. That is how the truth always triumphs.

For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: (2Peter 1: 16 – 19)

When Peter said that he was an eyewitness, he was actually offering a challenge to any questioning his faith. And Paul said the same thing in 1 Corinthians 15 as John said.

That is what I want us to do to examine our doctrines.

If you treat someone holding or believing a different doctrine as an enemy who must be fought, it is possible that your doctrine is false, or unbiblical, or spurious.

If you do not entertain alternative interpretations of the scriptures supporting that doctrine, again treat that as a red flag.

If you blank verses that seem to disagree with your doctrine, it is again possible that your doctrine has issues.

And finally, if your doctrine occupies a more prominent place in your proclamation than Christ crucified and risen, it is possible that you are a preacher of another gospel.

In closing I will say that false doctrine thrives on the feel-good power it has. It spreads because of the pleasure or comfort it offers, comfort that is not a rest after working but a rest that I can claim or possess.

Of course it does not challenge anybody to change, substantially, that is. I can be all that I am promised by doing absolutely nothing. Maybe transfer what I should do to visible things like giving and attending sessions. Or reading their books instead of the Bible.

This is just a small stone I have thrown to raise a little dust over deceptive doctrines

Delegation

And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. (Exodus 7:1)

It amazes me what God can do with someone totally sold out to Him

Imagine God making Moses a god!

Does it surprise us that Moses was still the meekest person who ever lived?

Can you imagine God delegating some of Himself to you?

How would it feel? How would you behave?

We are unable to handle little gifts and talents as we feel they make us superhuman.

In fact, the term diva, star and such other words confer on us that extra something that makes us feel that we are not like other men.

A pastor transforms into a CEO and a few other major titles when he grows a church into a mega church, whatever that means.

Then he must move to the leafy suburbs and drive a car commensurate with his status even when his church is in the slums and some in his congregation can barely afford food.

Now imagine that Moses was given the title god, and that by God Himself!

And he was able to handle that.

Imagine the millions in Egypt and Israel hang at his every word! Imagine Israel repented to God for speaking against him!

Yet he was still submitted to God. Yet he was submitted to the people he served.

Philippians 2 speaks about Christ humbling Himself. And I believe in a small way it can also describe Moses.

Why do I say this?

We love defending our humanness and its frailties when it suits us.

And we love attaching ourself to divinity when we need the power.

But you see power from the divine is not a preposition we pick when we need.

God releases His power to us so that we can partake and walk in His nature.

That is what makes many miracles deceptions as they release God’s power without manifesting His nature. I perform miracles but am unable to escape the snare of pornography. I can prophesy but am unable to stop lying to exaggerate my exploits. I raise the dead but can’t keep my trouser zipped in the presence of a woman.

But Moses was not like that.

He was made a god and took God’s nature, from compassion to a repugnance for sin.

Remember him pleading with God to kill him to forgive Israel? Remember him pleading for mercy for the people who had belittled his position when they were judged?

In short God delegated some of Himself to Moses and Moses didn’t choose what suited him. He took the whole package.

We love speaking in God’s name and using His power. But we have a problem when it comes to us having His nature running our lives.

We are like those women who will apply layers of paint to hide the spots and creases that show what they are like.

It is taking the cosmetic industry to the spiritual.

But God seeks to make us like Moses. He wants His nature to flow through us, not only His power.

Do you know the easiest demonstration of meekness?

It is a yoke of oxen (or buffalo or elephants for those who use them) plowing.

The power is immense. But it is subject to the one guiding them.

Isn’t that what we see with Moses?

Imagine someone who can move millions at will! Imagine someone who can move God!

Yet he could listen to miserable orphans (Zelophehad’s daughters).

Imagine someone who could stay for eighty days (a very short break between them) without eating and drinking anything! Imagine someone whose face glows with God’s glory that he has to veil it! Imagine someone God spoke to face to face!

Yet he could listen to his father-in-law who was not even from Israel.

Yet we see him hurrying Aaron to offer a sacrifice because judgment had been activated by the congregation’s defiance of him.

Thus saith The Lord should not be just a power statement. It should be indicative of a delegated position.

Look at Elijah.

It won’t rain until I say so appears very arrogant until we see him declaring that the rains have come.

I have done all this as You told me.

Remember that even at his lowest point he had to have God’s word?

We love those offices and power positions without seeking to be like the One who has given them to us.

God is in the business of delegating. But there is a stark disconnect between the people who love those positions as they do not desire the nature of the One delegating them.

And we see that most clearly with Saul the king.

Remember seeking the respect of his troops when God rejects him, the same troops that according to him caused him to disobey God’s order?

Yet isn’t that how many of us handle our delegation, especially after a long time of serving people?

How many ministers left everything for ministry yet have refused to move when God says so? How many have refused to hand over to another generation because they cannot afford to leave those positions, positions that were nowhere in their mind when God was calling them?

How many ministers have become spiritual brokers, selling everything from books to sermons to motivational speeches yet in their initial years cared nothing for mammon?

How many cook stories to get an extra car or a house yet in their first days were comfortably walking when they could not afford bus fare to get to the places they needed to minister to?

How many have removed offense from their sermons to please their troops like Saul?

In closing, do you realise that God delegated so much to Moses that He started calling Israel Moses’ people that he had led from Egypt?

Just imagine that!

 

Pastor 2

Thus I was; in the day the drought consumed me, and the frost by night; and my sleep departed from mine eyes. (Genesis 31:40)

I promised to help us understand a Biblical pastor better.

We had looked at a pastor in the context of God and His pastoring.

Today I want us to look at it from the farmer’s side, or a pastoralist or herder if that makes you more comfortable.

Incidentally I was able to understand this concept better when I started keeping animals. That is actually where the promptings of this message came from but I couldn’t write then because my computer was down.

Have you ever wondered why at the time of Christ’s birth the angel appeared to pastors, eeh, shepherds?

A pastor was being born. THE PASTOR was being born.

Why had it to be at night?

It was in their nature and duty to spend nights out for effective pastoring, probably because the days were too hot for the flocks to feed effectively.

Those of us in the tropics do not understand seasons because we do not experience the extremities of the same.

Summer in the tropics is just warmer than normal and winter is the converse.

Outside the tropics things are completely different. Winter is freezing cold while summer is scorching hot. We read of fires starting from nowhere because of the summer heat. We read of people dying of heat strokes for the same reason.

It therefore must have been the summer season that had prompted those pastors to keep their flocks outside so that they can adequately get their nutrition.

This gets me to the first point.

Pastor is not a title or job.

Pastor is a commitment, a calling if you want it to appear spiritual. Pastor is a function.

Just like it is impossible to have a shepherd without a flock, it is impossible in the spiritual to have a pastor (same name as shepherd) who does not tend a flock.

A pastor does not do it for the pay, if I may call it that.

You do not take the risks of fighting wild animals just to get a few coins.

You cannot forfeit sleep and the comforts of a bed just because of a paycheck.

The next point is related to the first.

A pastor has a complete relationship with his flock. There are no timelines with a pastor as concerns his flock due to that commitment.

Jacob herded Laban’s flock for fourteen years for a wife (who became four before long).

I am sure he could have haggled for the second seven years especially because he hadn’t wanted Leah. Maybe asked a discount of three or four years since the ‘goods’ had been forced on him.

But I am sure that in those first seven years he had become attached to the flock.

It took the complaint (and probably threat) of Laban’s sons and God’s order to consider leaving them.

This is the reason I have an issue with denominations that transfer pastors like the government transfers policemen so that they do not become too familiar with their flock.

You see, animals do not talk.

A pastor must learn to interpret their ‘language’, something that needs adequate time to develop.

Incidentally, each animal has its own language. And that is why we have verses like this.

What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it? (Luke 15:4)

He does not count one two three every time to know that one is missing.

He knows each sheep individually and so can easily identify the loss. And he knows the one with such tendencies of course.

Otherwise how would he know his sheep if it was swallowed by another flock, a usual thing with animals?

Remember recently when I wrote about the time our calf followed my grandfather’s flock and its mother noticed in the morning?

You see, a sheep gets lost when it is separated from its flock.

And it would require the same skill for the pastor whose flock the lost sheep joined to identify the stranger in his house.

A pastor therefore has a flock, however large, with individual sheep that he knows very well because he loves them individually.

That is why he celebrates the recovery of that troublesome one when he finds it.

The next point follows this one.

A pastor can never be paid for his services.

A pastor feeds from the flock, and not by ‘eating’ the flock.

Be thou diligent to know the state of thy flocks, and look well to thy herds. For riches are not for ever: and doth the crown endure to every generation? The hay appeareth, and the tender grass sheweth itself, and herbs of the mountains are gathered. The lambs are for thy clothing, and the goats are the price of the field. And thou shalt have goats' milk enough for thy food, for the food of thy household, and for the maintenance for thy maidens. (Proverbs 27: 23 – 27)

Jacob tended Laban’s flock for a wife. But after he cleared the ‘debt’ he continued to tend to get his own flock. And those who have some background information on herding know this.

Let me illustrate.

You tend the flock for free, but with particular conditions like, every second birth is yours, we share the twins equally, or even every one with a particular color or color code is yours.

Or you do not remember Jacob’s story?

But you are also milking, and if possible, selling the milk since many times you are far from home. That is what gives you sustenance as there is no other income you are getting.

That is how many people in the past used to get out of poverty, by attaching to someone with a large flock or herd and being gifted a startup capital of a few of his own.

Like I said recently, giving a cow is easier than giving money.

A Biblical pastor operates along the same lines.

He walks and grows with his flock. He does not demand anything from his flock but gladly shares (giving and receiving) in the growth and multiplication of his flock.

A pastor loses sleep over the state of his flock. A pastor agonizes over his flock. A pastor fights for his flock. That is what we hear Jacob saying. That is the reason the flock has no issues sharing their increase with him.

You see, only the pastor knows the goat to milk because he has taken very good care of it.

A pastor has both goats and sheep and intricately knows each and its peculiarities.

He doesn’t kill goats because they are troublesome.

He knows he needs them as much as he needs sheep.

But he also knows each needs its own shepherding.

The goat is independent, troublesome, looking for and creating trouble and of course loves herbs.

But they produce milk. And their meat has a unique taste because of their troublesome and greedy nature. They also produce twins, triplets and quadruplets more often.

The pastor must know that the goats require a lot of watching as they are naturally prone to trouble. It appears as if they are addicted to trouble. You take them to a very juicy meadow and they will run off to a neighbor’s wasteland.

A pastor must know this and herd them effectively.

A pastor knows sheep are not demanding. Give them food and they are content and will flourish. They do not care for anything the neighbor has provided they have food and water.

But they also have needs. Only that they do not make noise about them like the goats.

An unwise pastor concentrates on lowering the noise of the goats, a noise that is lowered only for a moment before it resumes.

A wise pastor knows that goats will make noise for nothing just as sheep do not make noise for anything.

He will therefore concentrate on keeping a healthy flock instead of lowering the noise of the goats.

But is that how pastors operate?

In closing let me state that a good pastor knows his neighbors and their sheep, of course not as much as he does his.

He needs to do this because like I mentioned earlier sheep get lost into other flocks. His goats can also easily cause a mess to another flock. Or some will mess their flock and run to hide in yours and vice versa.

It is thus important that he pastors his neighbor’s flock as well so that he can deal with some of those complications without needing to go to court.

Then all the sheep and goats around are secure in your shepherding.

I hope you understand my allegory.

But I am talking about the church and its pastor.

Feel free to comment or even bash me if you think I have not said anything.

Politics

It is the season of high politics, if there is something like that.

I feel that it is imperative as a minister to direct us to a few questions and expectations as we engage the political aspirants.

What is the purpose of politics? What is the end game for politicians?

Why do politicians always want to be called servant leaders, even servants of the people when they do absolutely NOTHING for the people they profess to serve?

You see, a servant leader is a person whose leadership is driven by the people he leads. It is a leadership dictated by the needs and aspirations of the people he leads. Simply speaking, his every thought and decision has his people at the very top.

That is why I have always said that Kenya has a very serious leadership vacuum. I am simply saying that we DO NOT HAVE leaders. And I will direct us to a very simple aspect of our lives.

Have you ever wondered how maize from Mexico makes our maize unsellable? Ever wondered why rice from a neighboring country is almost half the price of the one we produce? Why is rice all the way from Thailand and Pakistan cheaper than ours?

Why is sugar from the war-torn Sudan cheaper in than our country yet we have enough cane farmers and factories, factories that are on their knees?

Have you like me wondered why eggs from a neighboring country brings our poultry farming and business to their knees.

Do their chicken feed on soil and water to produce eggs?

Ever wondered why milk had to be stopped from being imported, and that because a big man runs the dairy industry?

It costs money to import, from transport to broker charges, even assuming that duty is not paid.

It is the answers to these questions that any leader should be seeking. It is the answer to these questions that any leader should be strategizing on.

Uganda’s cows do not produce cheaper milk because they drink from Lake Victoria to produce milk that is cheaper than ours.

And why is petroleum cheaper in Uganda yet the same passes through our port and land?

We always have leaders spending billions going for benchmarking trips around the world.

This is what those money guzzling trips should be doing, seeking answers for some of these questions.

I would want to know why a farmer a thousand miles away sells an egg to my neighbor cheaper than I can. I want to understand how someone would buy maize across the oceans, hire a ship and still sell maize cheaper than any sustainable price our farmers sell at.

But beyond that I would want to know how to deal with that to make it possible for me to sell my milk, maize, eggs, etc. to my neighbor because the price will make importation irrelevant.

But let me not just ask questions. Let me give an observation.

Do you realise that animal feeds in Kenya are up to six times their cost in Uganda?

Do our leaders and aspiring leaders know this?

Are they concerned about it?

Do they have a solution for it?

As we seek to elect leaders, will we engage them on such matters?

One is saying he will give the youth some monthly pittance, a pittance that will be inadequate to buy chicken feed for that month. Not forgetting the dependence the same develops.

That for me is an insult to hard working Kenyans.

Make farming viable. Make business easy to start and run. Make factories and industries easy to run by lowering the cost of power as an example.

In short ask them to give you to the solutions to the challenges facing you

Otherwise they are not servant leaders but noisemakers and conmen.

I haven’t rested my case, just taken a short break. I have just scratched just one aspect of or lives.

But I do not know when I will be back.

 

Pastor

The LORD is my Pastor; I shall not want. (Psalm 23:1)

I know some are already protesting that I have corrupted their favorite verse

I will start by stating a very simple truth, a truth that we many times confuse with our compartmentalization.

It is that the name pastor is another name for shepherd.

That compartmentalization has aided us in lowering the standards for the people we call pastor because they are so different from the Pastor our call originates with.

Yet it is the same Person we are ultimately answerable to as to our pastoral responsibilities.

You see, no one is called into the pastoral ministry by people, unless he is the hireling Christ talked about. Such will be answerable to the people who called him as to his calling.

I have never in my life heard a minister speak in the words of the politician, that he was heeding to the call of the people when seeking a position. No minister ever says that.

Again no minister says that they responded to the call of their stomach or their laziness index.

Every minister I have heard always says that they were responding to God’s call. And they even demonstrate how that call came and the battles they fought to respond to it.

Isn’t it amazing that we then use a worldly standard to assess that call? Isn’t it stupid when we use worldly standards to demonstrate the success of that call?

But even worse is the fact that we base the running of the pastoral calling on the world.

As such, we feel we have done well or failed purely on worldly standards. And by worldly I am not talking about sin and wickedness, though many, due to their shift in the one they report to, eventually end up there.

Again let us look at John 10.

I am the Good Pastor. A good pastor lays down his life for his flock. (John 10: 11)

Is that our standard?

I want to challenge us to read the Bible as it was written without making one word mean different things to satisfy our doctrine or theology.

Why do we love being called pastor when we are not willing to go the whole distance of being like our Model?

Look at this pastor who ministers in the slums yet lives in the leafy suburbs where none of his sheep can access due to transport, security, and other logistical and social challenges yet it is the same slum dwellers who pay for that house and car that drives him there, some who have a hard time putting food on their tables.

How much like Christ, the Good Pastor, are they?

Or this pastor who drives the congregation’s systems using proxies until they are bought that house or car. Or this other one who threatens to quit (of course in a very ‘spiritual’ way) if their package is not improved.

Was Christ ever like that? Is that the way God pastors us?

I have taken verses all of us know so well to challenge us to think about those we call pastors.

God is our model. Christ exemplified and incarnated that model.

How do we treat weakness? How do we treat sin? How do we deal with talent and gifting? How do we deal with wealth and the wealthy? How do we deal with the down and outs? How do we deal with the repentant?

The Bible was written to help us understand the responsibilities our callings demand. This by showing us God dealing with people, those on His side and those against Him.

Next time I will be writing about pastor from a farmer’s view. And this because the Bible is basically a farming book.

We therefore err by interpreting Biblical terms in a different context.

But suffice it when I conclude by stating the obvious (which is not so obvious when we compartmentalize our theology); that God is the model for the pastor’s office. And in fact it is not exactly an office. It is a function according to the scriptures.

Just like we have the attributes of God showing us who God is and how He operates, we have our ministries described.

Forgive me for taking so long to write.

My computer misbehaved and it became impossible to write anything because it was swallowing it whole, saving only titles.  I therefore had to wait until that was sorted.

I hope to be more consistent in my posts.

Once again forgive me for being unable to post anything for some time.

God bless you