The challenge for the ordained pastoral leader to be bio-comprehensive in delivering his/her professional role is even more daunting when one reviews the educational achievements and contexts of employment of the lay pastoral leaders of today. The number of lay professionals serving the church has risen dramatically since the early 1970s, and most of these have been women (Z. Fox, 1997). These professionals are persons “with Master’s Degrees in theology, religious education, or an approved equivalency, and at least three years of administration or teaching experience who have demonstrated skills in organization and are salaried, full-time members of a parish staff" (Walters, 1983, p. 4).

In light of this compelling landscape of educated and competent lay professionals, there is an even greater challenge for present-day ordained professionals to stay abreast of contemporary issues in theology, pastoral ministry, social sciences, and self-transformative courses or training. These issues not only affect their identities, roles, and ministries, but also the lives of the women, children, and men entrusted under their spiritual leadership and management. Embarking on renewal and ongoing education is one sure way that pastoral leaders can avoid tunnel-vision or parochial mentality with regard to conceptualizations of leadership and ministry. Schenk (1995) argues for the indispensable role of the church and, for that matter, leadership in a post-modern world in order to sustain the faithful in the community. He elaborates:

T]he church must have a character that allows it to embrace peoples of most diverse backgrounds, and must do so across time. When the church allows itself to be taken captive by a particular culture, ethnic group, or class, it forfeits its claim to be a faithful witness to the reign of God. This has crucial implications both for the individual Christian and for the church itself. For the individual who is seeking to be a faithful disciple, the reality of the church will either support or undercut discipleship. Loyalty to the church cannot be sustained over time if there is lack of congruence between the gospel and the existential ecclesial reality. (p. 8)

In a world of rapid technological change where change affects the daily lives and souls of people, future pastoral leaders can no longer resort to leadership paradigms of the past. Kanter (1996), in his studies on the leaders of the future, claims that future leaders are to become “cosmopolitans” or one who has the ability to cross boundaries and forge links with other people or organizations comfortably. For Covey (1992), this means that leaders are to become “principle-centered” by which “leadership is practiced from the inside out on four levels" (p. 31):

1) personal (my relationship with myself); 2) interpersonal (my relationships and interactions with others); 3) managerial (my responsibility to get a job done with others); and 4) organizational (my need to organize people – to recruit them, train them, compensate them, build teams, solve problems, and create aligned structure, strategy, and systems). (p. 31, italics, numberings, and parentheses in original).

According to Drucker's (1999) philosophy, future leaders are to become “leaders beyond the walls” (p. 9, italics in original). He argues that becoming “leaders beyond the walls” entails that leaders lead their own institution. This echoes Covey’s notion of “principle-centered” leadership. For Drucker, to lead is the first requirement for leaders in “leading beyond the walls.” Drucker also insists that future leaders learn to become leaders in the community, and to create a community for the sake of the common good. The insights of Kanter, Covey, and Drucker are relevant reminders for future lay and ordained pastoral leaders as they exercise their roles and functions in health care institutions, if not in congregational settings.

As the world continues to become a borderless global village, tomorrow’s leaders will require “new competencies” in order to appreciate cultural diversity in the workplace. Such cultural diversity includes leadership styles, industry or organizational styles, individual behaviors and values, race, and gender (Goldsmith & Walt,1999, p.159). In a similar voice, Bennis (2000) points out that in a post-bureaucratic, top-down leadership style, the alliance between leadership and followership is necessary and must be promoted. In this new alliance, Bennis reasons that “the new leader will encourage healthy dissent and value those followers courageous enough to say no” (p.152). And the leader who encourages cultural diversity does not see cultural differences as markers or divisions. On the contrary, the leader exults in these differences and “knows that diversity is the best hope for long-term survival and success” (p. 152). Bennis’s observation, according to R.R. Thomas (1996), implies that: “In the future, even more than in the past, the visibility of the country and its communities will demand effective diversity management skills at the community, organizational, leadership, and individual levels” (p. 72). For today’s lay and ordained pastoral leaders, such calls and challenges for “new competencies” and “new alliances” are especially fitting for our present-day multi-faith health-care institutions, as well as for a pluralistic society like the City of New York and other cities in the USA.

In order to lead, inspire action, and empower persons of all stripes, pastoral leaders in health-care ministry need to craft a vision and possess a sense of mission. They are to be “leaders with vision” (Starrat,1995, p.14) because, as Steinke (1996) observes: “Vision offers meaning; vision instills hope; vision directs energy” (p. 105), whether the leaders’ platform is a school or some other area of institutional life in the wider world.” Starratt further contends that future leaders are to be “bridge builders” in order to lead others to a common vision and goal. Frick and Spears (1996) claim that “foresight” is one trait that leaders must possess, as it is an essential part of the “lead” aspect of leadership. In their studies, they view leaders as historians, contemporary analysts, and prophets (pp. 317-322). For Schon (1983), the professional leaders are to become “reflective practitioners” (p. 295). This means that the leaders’ relationships with their employees, clients, subordinates, or patients must take the form of a literally reflective conversation with the situation. In a reflective conversation, the credentialed and technically competent leader and “his claim to authority is substantially based on his special knowledge in his interactions with his clients” (p. 296). The relationship between the competent leader and follower in a reflective conversation is not one of “blind faith” in a “blind box,” but one where the follower remains open to the leader’s competence as it emerges in professional interactions with the situation.

Harris (1989a), in discerning a wholesome and effective pastoral leadership style, argues for a new church curriculum or a process that embraces a total course of “pastoral vocation” (pp. 23-37) and “educational vocation” (pp. 38-54) in the life of the people of G-od. These curricula or courses must include community service, worship, proclamation, and instruction of all the church’s members from their births to their deaths. It is in this total teaching mission of the church that the church can truly fashion a new people of G-od.

Above all, Arbuckle (2000a) contends that “the issue of change is the most important contemporary challenge facing leaders of any organization, whether business, church, school, or religious community” (p. 31). In light of Arbuckle’s observation, and in the midst of rapid technological and organizational change, the leaders of the post-modern world are challenged to become “leaders with soul” (Bolman & Deal, 1999). They are called to the possessions of the intangibles; namely, spirit, courage, and hope. In the words of De Pree (1997), they are to become “leaders without power.” They are called to the possessions of love and morality. In this vision of leadership, Bolman, Deal, and De Pree perceive contemporary, future and, enlightened leaders as integrated and proactive individuals; individuals who feel the pulses of the people they lead. Therefore, contemporary, future, and enlightened leaders are souls who take risks and journey through uncharted paths; driven, imaginative, and innovative individuals who “venture into the unknown, beyond the boundaries of perceived purity and into chaos, in search of new meanings or new ways of doing things” (Arbuckle, 2000a, p. 9).
________________________________
Email CESAR ESPINEDA