His statement caused me to think about the condition of our nation today. As I consider the data regarding the perceptions, values, behavior, and dreams of Americans, especially younger Americans, it seems clear that while we love the remaining freedoms and benefits of living in the United States, many citizens lack a real relationship with this nation and thus rebel against its rules and traditions. We are eager to take advantage of what’s available but are substantially less willing to sacrifice and invest for the good of the nation. The “common good” is a foreign concept to many Americans. Despite many politically correct speeches about “community,” “sharing,” “serving,” “tolerance,” and sensitivity, there often seems to be more lip service to bonding with America than behavior that supports it.

Think about the education our children receive these days. Gone are stalwart classes such as Civics or practices such as saying the pledge of allegiance or singing the national anthem. Perhaps in your area many community organizations that fostered a pro-country attitude or worldview have receded or closed down. Turn on the television or radio and you may encounter a mainstream media that seems more intent on challenging America’s foundations and heart than helping to build a sense of national spirit. Even in this year’s presidential campaign, when several candidates have spoken movingly about their love for our country, the response was to have their motives questioned, their personal lives attacked, and their sentiments dismissed.

I wonder how much longer the United States can withstand such a deficit of investment in upholding the foundations of our country, and thinking about the meaning of and commitment to the common good. And it is concerning that the two youngest generations of Americans seem to view society’s rules as barriers to overcome rather than legacies of love and wisdom.

As supporters and beneficiaries of those standards and historic commitments, I believe that America’s Christians have a special role to play in defending, conveying, and strengthening the foundations of our country.

Am I the only one who worries about our fading sense of loyalty to and connection with our republic? Do you sense that we have a problem regarding our individual relationships with the United States? How well do you think we, as Christians, are adequately protecting, explicating, and restoring the foundations of the U.S.? What else could we do? What have you done that you are proud of in this regard?

Unfortunately, I find it difficult to read when conversational interviews occur nearby at a loud volume, so I was intermittently dragged into the content of the program. The segment that distracted me the most was the program’s farewell to curmudgeonly commentator Andy Rooney. I heard his responses to several questions. One of his statements struck me.

“A writer’s job is to tell the truth,” said Mr. Rooney.

I will not delve into the irony of that statement emanating from a program that, to my mind, is one of the most flagrant transgressors of that very sentiment. But Mr. Rooney’s words are well-taken, regardless of the source. A writer is an educator, and an educator has a responsibility to convey truth in order to advance people’s well-being.

Perhaps this hit me so hard because of my recent stop at a local bookstore. Like most authors, I am drawn to bookstores. As my wife will attest, a “quick stop” at a bookshop is 30 minutes; a more typical visit lasts well beyond an hour. During last week’s experience I was blown away by the sheer volume of pabulum and outright lies being sold to the public. Volume after volume, especially in areas concerning politics, history, religion, sociology, culture, arts, and parenting – the subjects which I perused at length – conveyed distortions that would be laughable if not for the fact that millions of ill-advised people innocently embrace those half-truths and full-on lies.

Of course such a criticism is difficult to sustain these days. Where there is no absolute moral or spiritual truth that we universally or even generally accept, then one man’s truth is no better or worse than any other man’s truth, as long as he firmly embraces it. Mr. Rooney’s statement needs to be updated for today’s world: “A writer’s job is to tell his truth” or perhaps “his version of the truth.” Consequently one could argue that a reader’s job these days is simply to consider the various truth versions available, identify which one she likes the most, and own it.

I would like to give Mr. Rooney the benefit of the doubt and believe that he really meant what he said, that his words could be taken at face value. He comes from a generation that still generally contends there are absolute truths that exist whether people acknowledge and accept them or not. Sadly, that perspective is losing ground faster than we realize. And that rapid and seemingly unrestrained redefinition of truth is a sad commentary on the depth, engagement, and influence of the Church today.

For instance, among Catholics, there was significant movement from 1991 to 2001 regarding declining church attendance, declining adult Sunday school involvement, increase in personal commitments made to Christ, and an uptick in the number of born again adults – but no significant movement in these factors during the past decade. Protestants had a similar experience, with decreasing church attendance, declining church volunteerism, and expansion in attendance of large churches taking place from 1991 through 2001 and then holding steady for the last ten years.

There remain interesting and telling differences between Catholics and Protestants, underscoring the fact that despite the substantial cross-pollination that has occurred between the two factions in recent decades, each of those strains of Christianity within the U.S. remains a unique expression of the faith.

Protestants are four times more likely than Catholic adults to attend a Sunday school class, despite a 31% drop in such engagement among Protestants over the last 20 years. Protestants also continue to be three times more likely than Catholics to volunteer at a church; twice as likely to read the Bible during a typical week; only half as likely to attend a large church; 21% more likely to maintain an orthodox view of the nature of God; 45% less likely to write off Satan as merely a symbol of evil but not a living entity; twice as likely to firmly believe that the Bible is totally accurate in all the principles it teaches; more than twice as likely to accept personal responsibility for sharing their faith in Christ with others; and two-and-a-half times as likely to satisfy the born again criteria. Not surprisingly, Protestants are also 21% more likely to argue that their religious faith is very important in their life.

Although I am not a Catholic today, I was raised in a Catholic family, served as an altar boy, was baptized, confirmed and married in the Catholic church, and attended a Catholic college. One of the turning points in my life was being driven from the Catholic church threough a life-changing confrontation with a priest during my pre-marital preparation process. That experience led to my leaving the Catholic church, embarking on a search for truth, meeting Jesus Christ, and consequently rearranging the course of my life. As a result of that journey, I understand the genesis of these statistics regarding Catholicism in America today. Perhaps the most perplexing number of all, given Catholic doctrine, has been the slump in church attendance among Catholics, which may be the most indicative of all the factors of the growing spiritual apathy or sense of resignation in many Catholic parishes.

These comments are in no way meant to be a diatribe against Catholicism and I am not suggesting that there are not millions of spiritually alive Catholics; indisputably there are.

In fact, if we look at the born again statistics by denomination, the Catholic church is home to the second largest number of born again adults in the U.S. In fact, the percentage of adult Catholics who now satisfy the born again criteria – i.e., having made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is important in their life today, and believing they will experience Heaven after they die only because they confessed their sins and accepted Jesus Christ as their savior – has doubled since 1991. That is more than twice the growth rate among Protestants. But the data clearly reveal a huge denomination with loads of untapped spiritual potential. (To be fair, I could make a similar statement about many other denominations, too – but none of them has anywhere close to the massive number of adherents of the Catholic body.)

One pattern masked by looking only at data accumulated at the start of two decades (1991 and 2011) is that the last ten years has seen some recovery in Bible reading among Protestants. Reading the scriptures dropped from 64% in 1991 to 48% in 2001, but has since climbed back to 57% – not a full return, but positive movement to be thankful for. To be sure, the thing that matters most is what people do with what they read from God’s Word, but getting people into the Book is at least a hopeful starting point.

A final observation has to do with another group that is reflecting declining depth of commitment: born again Christians. As the number of born again adults has increased (from 35% in 1991 to 41% today), the engagement in the Christian life seems to have waned – a common problem when a product, service, movement, or perspective gains massive numbers and velocity. Note that during the last two decades several critical reflections of spiritual devotion, such as church attendance and Bible reading, have dropped among the born again constituency. In the past decade, even the proportion of born again adults who say their faith is vitally important to them has dipped substantially.

What should we make of this growing complacency among the born again group? I attribute it to a central finding in the Maximum Faith research showing that many ask for God’s forgiveness but few are willing to suffer and sacrifice in order to be broken of sin and move on to a life of surrender and submission that produces a deeper relationship with God and a genuine love for other people. Bonhoeffer’s description of such a spiritual condition, the pursuit of cheap grace, fits America all too snuggly today.

The tracking data demonstrate that there has been a lot of movement in people’s faith over the past two decades. Over the past few days I’ve released reports detailing some of those changes according to gender, age, race and ethnicity, and now region.

How did you anticipate religious change to be distributed geographically? My expectation was that the convergence of several factors – decades of rampant household mobility, the democratization and universal accessibility of information, a cultural shift toward postmodernism, and the redefinition of ministry “success” in church circles – would produce a completely different theolographic™ geography. (In case you – like most people – missed it, I started using the term theolographic™ about two decades ago to describe matters related to religious behavior and beliefs.)

To my surprise, that is not the case. Yes, there has been a lot of movement within regions regarding religious beliefs and behaviors. However, two particular analyses show that while the four regions have not experienced the identified changes in lockstep, there is a shocking degree of similarity in the transitions that have happened during the past 20 years.

First, consider the rankings of the regions on 11 of the measures we tracked. (Rankings are provided in the accompanying table.) In 1991, the South reflected the most “Christian” position on nine of those measures, and the Midwest was firmly in second place, placing second on eight of them (and first on two others). In 2011, the South placed first in all 11 measures, and the Midwest was next in line on nine of those measures. Looking at the coastal regions, in 1991 the West was on the bottom rung of the ladder related to three of the factors and was third on seven factors; in 2011 the West held the final position on four factors and third position related to five factors. In other words, not much has changed, at least in terms of rankings.

Another way of examining how things have transitioned is through a gap analysis – i.e., an examination of the size of the gap between the results of the regions on the various factors involved. To anchor the analysis, I compared each region to the statistics for the South. In doing this analysis across the 11 variables of most interest, the results were strikingly similar to what we find in the rankings. The average gap across the 11 factors between the Northeast and South was 14 percentage points in 1991; it was 15 points in 2011. The mean gap between the Midwest and South was seven percentage points in 1991; it was exactly the same in 2011. The biggest change was between the South and West, where the average gap went from 10 points in 1991 to 13 points in 2011. That is a noteworthy difference, but not large enough to make a big deal over.

One pragmatic conclusion we can draw is that a handful of trends have occurred across the nation and thus deserve focused attention. For instance, all four regions experienced double-digit increases in the percentage of unchurched adults. Three of the four regions endured statistically significant declines in the proportion of adults who are confident that the Bible is accurate in the principles it teaches. (Only the Northeast was left out of that shift; the three point drop it experienced did not exceed the maximum level of sampling error.)

But at the end of the day, I return to one of the lessons gleaned when I was learning the ropes regarding the gathering and analysis of religious data in the U.S. In general, any particular faith practice or religious belief that squares with the Bible or with traditional Christian teachings and expectations is likely to be most prolific in the South and Midwest, while the Northeast and West will be more similar to each other, lagging well behind the more biblically-consistent faith behaviors and beliefs of residents of the interior states.

One of the fascinating realities about the new data is that it is likely to shock a lot of pastors – well, at least those who are not Hispanic. Since conventional churches are overwhelmingly segregated, white, black, and Asian pastors are not likely to be well-informed about the current changes happening in the Hispanic faith community. (I’m not saying they don’t care, only that their focus is generally not upon reaching people from racial or ethnic groups other than that which their church presently serves.) In other words, most church leaders who operate outside of the Hispanic world may find the trends interesting or even alarming, but not personally relevant.

One of the outcomes that rocked me was the dramatic surge in the unchurched proportion among Hispanics. While the unchurched average has exploded among whites and blacks during the past two decades as well, only Hispanics doubled their percentage of unchurched adults. This condition is especially significant because of the large family sizes and young age of the Hispanic segment. Past studies we have conducted indicated that being an unchurched adult is related to one’s church experiences while young. If America’s Hispanic adults are increasingly shifting away from church attendance – or any kind of organized faith experience – the future does not bode well for the expansion of Christianity in the U.S.

Let me also point out a contextual factor of importance in this discussion. In 1991, 68% of Hispanics were associated with a Catholic church, 20% with a Protestant congregation. By 2011, the Protestant figure was roughly the same, but the proportion of Hispanics associated with Catholicism sunk to just 45%. The key insight is that most of those people who used to frequent a Catholic church simply dropped out of organized religion altogether.

Reclaiming the lost portion of the Hispanic population for Christ will take a lot more than simply figuring out how to custom design worship services and family programs that they find appealing. The operative principle beneath their movement out of the church world is that we do what we believe; actions follow beliefs. The perspectives that are most forcefully driving Hispanics out the door are a declining belief in the existence of the God of the scriptures and a huge loss of faith in the accuracy and authority of the Bible. Until those cornerstones are effectively addressed, and the growing objections and mistrust of Hispanics adequately answered, mere changes in formats and programs will not reverse their decision to abandon organized Christianity.

By the way, here’s a little more food for thought (since many people may not be too exercised about the departure of Hispanics from the Church.) Some of the early measurements suggest that we may be facing a similar long-term exodus among young white people. We’ll touch on that another day…

• From 1991 to 2011, of the 14 dimensions tracked, men’s average score declined by at least 10 percentage points on one factor (certainty that the Bible’s principles are accurate). However, women’s average scores dropped by 10 or more points on four indicators (church attendance, orthodox view of God, Bible reading, and a huge rise in being unchurched).

• Women used to put men to shame in terms of their orthodoxy of belief and the breadth and consistency of their religious behavior. No more; the religious gender gap has substantially closed. In 1991, there were 6 of the 14 tracked dimensions in which the gap between the genders was at least 10 percentage points (and in all cases women had scores that were more positive from a biblical standpoint). In 2011, there were only two indicators reflecting such a gap. (For the record, those indicators were having made a personal commitment to Christ and contending that religious faith is very important in their life.)

• The double-digit gaps that existed between the genders on five of the 14 factors back in 1991 had been substantially diminished by 2011 – and even reversed in one instance. For instance, while women were more likely to read the Bible during the week than were men in 1991 (50% compared to 40%) the pattern was reversed by 2001 – 41% of men read the Bible during the week in the 2011 study compared to 40% of women. While that single percentage point of difference may be a measurement artifact, the elimination of that gap is what is striking. Other notable reductions in the difference between the genders included an eight-point drop in the unchurched gap (down from 12 points) and a seven-point decline in the margin around religious faith being very important (down from 21 points to 14).

Generational distinctions became unusually newsworthy once the Baby Boomers entered their adult years. Boomers have consistently dominated the media spotlight and have generally reshaped every aspect of American life they have touched – sometimes for the better. Now, as Boomers enter the years traditionally associated with retirement and slowing down, that segment is ensuring that more changes are store for our ideas about aging and associated lifestyles.

As we examine the survey data concerning generations and faith, the nature and size of the three generations under the microscope matters. Consider the relative magnitude of each group during the 20-year era we are studying. In 1991, Elders constituted 43% of the adult population (adults defined as 18 or older); Boomers, 44%; and Busters, just 13%. (Remember, the “Elders” segment is really a combination of two earlier, smaller generations – the Builders and Seniors. Treating those two groups as unique entities means that Boomers have reigned as the largest American generation for nearly four decades.) Currently, the generational figures have radically shifted: Elders have plummeted to 17% of the total adult population, Boomers have dropped to 30%, and Busters have risen to 34%. (There is an emerging generation of adults, one we labeled the Mosaics, who represent the remaining 19% of today’s adults.) These proportions serve as a kind of relative weight that each generation holds in society. As births, aging, and deaths occur, that relative weight shifts a bit from year to year. The present-day figures indicate that Boomers remain a force to be reckoned with – in ways beyond their massive numbers – but it is also undeniable that their numerical prominence is waning.

As we turn to the survey findings, sometimes the most intriguing revelations are those describing things that did not happen. I think a few of those revelations are evident in the generational analysis of the data from our study looking at faith trends over the past 20 years. For instance, Busters did NOT experience a decline in church attendance – despite widespread expectations that the “slacker generation” which heavily promoted “postmodern theology” and a worldview summarized by the word “whatever” would abandon organized religion ASAP. Meanwhile, Boomers have been leaving churches in droves and expressing general dissatisfaction with the ways of conventional churches, but their Bible reading levels stayed consistent.

Other times the most invaluable insights are discovered through noting points of consistency across disparate groups. In this case, the most startling convergence was the fact that there was significant growth within all three generations among the ranks of the unchurched. Those who have nothing to do with churches increased by eight percentage points among both Busters and Elders, and jumped 18 points among Boomers. Similarly, there has been no net change over the past 20 years across all three generations in relation to how many people view the religious faith as very important, or how many believe they have a responsibility to share their faith with non-Christians.

Occasionally a useful insight is grasped by noticing an unexpected outcome. The study produced several of those revelations. For instance, after at least two decades of growth in the percentage of Boomers who were classified as “born again” (from 1982 through 2001), the proportion plummeted by nine points in the last ten years. Or, consider the dramatic growth among Elders switching from small or mid-sized churches to large congregations, increasing by 150% since 1991. (The increases in large church attendance for the other generations were 85% among Busters and just 6% among Boomers.) Or how can we explain the across-the-board decline in people’s sense of evangelistic responsibility that occurred since 2001: a 10-point drop among Busters, 7 point decline among Boomers, and a 12-point reduction among Elders?

In some cases you glean valuable knowledge by looking for patterns within a group’s data profile. An example relates to the religious beliefs of Busters. Those changes include a five-point drop in orthodox views about God since 2001; an 11-point decline in firm agreement that the Bible’s principles are accurate; and a seven-point drop since 2001 in Busters’ perceived responsibility for personal evangelism. These shifts point to theological trouble for the future Church. Busters are, after all, the generation currently gaining a majority of the open pastoral positions in churches across the land.

Yet another way of reading the statistics is to consider which group is most consistent with biblical teachings, or most engaged in conventional forms of religious activity. Elders claim the top spot in all of the “positive” areas of both belief and behavior – that is, they were the most likely to participate in each religious behavior tested, the least likely to be unchurched, and the most likely to have beliefs that corresponded to biblical teaching.

In that regard, one of the more shocking realizations is that Busters and Boomers had equivalent scores on five of the six behaviors (Boomers surpassed Busters only with regard to attending a large church). While the two generations’ belief systems were not as similar, they were nearly identical in relation to five of the eight beliefs tested. The points of divergence related to stating that their faith is very important (Boomers were 11 points more likely to do so); self-identifying as a Christian (Boomers were five points higher on this measure); and claiming to have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ (Boomers were nine points higher).

In fact, if we examine how the beliefs of Busters and Boomers have shifted in the past 20 years, in comparison to each other, we see that the average gap between their beliefs in 1991 was 10 points in 1991, nine points in 2001, and just five points in 2001. In contrast, the gap between Boomers and Elders went from four points in both 1991 and 2001 to seven points in 2011.

Looking at the absolute figures in the hope of gleaning a general perspective, we might conclude that as Busters have aged they have become more conventional in their religious behavior and somewhat more traditional in their beliefs, although they still struggle to accept the veracity of the Bible. Meanwhile, as Boomers have aged, they have been slowly distancing themselves from both conventional religious behaviors and beliefs – the typical expectation-breaking pattern we have come to expect from Boomers. (Just as they are reluctant to accept 65 as a reasonable or required age for retirement, so are they bucking the religious system regarding what to believe and carry out their beliefs.) Elders, considered to be the last reliably Christian generation we may see during our lifetime, have become less active in faith endeavors (a normal pattern as a generation ages – especially when their median exceeds 75) but have generally remained firm in their beliefs.

Overall, there is a lot of faith transitioning within generations – more than might have been expected.

In this new Update, notice several patterns. First, beliefs did not change much. Behavior, however, changed substantially. Because we know that behavior follows beliefs, we could have anticipated the behavioral changes three and four decades ago, when there was major upheaval in our belief systems. The seeds that were sown in the Sixties have now borne their fruit: decreases in church attendance, Sunday school participation, Bible reading, and church volunteerism.

Second, a deeper examination of the data revealed that there is a huge degree of behavioral and belief shifting taking place at a sub-national level. In other words, there is a lot of change that gets canceled out when you simply look at the net statistic for a specific factor. For instance, the percentage of adults who consider themselves to be Christian appeared to stay relatively unchanged over the 20 years in question. That suggests there has been little ferment on this matter. However, that national average masks the fact that in the Northeast, of all places, the proportion of self-identified Christians rose by ten points at the same time that it dropped by seven points in the Midwest. We will dive into some of the critical subgroup explorations over the next eight days in a series of segmentation analyses released on barna.org and commented upon here.

Third, notice that as alarming as a nine percentage point drop in average weekly church attendance is, a companion statistic is equally as alarming: the 13-point increase in those who are now unchurched. Some church analysts have claimed – incorrectly, as it turns out – that the ranks of the unchurched are swelling because younger adults have stopped attending church. In truth, the biggest decline of all has occurred among Baby Boomers (an 18-point dip).

Another interesting angle pertains to when increases and decreases began. It is normal for there to be minimal changes in the percentage of the public that gives any particular response from year to year – fluctuations that might be attributable to sampling error or other uncontrollable factors (such as a snowstorm that prevents people in a region from attending church services during the period of the interviewing). Consequently, we look for longer-term patterns.

For instance, the biggest share of the decline in church attendance occurred between 1991 and 2001; there has not been much change in the past decade. The same pattern is evident regarding church volunteerism. However, adult Sunday school attendance appears to have experienced a very slow but steady decline over the past two decades, diminishing by four points per decade – not enough to be alarmed about in a single decade, but significant when it amounts to eight points over twenty years, and a trend line that clearly slopes downward.

Looking at the data regarding beliefs, we also see that more than seven out of ten adults held an orthodox view of the nature of God through 2001; it has only begun to dip in the past several years. Likewise, people’ views of the accuracy of the scriptures held steady until the latter part of this past decade.

Overall, the picture is not pretty though it falls somewhat short of disaster. If existing tendencies continue, then we will likely see an increase in the numbers of people who do not accept a conventional definition of God’s character and those who reject the accuracy of the principles taught in the scriptures. Adult Sunday school could easily go the way of the all-but-forgotten midweek service. The percentage of unchurched people will probably continue to climb as the percentage of adults attending church services remains on the downward slope.

What do you make of this picture?

Read the Barna Update: “Barna Examines Trends in 14 Religious Factors Over 20 Years“

“It is a great matter to live in obedience, to be under a superior and not to be at our own disposing. It is much safer to obey than to govern. Many live under obedience, rather for necessity than for love; such are discontented and do easily repine. Neither can they attain to freedom of mind, unless they willingly and heartily put themselves under obedience for the love of God. Go whither thou wilt, thou shalt find no rest, but in humble subjection under the government of a superior. Many have deceived themselves, imagining to find happiness in change.” (Kempis, Thomas à. The Imitation of Christ. New York: Walker and Company. 1987. Pages 23-24.)

Besides echoing the sentiments of 1 Timothy 3, à Kempis raises a fundamental question that often gets ignored: What is the role of a leader? I have argued for years that leaders are responsible for directing, motivating, mobilizing and resourcing people to pursue a transformational vision. And while such assertions ignite general agreement, the truth is known by an examination of the fruit.

The leadership fruit that Americans cherish is typically different than the noble and deeper outcomes that à Kempis recommends. Our culture prizes action above reflection and restraint, resulting in many dubious and superficial choices. In business, good leadership is commonly equated with producing a profit. Effective governmental leadership is often deemed to be that which generates grand policies, provides public comfort, and minimizes partisan bickering. In education, progressive leadership seems to be about image, expanding enrollment, increased revenue, and faculty awards. Even in Christian families, our studies show that parents generally view conformity and achievement as the marks of success for their children.

But à Kempis intimates that great leadership is about enabling people to experience peace of mind. Such peace is ultimately a spiritual reality more than a physical condition. If it is true that Jesus was the greatest leader of all-time – and what leader has ever produced a more significant and enduring outcome? – then we must note that a significant component of His legacy was providing His people with the tranquility that comes from the joy and freedom of a restored relationship with God.

In other words, a great leader endows people with a vision of the future that transforms their physical situation and potential contribution through the content of their dreams and desires. For the leader to facilitate peace in the minds and hearts of followers he/she must have their full trust, earned by embodying integrity and godliness. And that leader’s authority comes not from a charismatic personality or administrative competence but from a deep connection with God. The importance of that relationship cannot be overstated; after all, you cannot give – or help others to have – what you neither understand nor experience.

A great leader, therefore, enables people to experience lasting and deepening peace with God. He enters into a compact with the people to help them advance in their quest for genuine transformation. Look at the leaders around you – and, maybe, at yourself if you claim to be a leader. How well do people understand the transformational vision being promoted? How well do they own it? How consistently are they advancing it? How much peace do they have?

That is an interesting argument. It makes some sense: if you think this is a great nation and love the perks of living here, then be willing to pay for the privilege. Its basic economics: you pay more for a better product or service.

Without rejecting Mr. Miller’s sentiment, I was disappointed that the editorial did not place the recommendation in context by raising the issue of how much is too much–either too much government or too much tax. After all, if you agree that your appreciation motivates you to pay a higher tax rate, then where does the line get drawn? Are you ungrateful if the tax rate is raised by another two percentage points? By twenty-two percentage points? Given the crushing debt load the country has taken on in the past few years under both Republican and Democratic leaders it is feasible that an argument could be made to raise the existing tax rate to just about any level proposed by desperate government authorities.

The discussion about tax rates, though, masks a deeper leadership issue. Leadership is about vision; vision is about defining the future; defining that future is about anticipation of outcomes and impacts. A great leader is not one who proposes a big vision; a great leader is one whose big vision has been thought through and can reasonably be shown to have positive consequences if fully and properly executed. Exploring potential scenarios if particular strategies are embraced – that is, asking the “what if” questions – is one of the necessary practices of great leaders. Too often I get the sense that our leaders have looked at today but not tomorrow; our policies and actions are short-sighted, protecting them from the immediate threats but possibly creating many more for the future.

In fact, the concept of anticipating consequences is a germane challenge regarding taxes. Let’s suppose the “rich” were to pay tax rates roughly four points higher than those in force today. Would that solve the economic issues facing the United States today? If not, then what? And how will the maximum tax threshold of any particular group of taxpayers be determined?

Anticipating long-term consequences is a necessary practices for church leaders, too, as they seek to address the needs of not only their congregation but also those of their entire community. Exploring our impact on the future is one component of giving competent leadership while also displaying our love and concern for others. As you examine the kind of leadership your community of faith is providing, how well does it anticipate the future in light of its biblical mandate and core values?