On Local Political Engagement

Some have asked why I have become less politically involved over the years. There were a number of reasons that brought me to this point. The first, my family grew in size, and I want to spend as much time focused on them and shaping the next generation. The second reason is that I saw all of the voices shouting for your political attention and realized that people are getting enough of that. I want to focus on the parts of life that are not partisan.

The local political landscape changed too. When I first became involved, members of the community liked seeing a young person engaged even if we did not always agree on every issue. Power changes though brought individuals front center who expected ideological purity and the expectation of complete conformance to their views.

One issue that I feel strongly on is the hyper-partisan state we have turned our schools and municipalities into. We have created this cycle where we have drawn up the battle lines and engage in partisan bickering; because if we don't, the other side will walk all over us and win the day. It isn't that I deny that this exists; rather, I grieve the toll this has taken on our children and communities.

I am blessed to reside in a community where at one time was less partisan bickering. Recent elections though have sadly demonstrated that people locally want to bring the tensions we see at the national level down into our local communities, and that both saddens and disappoints me. We live in paradise down here, and our home should be a place where we find rest and strength. What I would like to see in the future are elections where both candidates - not just one - truly embody a spirit of let's focus on our vision for the community and not tearing down the opponent that I have decided to run against. I do find hope in that following this latest cycle of elections there have been quite a few people say, that was too brutal. Elections of that nature are not what we as Okaloosans want to see from our candidates.

Operating from a position of perceived strength, some (not all) in our local Republican Party have taken steps to inject partisanship into domains where partisanship did not previously exist. Today, we are facing this issue in Crestview where one candidate is registered as a democrat and the other a republican. Without knowing the two individuals, their philosophies, or even their voting histories, the local Republican Party has decided to endorse the registered republican in what is supposed to be a non-partisan race. Sadly, their meddling only serves to more deeply drive wedges into our community and further disenfranchise people that I believe could be brought into the fold.

Several years ago, I presented my beliefs countering the introduction of needless Republican partisanship into non-partisan elections. The result of this was that I received threatening messages from someone connected to the local Republican Party. They, then messaged a few of my friends telling them to distance themselves from me, and they called the individual that they believed was my boss and said that I needed to be fired from my job.

For no other reason than I dared disagree with them on a single issue, the party that asserts that it is the one that stands for economic opportunity and family values tried (but failed) to attack my ability to earn a living that my young and large family depends upon. At that point, I realized significant involvement in local politics not only kept me focused on things other than my family but also presented a threat to my ability to financially support them.

There are wonderful people serving Okaloosa County in elected capacity. Periodically, I use this page to highlight their contributions and views. Also, there are some rare occasions when the negatives need to be highlighted. In previous years, this county has struggled with corruption. When that resurfaces, it needs to be exposed so that we do not repeat the mistakes of our past. But, one thing I would encourage you to do is push back on the partisan narrative. Not everything has to be turned into a republicans versus democrats debate. We have let that invade too much of our lives, and we are destroying relationships and communities.

In the last couple of years, I have debated on whether to use this forum for any political discussion. Part of me says, it should be completely non-political. That, however, limits a forum where valuable information exchange can be had though. Ultimately, what I have decided is that this forum will be mostly positive and mostly non-political with a few political interjections here and there as appropriate.

A Reflection on Psalm 24

Psalm 24 considers the King of Glory and his Kingdom. For the Jewish people, this Psalm would be sung in the temple courts on Sundays, and they specifically consider this a Psalm for the first day of the week. Written into the Psalm is a call and response format, one example that we see is found in verse three, where the question is asked, “Who may ascend into the hill of the Lord?” The people in the temple would then sing back, “He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who has not lifted up his soul to an idol, nor sworn deceitfully.” Through this process of call and response the Psalmist answers three questions for us. 

The first question answered here in verses one and two is, “Who is subject to this King?” The response of the Psalmist, “The earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness…” The Psalmist does not stop there though; the Lord’s ownership is not limited to just the earth and nature, “The world and those who dwell therein” are also part of his domain and Lordship. Simply put, Yahweh’s (YHWH) kingship is found in his creation. He founded this creation, and naturally, he owns, upholds, and maintains it. This is in direct contrast to the false deities worshiped in the lands surrounding Israel. In their world, minor deities scrambled for control and engaged in petty rivalries with one another in a desperate and pathetic fight for control. Similarly, today, we are told by secularists that the only higher source of moral authority is our own self, and we should do what makes us happy. The result, we see an onslaught of rivalry as we piteously scrounge trying to play the role of mini-deity ever-engaged in a rat race to expand our dingy private kingdoms. This is not our Father’s plan for us, and it is no wonder so many in our world find themselves lacking in joy and happiness. Instead, we should seek that joy that comes through seeking to fulfill our created purpose worshiping and honoring our heavenly Father. 

The Psalmist then answers what should be our natural follow-up question. If this is the King of Complete Dominion, then who can approach this holy God? The text states, “Who may ascend into the hill of the Lord? Or who may stand in his holy place?” The Psalmist’s response is simple, “He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who has not lifted up his soul to an idol, nor sworn deceitfully.” There is an expectation that we must intentionally pursue holiness and purity. This is a call to action. Yet it is not a call to action for showmanship. Apart from God, we have no goodness, and in our humble state we certainly are able to offer no benefit to the Creator of the Universe either. Instead, this pursuit is simply to receive the blessings of God. This one, “Who has clean hands and a pure heart,” the Psalmist states, “He shall receive blessing from the Lord and righteousness from the God of his salvation.” The simple state of being conveyed by these words offers the idea that as worshipers of God, we are to be permanent guests of God on his hill. True worship of our God is not a process that we enter and exit at our convenience, and we should set our eyes upon Christ the only man with a truly clean heart and hands as he is the personification and fulfillment of this question.

Something remarkable begins to happen upon answering the question, who may approach the King. We see, “Lift up your heads, O you gates! And be lifted up you everlasting doors! And the King of glory shall come in.” Creation and the worshipers of the true God YHWH begin preparing for the entrance of our Lord. It was no accident that the Jews would sing this Psalm in their temple on Sundays and that Christ’s triumphant entrance into Jerusalem would also occur on a Sunday. The King has made himself known to us. This King of Glory, “YHWH strong and mighty… YHWH mighty in battle” has entered our midst attending this jubilant worship. And, here we see the final question answered, “Who is this King of Glory?” He is, “YHWH of hosts,” this King, who has mercifully opened up the gates for the people and his creation to worship him, this Creator of all things surrounded by worshipers, “He is the King of Glory.”  

As we go through the rest of our week, the questions we should ask ourselves when we worship are these:

1. “Are we worshiping with the knowledge that the King of Glory, the Lord of all Creation has entered our midst and made himself known to us?”

2. What implications does/should this knowledge have on how we worship from here on out? 

Elijah - A Character Sketch

Introduction 

James 5:17-18 “Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed earnestly that it would not rain; and it did not rain on the land for three years and six months. And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth produced its fruit. 

Notice that James does not refer to Elijah as a man with unsurpassed nature. Elijah does not set an impossible standard of faith that we can only aspire to. Instead, he writes that Elijah was a man with a nature like ours. Elijah lived a life characterized by heroism and humility. He achieved this through living a life characterized by prayer and faith placed in God. 

Question

Do you ever feel as if you are living on just enough while some wicked person you know is living their best life? You might find yourself wondering, why am I doing the best I can, trusting in God while my neighbor is living life as an utter pagan and seems to be getting rewarded for their wickedness. 

Let’s consider Elijah and Ahab. Here Elijah is a man and prophet of guide. Following his message to Ahab that rain will cease in the land of Israel, he immediately is placed on Israel’s most wanted list and goes into hiding. At the Brook Chereth, he is served by ravens who bring him bread and meat daily. Because God is the source of the miraculous intervention, I can imagine that the meat was of the highest quality. Perhaps, the ravens were bringing strips of filet every morning and evening. Hopefully, the bread was of the artisan, gourmet variety. Ordinarily though, Raven’s aren’t known as gourmands and the food they dine on isn’t the freshest. 

After a while, the brook dried up and Elijah was directed to Zerephath. The situation here was a little better; because, at least there was companionship for Elijah. Ravens aren’t known for their discerning food taste, and they are worse conversationalists. When Elijah arrives though, the food situation remains a miracle. Now, he, the widow, and her son are subsisting on a little flour and oil that never seems to run out. All the while, Ahab and Jezebel are living their best life in a place surrounded by a lovely murdered that Naboth said was to die for. 

But, for Ahab and Jezebel this is as good as it was ever going to get for them. And, for unbelievers, this existence here on earth is their heaven. There is no expectation for unbelievers to live by faith and trust in God for his provision. Life for them is about maximizing pleasure and personal gain. In this lifetime, it may be hard for us to see this as fair. But as believers, God has set a higher standard for us because he loves us and wants what is best for us. 

Enter Elijah 

So, who is Elijah? Starting with his name, Elijah means YHWH is my God. Further, he is identified as being from the settlers of Tishbe in Gilead. We do not know anything of Tishbe, but we know that those residing in Gilead lived a rugged pioneer existence. Gilead literally means heap of stones and it is hill country. Elijah is a humble man of humble origin who bursts into the scene of Ahab’s royal court to deliver an astounding message. “It will not rain again until I say so.” 

What can we learn from this? 

Remember that God looks at our hearts – not our background, appearance, and education. Scripture is full of humble people from humble origins being called to acts of heroism that ultimately glorify God. Perhaps, this is because the humble simply because they are humble are more easily molded, more teachable, and more willing to be servants of God instead of the mighty who are often prone to pursuing their own agendas. 

Brook Cherith

As we mentioned previously, Elijah immediately becomes public enemy number 1, and the Lord directs him to go into hiding at the Brook Cherith. In this narrative, all of the names and locations have significance and meaning. Cherith means to cut off or cut down. God was utilizing this time of isolation to cut down Elijah the Tishbite and develop Elijah the Prophet. 

Application 

What do we see here that is applicable to our own lives? In our lives, we need to find time for solitude and education. There are many examples across the Old and New Testaments of God utilizing aloneness as an opportunity to not only draw his servants closer to him but also educate them in the faith. We must cultivate both our relationship with God and our understanding of God, and a key element in this process is solitude spent wisely.

However, this existence cannot go on forever. In high school, I had quite a few classes with an individual who was an avid reader. Any time I saw this person, they were reading something of significance. Yet, this person also was extremely quiet. They had tremendous knowledge and insight but never shared the lessons they had acquired. As Christians we are called by God to read and study his word, we are called to moments of isolation, but this is all meaningless if we never share what he has given us. Does anyone remember the song, This Little Light of Mine? What does it go on to say, “Hide it under a bushel… NO! I am going to let it shine.” Elijah could have spent his remaining years living by the brook but unless he moved on we would never have the greatest parts of the story, and there would be no legacy left in his student and friend Elisha. 

Lessons from Elijah’s time at the Brook

I recently read some of Chuck Swindoll’s thoughts on Elijah and following my reading of that, I think we can learn the following lessons from Elijah’s time at the Brook Cherith: 

1. We must be willing to take a break from the action and be set aside for a while. 

2. God’s directions always include God’s provision. If you find yourself somewhere where there is no provision, then evaluate whether you are there because of his direction. 

3. Trust in God one day at a time. We almost never know what he has in store for us. Notice that God never told Elijah the next step until he had taken the first step. 

4. A dried up brook is often a sign of God’s pleasure not his disappointment. When the Brook of Cherith dried up, it was not because God was punishing Elijah. Rather, he was giving his tacit approval to Elijah saying, you are ready for the next phase of ministry.  

From Basic to Advanced

Have you ever found yourself engaged in a task perhaps in school or on the job where you thought, “Wow, that was really challenging, but I think I understand everything now.” 

In 2019, I left the job that I had been doing in the Air Force for 10 years and began a new career in the Air Force. I was accepted into a three year training program where the first two years proved to be a challenge, but midway into the second year, I found myself comfortable and understanding my role. This was in preparation for my third year of the program where the training and work became significantly more complex. Without those first two years, I would not have been able to get through the third year. Essentially, I had transitioned from basic training to advanced training. 

For Elijah, the Brook Cherith represented Elijah’s basic training, and Zerephath was his advanced training. Once again, the words here have a deeper meaning than our English Bibles allow us to see. Zerephath as a verb means to melt and as a noun it means crucible. So from Cherith to Zerephath we see cutting down to melting. We can visualize this by thinking of a wood craftsman’s external focus on appearance versus a welder’s internal focus on the strength of the bond existing between two joined pieces of metal. Essentially, Elijah had jumped from a room temperature environment to a fiery furnace. 

In Elijah’s first step of faith, he was tasked with leaving Cherith from the far eastern edge of Israel West across Israel. He wasn’t exactly on speaking terms with Ahab who had the entire army searching for him, and Elijah had to trust that God would protect him as he made his journey. 

When Elijah arrived in Zerephath, he found a woman gathering sticks to make a fire that she believed would cook the last meal that she and her son would enjoy. It is safe to assume that she was experiencing feelings of sorrow and fear. Have you ever encountered someone experiencing fear? What are some of your observations? It is contagious! Often, when we meet someone who is genuinely afraid we begin experiencing this same emotion. Elijah met this woman where she was at and responded to her trepidation with confidence. He had faith in God’s provision. In fact, he tells her in chapter 17 verse 13, “Do not fear; go and do…” Here we can learn that just as fear is contagious so is a strong faith in God. In verse 15, we see, “So she went away and did according to the word of Elijah…” Elijah’s faith helped take her fear and turn it into simple obedience. When we are walking in faith, we can lead others to do so too simply through the humble confidence God blesses us with when we know we are abiding in his will. 

The first person raised back to life

Sometime after Elijah arrived in Zerephath, the widow’s son becomes ill and passes away. In her grief, she becomes angry with Elijah. She states, “What have I to do with you, O man of God? Have you come to me to bring my sin to remembrance, and to kill my son?” Notice Elijah’s response, “Give me your son.” Elijah doesn’t try to persuade her that she is lashing out and her feelings are off base. He understands her grief and anger. For us when we encounter someone who is grieving and angry, the worst thing we can say in the moment are platitudes designed to let them know it is going to get better. Often, the best thing we can do in these situations is provide silent companionship. 

Elijah responds in faith and enters unchartered territory. In the verses that follow, we witness the first recorded miracle where someone is brought from the dead. Elijah (that we know of) has no prophets that have gone before him providing the manual for the resurrection process. He writes the process. Notice the simple, straightforward humility of his approach. He states, “O Lord my God, I pray let this child’s soul come back to him.” Have you ever prayed long prayers dancing around asking God what you really want to ask him? I have, and when I reflect on my heart condition at the time, I can see that it came from a place of not having faith in God to ask him what was really on my heart. As I have grown in my walk, I have learned to approach God and share what is really on my heart. 

This summer we have struggled with this mysterious swelling that has been afflicting Ezra’s face. There have been numerous medical visits and procedures in Fort Walton and Pensacola. Finally, one day as I was driving into work I prayed, “Father, you know what is wrong and you are the healer. I know that if it is your will you could heal him instantly. I also know that you can guide his physicians and let them find an answer. That day we were finally given an answer. While it is an annoying condition that he may have to deal with for some time, it is not anything harmful.”

Again, Elijah placed his faith in God, and the son was restored to life. We see that Elijah then takes the child and brings him to his mother. Notice his humble statement, “See, your son lives!” Both in English and Hebrew Elijah refrains from injecting himself into the narrative. He does not say see this miracle that I performed, or I prayed for your son and he lives now. Elijah in this moment of heroism had an opening for pride, but kept the attention off himself. The result was that the widow’s faith in God was strengthened. She states, “Now by this I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the Lord in your mouth is true.” The glory was God’s alone and through Elijah’s humility hardened hearts were softened and brought closer to the Lord. 

The Confrontation

After three years had passed, God told Elijah that it was time to confront Ahab. When they were finally brought together, Ahab states, “Is that you, O troubler of Israel?” In Hebrew, this word trouble is interesting as it can also mean viper. Basically, Ahab refers to Elijah as a viper. Instead of facing his sin and accepting the consequences of his idolatry, he is looking to blame Elijah for the suffering and misery experienced by his kingdom. Elijah calls it how it is, “I have not troubled Israel, but you and your father’s house have…” There is no drawn out debate, and I think we can learn that there are times when we need keep ourselves from being sucked into someone else’s narrative. Our calling as Christians requires us to rise above petty drama and focus on the truth. 

Having read a fair amount of ancient literature, I can tell you that in chapter 18 verses 20 through 40 we read one of the greatest stories ever written. Elijah again acting in faith allows the situation to be set up completely in the prophets of Baal’s favor. They pick the bull, they pick their spot, and they go first. Elijah has issued a challenge whichever deity responds follow that one. He knows what the result will be but wants to give those in the audience no excuse. Of course after a day spent being mocked and mutilating themselves, the prophets of Baal are unsuccessful. Elijah then ups the ante and tells them to soak his alter in water. Some use this as an opportunity to attack the validity of the narrative. They are in a three year drought where is this water coming from? However, if you know the geography of the region, it makes sense. Today, Mt. Carmel is only 5 miles from the Mediterranean Sea, and it is likely that in Elijah’s time it was even closer. Then Elijah prays a simple prayer, the Lord responds, and the people begin worshipping the Lord, the one true God. 

The Execution

Immediately following this, Elijah directs the weakened prophets of Baal to be gathered up, and he executes them at the Brook Kishon (which ironically can be translated into English as sore). When I would hear this story as a child, I would always cheer for Elijah’s win, but then wonder why he behaved so brutally following the win. The reason is that we are called to completely eliminate any evil within our lives. Root it out! When we lived in Colorado, our backyard was plagued with thistles. Here in Florida, a thistle in the sand pulls right out, but in that hard, dry packed soil of Colorado thistles are nearly impossible to pull out as their roots can extend many feet under the surface of the ground as they search for water. The only way to rid the yard of thistles was to pull every last weed by the root out. And just for the record, we never did pull out every thistle. The new owners eventually won by removing all vegetation and covering the yard in rocks. While we may not be called to execute prophets of Baal, we are called to eliminate sin from our hearts.

Rain on the Horizon

Over and over we have seen the trust that Elijah places in God. Following the execution of the prophets, Elijah says to Ahab, “Go up, eat and drink; for there is the sounds of abundance of rain…” We may think that this means a rain storm was visible or perhaps thunder began to roll across the coastline. I am being somewhat presumptive, but at this point, I believe that it is still a cloudless, hot dry day. I believe that the sound of rain was Elijah’s own trust in God’s promise. The reason I think this is because Ahab goes away to eat and drink. Elijah bows down and tells his servant “Go up and look toward the sea.” Elijah and the servant do this six times and there is nothing each time. Then on the seventh time, a tiny cloud is seen on the horizon. That cloud then turned into a rain storm that the land had not witnessed in years. 

Transition to the Blues

We are familiar with the narrative, and we know that Ahab and Elijah engage in a furious race down the side of the mountain where Elijah outruns Ahab in his chariot. Jezebel promises to kill Elijah, and all of the sudden we see Elijah crumple. He retreated into the wilderness and requested that God take his life. As this story has been taught to me, many have taken it as an opportunity to assert that Elijah is bipolar, or Elijah demonstrates he is human by blowing a glorious existence to engage in a sinful pity party. Elijah is depressed, but he is demonstrating to us that he is human. 

Years ago, I decided to train for a marathon. The process was rigorous and was like having a second full-time job. On the day of the race, the energy of the crowd propelled me for the first 16 miles. It was a lot of fun. My training got me through the next 4 miles, and at mile 20, I realized that I was in a lot of pain, I still had 6.2 miles left, and not too long ago, I thought 6.2 miles was a really long race. Willpower and this ancient marathon running great grandpa got me through those last miles. The race terminated in a minor league stadium that was filled with thousands of people from all over the region cheering for the finishers. I have never been in as much pain and exhaustion as I was then, and I found myself trying not to cry. Following that experience, I found it difficult to run again from the sheer exhaustion and the mental block of how do I ever compete with that again? That was a mountain top experience, and it will never be the same. It is a common phenomenon for first time marathon runners, and I believe that Elijah was experiencing something similar. 

In God’s intervention, notice what he does. He feeds him and lets him rest in the quiet wilderness. God doesn’t say get back at it Elijah you slug! No, God understands where Elijah is at and he gives him this moment of rest. Finally, after 40 days and 40 nights, the Lord reaches out and says, “What are you doing here, Elijah?” In Elijah's response, we see self-pity, and we see the distortion of reality that self-pity causes. Elijah thinks he is alone, but God shows him the truth. 

A mission and a friend

Then God gives Elijah a mission and a gift. We are going to have moments where we retreat to the cave. We are going to have moments of self-pity. Some may find feelings of shame trapping them in the cave. Our internal voice may say, “You have been in the cave too long. You are no longer fit for service.” We need to rest and recover, but we also have to be willing to follow God’s calling when he says it is time to proceed with the mission. 

For Elijah, the mission was to anoint Hazael as king over Syria. Does anyone know the gift that God provided Elijah at this time? A friend and student named Elisha. As Christians we need companionship and we need to pass the ministry on from generation to the next. Elisha fills both of these roles for Elijah. 

The Final Chapter

In the final chapter of Elijah’s life, he knows that it is time to be taken up to heaven. He starts his journey at Gilgal, the location of the Israelites campsite before they crossed the Jordan into Canaan. From there, he goes on to Bethel where Abraham had built his altar and met with the Lord. Then he proceeded to Jericho where the Israelites had been victorious in battle, and finally, he went on to the river Jordan. During this whole process, he had been trying to get Elisha to stop following him, and it seems that this may have been a test for Elisha. And, Elisha proved himself a relentless follower. 

We know of Elijah’s offer, Elisha’s, request and the result of that… But look at their final moments, “Then it happened, as they continued on and talked, that suddenly a chariot of fire appeared with horses on fire, and separated the two of them…” We see two friends walking and talking enjoying each other’s company; then Elijah is carried off into glory.

Concluding Thoughts

Christians are to actively engage their culture! As ambassadors of Christ we uphold a standard. Earth is not purgatory nor is it heaven’s waiting room. We are here on earth called to do ministry and called to stand for what is right and wrong. We see today out of a reaction to legalism all these cute sayings about the importance of showing that God is love. There is a time and place for that. Notice the difference in how Elijah treated the widow’s unbelief versus the idolatry of the prophets of Baal. But, we can’t forget how he treated the prophets of Baal. Wickedness must be rooted out.

 

To Attack or not to Attack

 Enemy aircraft have been placed near culturally significant sites. At the present, the primary ethical considerations made in assessing these targets include rules-based thinking and care-based thinking. The commander’s attorney has advised that the onus of responsibility for the placement of these aircraft is solely on the enemy. As such, any collateral damage inflicted to the culturally significant sites is their doing. However, another officer considering care-based ethics asserts that video imagery showing any damage sustained by these sites will cause the sympathy of viewers to be on the side of the enemy. These opposing arguments must thus be balanced utilizing results-based ethics. The commander should assess available intelligence on these targets and determine the impact their elimination will have on the outcome of the conflict. Considerations to make include determining whether any of these aircraft represent a center of gravity for the enemy and what tactical advantage gained by the target’s elimination. For example, intelligence might reveal that certain aircraft are not mission capable. These would be lower in priority and could potentially be avoided sparing some collateral damage to sensitive sites. My recommendation is to place a weighted value on each of the targets and attack them in the order of highest to lowest tactical value so as to bring a swift conclusion to this conflict.

Anti-aircraft weapons have been placed in close proximity to hospitals. While the principle of discrimination protects non-combatants, the principle of double-effect provides additional consideration. The enemy has intentionally violated long-standing international law by their placement. Thus, these anti-aircraft weapons represent lawful military targets. Not all military targets are of equal value. The commander should primarily consider care-based ethics in this scenario. If the targets present no military threat to our personnel, then they can be ignored while other targets of greater value are eliminated. Additionally, the commander can look to the principle of last resort. Utilizing a range of non-kinetic options, perhaps the enemy can be persuaded to remove these anti-aircraft weapons on their own volition.

Families have moved into high value military targets. In this circumstance, rules and results-based ethics both identify that these targets must be eliminated. The rules on this issue are clear, combatants cannot use non-combatants to make their targets of military value off-limits.  Further, these have been identified as high value targets. They are centers of gravity for the enemy, and the elimination of them will likely sway the outcome of the conflict. Armed conflict is a necessary evil, and it is through the swift termination of hostilities that human life can be best preserved. Yet, when applying care-based ethics, it becomes apparent that the toll of attacking these targets will have on people will be significant. Because of the actions of the enemy, civilian casualties in this instance are unavoidable.

In this instance, it becomes apparent as to why it is necessary that war only be based on just causes. Conflict results in tragedy. As such, decision makers must ensure that armed action only be used as a last resort, that the right intentions are clearly driving the necessity, and that the right authorities make the decision to engage. Further, it must be clear that the conflict can result in a lasting peace. Many of the conflicts that we have witnessed in recent years have failed in this consideration, and it has prolonged the suffering associated with conflict. Assuming that all these considerations have been made, the commander should attack these targets. While the principle of double-effect is applicable in this situation, the commander should devise an engagement that still seeks to minimize non-combatant casualties.

Each of these scenarios presents an ethical challenge for commanders to weigh. The provided recommendation for all three was to engage the enemy in a manner that pursues a swift termination of armed hostilities. This will limit unnecessary loss of life and property. Commanders should prioritize targets as not all lawful military targets are of equal value. Priority should be given to centers of gravity. Additionally, when the loss of civilian life and property is anticipated steps should still be taken to ensure that these damages are kept to as minimal of level possible while still completing the mission. Finally, conflicts such as this leave lasting wounds for all involved regardless of affiliation. Decision makers should only engage in conflict when it has been determined to be for a just cause.

A statement to those of us (myself included) who lead people

If you are a leader, the people you are charged with leading need you to take your time off. During the week, you have tremendous influence over their priorities and agendas. Often, they put your requirements first - working for you before they even address their own needs. And, there is nothing abnormal about this; the organization has entrusted you with the responsibility to perform this function.

Simply, recognize the magnitude of your impact and take your time off. During your time away, employees utilize your down time to innovate through working at their own pace and via their own processes. Further, your time away affords them time to attend to mandatory but personal administrative matters. For example, my organization requires us to complete 40 continuing education credits a year, and I rely on my team lead's off days to complete these requirements. 

When you work around the clock, refuse to take your vacation time, and work through your scheduled days off, you are denying your employees a chance to have a break from your agenda and priorities. Further, you are establishing an environment where, while taking vacation time may not be frowned upon, it seems like it is because you are never away demonstrating that vacation time is a must for maintaining the health of the individual and ultimately that of the organization.

Ethics and Power

Lord Acton once stated, “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” This has been the guiding mantra for many entering the field of management or leadership. Power tends to be viewed as this malevolent force, yet in truth, power in and of itself is neutral. Rather, how we vector that power towards the pursuit of personal and institutional goals determines whether it is malevolent, neutral, or positive.

Ethics and Power Intersect

Reiley and Jacobs (2016) wisely assert that both referent and reward power are absolutely vital for leadership to effectively exercise as they engage in the process of management. The use of prompts through these power mechanisms promotes organizational citizenship behaviors within the firm. One can observe here that at this moment, there is still room for ethical or unethical decision-making and action. Leaders desiring an ethical organization staffed by moral employees must exude these values through their own words, decisions, and deeds. There is only one alternative here, and that is an organization built upon the values of manipulative Machiavellianism and destructive leadership. Where matters pertaining to morality and ethics are concerned, we are almost entirely incapable of simply being neutral.

Contrast

Enter Leo Tolstoy; diverging from this viewpoint that leaders should shape ethical organizations through their actions, Tolstoy according to Kellerman (2010) espoused a deterministic fatalism. Taking this view to its logical endpoint, whether in positions of leadership or not, we simply do what we do without any true consideration to the why behind our actions. The actions and outcomes have already been predetermined, so there really is no use in pausing to reflect. With this, Tolstoy went on to embrace an anarchical model of governance. This sounds extreme, yet in many work centers, we can readily observe leaders choosing to embrace a laissez-faire leadership methodology. C.G. Brown (1955) rightly argues that anarchy can be substituted for the term laissez-faire. Here presents a frightening scenario where no consideration to ethics, oversight, or power is given. Rather, individuals in the absence of responsible authority are permitted to do what they please with minimal governing and restraining structure. The thought of an uninvolved supervisor may sound enticing for some, but there can be no long-term accomplishment or furtherance of goals in a system of this nature.

A model worthy of pursuit

Gini and Green (2013) highlight for us the example of Abraham Lincoln. Though Abraham Lincoln was both poorly educated and prepared to take on the position of President of the United States when compared to his predecessors and successors. Ross (2009) highlights that Lincoln balanced his fears of mob violence and esteem for the law with an understanding that he must transform the law and organizational climate of his era. In pursuing this, he properly wielded the magnificent power of his office because of his long-standing practice of both physical and moral courage. In essence, he not only thought virtuously he also followed these thoughts up with forceful and proper action. Leaders must learn from Lincoln’s example that ethics cannot simply be an academic pursuit where theories of what constitutes right and wrong are considered via the meandering dialogues of academicians. Instead, we must put our views to work for the betterment of our spheres of influence.

Application

When studying monumental leaders such as Abraham Lincoln, Rosa Parks, Winston Churchill, and many others, one can easily fall into the trap of realizing that he or she is no Abraham Lincoln. From there, it is a slide down a slippery slope. If one is not Abraham Lincoln and will never reach that magnitude of greatness, what is the purpose of even trying? Levin and Boaks (2012) capture this sentiment. They write that when discussing leadership we can at times ascribe too much virtue to the position turning it into an impossible ideal that no ordinary human can achieve. They caution against this warning that as we think about and discuss leadership, we must temper our rhetoric so that us ordinary types have something that we are able to pursue and achieve. Thus, we should view the aforementioned leaders and others as the ideal but realize that in our homes and work centers we too are capable of effective leadership even if we never personally realize the lofty accomplishments of those whom we admire.

References

Reiley, P. J., & Jacobs, R. R. (2016). Ethics Matter: Moderating Leaders’ Power Use and         Followers’ Citizenship Behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(1), 69–81.            http://www.jstor.org/stable/24703756

Kellerman, B. (2010). Leadership: Essential selections on power, authority, and influence (1^st    ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

BROWNE, C. G. (1955). “LAISSEZ-FAIRE” OR “ANARCHY” IN LEADERSHIP? ETC: A        Review of General Semantics, 13(1), 61–66. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42581576

Ross, D. (2009). Lincoln and the Ethics of Emancipation: Universalism, Nationalism,    Exceptionalism. The Journal of American History, 96(2), 379–399.            http://www.jstor.org/stable/25622298

Gini, A. & Green, R. M. (2013). Ten Virtues of Outstanding Leaders: Leadership and Character.      John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Chichester, West Sussex, UK

Levine, M. P., & Boaks, J. (2014). What does ethics have to do with leadership? Journal of Business Ethics, 124(2), 225–242. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24033265

Moral Vision Moral Judgment and Leaders

Moral Vision

For moral judgments or ethical decision-making to exist, there must be moral vision. Gini and Green (2013) assert that moral vision is the quality that enables leaders to understand why they stand for a certain set of values in the first place. Moral vision thus comes before any ethical reasoning; it is the philosophy that powers our ethical thought processes. That philosophy provides us the space and vocabulary necessary to think a certain way is a difficult concept to grasp. A.J. Mandt (1994) writing on Immanuel Kant provides an example of how this works in a different context. He asserted that Kant’s discussions on space and time opened up the avenue of thought necessary for Einstein to later discover the Theory of Relativity and break the traditional rules of Newtonian physics. Though applied differently, moral vision enables this same sort of reasoning where the mental pathways necessary for ethical thoughts are opened up. Leaders capable of tremendous moral judgments are thus leaders who have already established a working moral vision.

James Burke

Gini and Green (2013) introduce one such leader who faced a terrible situation and made excellent moral judgments. James Burke led Johnson and Johnson during a time of crisis. Someone tampered with their Tylenol and had laced products with cyanide. This resulted in the deaths of numerous unsuspecting customers. Many thought that Tylenol would cease to exist as a brand. Rather than worrying about stockholder profits or the reputation of the brand, James Burke courageously recalled all Tylenol that was on the market. When faced with media scrutiny he refused to become evasive or defensive. Rather, he laid out his moral judgment and accepted responsibility for correcting the situation. This straightforward honesty and acceptance of responsibility are two critical hallmarks of a leader.

Winston Churchill

Gini and Green (2013) rightly recognize that the distinctive leadership qualities of Winston Churchill were his moral vision and his judgment. Churchill was at one point before World War II a deeply unpopular public official because he recognized Hitler’s Nazi Germany for the terror that it was. Many in Britain at that time were sympathetic to the Fascist cause and openly courted Hitler’s favor. Those that did not go as far as that remembered the previous World War and wanted to do everything within their power to placate Hitler so as to avoid another costly conflict. Churchill the visionary that he was recognized that while war is an atrocity, it was his responsibility to ensure that his nation was prepared for the coming fight. He went against the prevailing popular opinion and pushed for what was right. For him, leadership was not a popularity contest; rather, leadership meant he had an obligation to do what was right despite public animosity to that course of action.

Rosa Parks

James Burke accepted responsibility and Winston Churchill went against popular public opinion, but both men were wealthy, powerful, and had a group of loyal supporters. According to Michael Schudson (2012), Rosa Parks was a long-time civil rights activist and NAACP member even before the incident on the bus. After a long day of working, she seated herself at the front of the black section of the bus and was soon ordered to the back of the bus when enough white people had filled the bus and did not want to sit next to her. At that moment, Rosa Parks courageously took a stand by remaining seated. She was a woman isolated, vulnerable, and without a crowd of loyal supporters, yet she continued to act upon her moral judgment even though she was completely alone.

Confucius

In her discussion on Confucius, Kellerman (2010) reveals that Confucius forsook personal comforts as he pursued his cause and advocated for a model of leadership emphasizing moral vision and moral judgment. Leaders must be willing to lead for reasons that extend beyond the perks in order to effectively lead followers. In 2009, I was a brand new airman in the Air Force. In my first three years, I was primarily supervised by two non-commissioned officers. One never asked me to do anything that he himself would not do. If the requirement was to clean our work center, he would ask me to take out the trash while he ran the vacuum. When cleaning the breakroom, he would often clean the refrigerator while I mopped the floor. The other non-commissioned officer frequently reminded me that rank has its privileges. One I remember fondly and seek to emulate; the other serves as an example of how not to lead.

Plato / Socrates

Kellerman (2010) introduces us to Plato and Socrates. In his work, the Republic Plato captures Socrates' last evening alive. His supporters are urging that he (Socrates) take the easy way out so as to avoid execution. However, to the very end, Socrates uses the opportunity to teach his students through the use of expert questions (we refer to this as the Socratic method). Socrates understood that for moral vision and judgment to continue it must be passed along to the next generation of leaders. Sometimes, leaders can fall into the temptation of viewing younger up-and-coming employees as sources of competition. However, this is not the case. Young employees present opportunities for mentorship and the establishment of multi-generational moral visions and moral judgments.

Saint Thomas Beckett

Finally, we come to one of my favorite leaders who exhibited moral vision and moral judgment, Thomas Beckett. According to Catholic tradition, Thomas Beckett did not start out as a leader that we describe as having a strong sense of moral vision and moral judgment. He was a friend of King Henry II, and the king appointed him to the role of Archbishop of Canterbury in order to have a puppet in a key religious position. However, on being appointed to the office, Thomas Beckett recognized the gravity of the role he had assumed. When King Henry II attempted to exert control over the church and lower-ranking bishops Beckett pushed back on the incursion. For this, he was eventually martyred. In life, we are not always ready to assume a position of leadership; however, in these circumstances, we must recognize that role that we have been placed in and act accordingly.

How do these individuals fit ideal leader characteristics

Leaders are humans and as a result are fallible. Further, leaders will exhibit both strengths and weaknesses. As such, we must look to a number of leaders in order to establish a mosaic of what effective leadership looks like. Honesty and acceptance of responsibility have to be the foundation of one’s moral vision and judgment. Leadership often is not fair; leaders can and should be held responsible for mistakes that they themselves do not make. This is due to the fact that as a leader, they have accepted responsibility for the decisions made by their organization and the people within the organization. Second, leaders must be willing to make decisions that though right may prove deeply unpopular as did Winston Churchill, and like Rosa Parks they must be willing to pursue these decisions even if they are alone in doing so. The life of Confucius reveals that effective leaders throw out the idea of rank has its privileges and instead forsake their own comforts for the advancement of the people and institutions they lead. Then, like Socrates, they must see young employees as the future of their moral vision and moral judgment and not as a threat. Finally, like Thomas Beckett, we will on occasion be called to lead when we are not ready or when others think they can easily manipulate our leadership. In these instances, we must recognize the situation for what it is and do what must be done.

Expectations for Organizations

Albertzarte (2012) states, “Moral principles are not sufficient to guide moral thought and action.” We can know and understand what is right, but we must also be capable of making judgments and taking action. Organizations should not simply have a code of ethical conduct on their website, they must back their words up with actual moral decision-making in the marketplace. Lawton and Paez (2015) acknowledge two facts. First ethical organizations are comprised of ethical employees, and second, an organization’s views on matters pertaining to morals and ethics are shaped by its leaders. Thus, consumers and stakeholders must expect that firms make an effort to retain those who exhibit moral vision and judgment and hire those who have this same capacity.  

Levels of Accountability

Very often when something goes wrong, we search for a specific individual to hold accountable for the incident. Sometimes, this is correct, and in other times, we pursue this at the expense of holding the organizational culture responsible for enabling a climate that permitted a moral lapse. Holding organizations and individuals accountable is an imperative, but leaders must view situations in their entirety. Holding a single individual accountable for a moral lapse often fails to recognize the totality of the problem which in turn fails to actually resolve the root cause.

References

Gini, A., & Green, R. M. (2013). Ten virtues of outstanding leaders : leadership and character. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Inc.,.

Mandt, A. J. (1990). The Giants of Philosophy: Immanuel Kant. Carmichael & Carmichael Inc.

Kellerman, B. (2010). Leadership. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.

Schudson, M. (2012). Telling stories about Rosa Parks. Contexts, 11(3), 22–27.  http://www.jstor.org/stable/41960839

Ahmad, A. (2022, January 5). The long road to diversifying PBS. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved January 26, 2022, from https://www.cjr.org/analysis/pbs-cpb-diversity.php

Albertzart, M. (2013). Principle-Based Moral Judgement. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice,    16(2), 339–354. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24478801 (Links to an external site.)

Lawton, A., & Páez, I. (2015). Developing a Framework for Ethical Leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(3), 639–649. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24703528