They Are Servants

[1Timothy115]

Persons elected or appointed to governmental offices are NOT leaders, they are PUBLIC servants. From the office of President Of The United States to the office of Sewer Inspector Any City of the United States, they are all PUBLIC servants NOT leaders. We don't need leaders. First, we need servants who will respect the authority of the document (The Constitution of the United States and State's Constitutions) which provides the guidelines for those government service positions. Secondly, we need servants who respect the desires (vote) of the people. I believe we would be better served by our servants if we stopped calling them leaders and started holding them accountable for their service. Furthermore, the real leadership is the voting public not the PUBLIC servant. 

[ThePilgrim]

Persons elected or appointed to governmental offices are NOT leaders, they are PUBLIC servants. From the office of President Of The United States to the office of Sewer Inspector Any City of the United States, they are all PUBLIC servants NOT leaders. We don't need leaders. First, we need servants who will respect the authority of the document (The Constitution of the United States and State's Constitutions) which provides the guidelines for those government service positions. Secondly, we need servants who respect the desires (vote) of the people. I believe we would be better served by our servants if we stopped calling them leaders and started holding them accountable for their service. Furthermore, the real leadership is the voting public not the PUBLIC servant. 

​I agree, that is the way it was suppose to be and the way it was.  However due to the voters who have not really paid that close attention to what their servants were doing through the years that is not the way it is today.  The voters only get to vote on those who are chosen by others . . . . fiddle dee or fiddle dum.  Not the way it was meant to be, but that is the way it is.

We may wish they were our servants but the fact is they are someone else's servants.

[1Timothy115]

​I agree, that is the way it was suppose to be and the way it was.  However due to the voters who have not really paid that close attention to what their servants were doing through the years that is not the way it is today.  The voters only get to vote on those who are chosen by others . . . . fiddle dee or fiddle dum.  Not the way it was meant to be, but that is the way it is.

We may wish they were our servants but the fact is they are someone else's servants.

I understand, only because I'm saved by grace and speaking with a brother who knows what is going on. ​We should at least stop saying leader and phrases like "we need stronger leadership in our nation's capitol." Some of these people we place in Washington D.C. begin to believe they really are 'leaders' like Obama, and therefore are free to do as they please. 

[DaveW]

But are they not elected to lead the nation?

Is that not the form their servanthood takes?

I understand what you mean when they have forgotten that they are servants,  but their service takes that form.

A bit like a pastor, who is the servant but in a place of leadership - AND he is warned not be a "Lord".

 

It is definitely "out of whack" in the way most national leaders regard their job and are regarded in their job. In this we are in agreement.

[1Timothy115]

But are they not elected to lead the nation?

Is that not the form their servanthood takes?

I understand what you mean when they have forgotten that they are servants,  but their service takes that form.

A bit like a pastor, who is the servant but in a place of leadership - AND he is warned not be a "Lord".

 

It is definitely "out of whack" in the way most national leaders regard their job and are regarded in their job. In this we are in agreement.

​No they placed in these positions to serve the people. 

[DaveW]

​No they placed in these positions to serve the people. 

But to serve as leaders.

The problem is they have forgotten the servant part of leadership.

For instance, if all the people wanted to legalise murder (for a stupid example), should the representative simply serve the people's will, or should he stand and lead them into a right course?

 

This is the problem - they have twisted these things around and neither lead NOR serve correctly, for they tend to serve the people's will in unrighteousness and impose their will for their own profit.

The men in these positions need to serve the people in righteousness and lead them in righteousness.

[1Timothy115]

But to serve as leaders.

The problem is they have forgotten the servant part of leadership.

For instance, if all the people wanted to legalise murder (for a stupid example), should the representative simply serve the people's will, or should he stand and lead them into a right course?

 

This is the problem - they have twisted these things around and neither lead NOR serve correctly, for they tend to serve the people's will in unrighteousness and impose their will for their own profit.

The men in these positions need to serve the people in righteousness and lead them in righteousness.

Leader isn't in The United States Constitution. Those elected are placed in the service of the nation. Not as leaders. We have never needed leaders in public service only persons fulfilling their role as described in the U.S. Constitution. 

[1Timothy115]

I'm really amazed no U.S. Citizen has chimed in to make this statement before me. Maybe none of them knew. Maybe none are familiar with the U.S. Constitution or the public service positions described therein.

[OLD fashioned preacher]

Or maybe none saw it, I popped in (and on my way out) for the 1st time in several hours, which was the first time for 2 days.

[John81]

While the Constitution doesn't use the term "leaders", those elected to office are intended to be our servant leaders. It's through our vote that we elect certain people to represent us, in effect we grant them the power and authority to lead the nation for a specified length of time.

There are legal means in place to effect the early outing of elected leaders which fail to properly represent their constituents. There is also the ballot box to replace ineffective leaders with new ones at scheduled intervals. There are also means in place for other elected officials to confront bad ones.

If every citizen were the true leaders of the country then we would have a pure democracy and for anything to be done there would have to be massive community meetings of citizens voting on everything. As it is, the Founders rejected democracy as the worst form of government and instead chose to create a Republic where the people delegate authority to a small group of men to lead them for a time. Unfortunately, much of the Republic aspect has been lost, replaced with more of a democracy aspect, to the detriment of the nation.

Indeed the elected leaders of our nation have gone against the Constitution, and do so now, but it's "we the people" who have not only allowed, but facilitated this process.

While many Americans complain about the politicians and what they do, most often they turn around and reelect these same politicians back into office. Complaints are made about the poor choice of candidates yet rather than working to correct that, the people continue to settle for the poor choices and then complain those leaders poorly represent them...and then vote them back in next election.

Washington warned of the dangers of party politics and his warnings have proven true. Two political Parties have been allowed to rise up and dominate American politics for about a hundred and fifty years now. Just as Washington warned of, these party politicians are more concerned with their own interests and the interests of their Party than they are the welfare of the nation or her people.

We the people elect our leaders so in effect, we are getting what we asked for (as a people, not necessarily as individuals).