A recent article by Rev Edward Buri posed a thought-provoking question: when leaders who hold public power identify themselves as followers of Jesus, does the nation have a reasonable basis for expecting their leadership to look different? This is not about whether Christians are perfect or have a monopoly on goodness, but whether a public confession of following Christ creates a legitimate expectation of fruit. The article sparked a national conversation on the role of faith in leadership.
The article argues that if Christ is genuinely shaping a leader, the nation is entitled to look for evidence of that shaping in the leader's manner. This includes truth, justice, integrity, human dignity, compassion, and accountability. These values are not decorations around Christian leadership but part of its expected fruit. A Christian businessperson who refuses a bribe, a public servant who treats office as stewardship, and a politician who can disagree without contempt are all examples of dividends.
However, the article notes that many who publicly identify as people of faith appear less like converts of Christ and more like associates of Christ. Their political postures reveal only a shadowy connection to faith manners. The rhetoric of Jesus' associates in present-day Kenya is often inflammatory, and their words are frequently dehumanizing. This creates a painful contradiction between confession and conduct.
Christian faith should change not only what we believe but also how we speak, how we confront, and how we treat those with whom we profoundly differ. The associates want the dividends of faith but do not want to give the dividends of faith to those they lead. They want credibility, blessing, and moral capital associated with identification with Christ, but when power comes into their hands, those they lead are denied the fruits that faith should produce.
The article emphasizes that faith is not merely an investment from which the leader expects personal returns. It is an investment that should generate returns for others. Christian leadership must be examined not only by what the leader receives from faith but by what those under the leader's care receive because of that faith. When power arrives and responsibility disappears, the problem is not that faith has failed to produce dividends but that the person entrusted with power has failed to distribute them.
The temptation for Christian leaders can be to lose a little faith in order to gain a few more votes. However, Jesus sometimes asks the opposite: lose the votes and keep the faith. People who do not profess faith in God often demonstrate remarkable courage, honesty, compassion, and commitment to the common good. If people who do not profess faith in God can draw moral conduct from their humanity, how much more should those who profess faith in God be able to draw from the divine help they claim to have received?
Ultimately, the article concludes that the nation is entitled to look for congruence between Christian confession and Christian life. The Christian leader cannot keep asking, "What will my faith do for me?" while neglecting the more demanding question, "What should my faith do through me for those entrusted to my leadership?" The biblical story repeatedly shows that when the disciples of Jesus genuinely followed him, their lives were transformed, and they produced fruit that benefited others.
Key points
- Christian leaders must demonstrate the fruit of their faith in their leadership.
- The nation has a reasonable basis for expecting different leadership from those who identify as followers of Jesus.
- Faith should generate returns not only for the leader but also for those under their care.
