This is a guest post by Dr. John Seel.
We are living through a leadership crisis, but not for the reasons most commentators suggest.
The problem is not simply political polarization, institutional distrust, technological disruption, or economic uncertainty—though all are real. The deeper problem is that we are trying to solve twenty-first century civilizational problems with late twentieth-century leadership assumptions. Our models of leadership were built for a world of institutional stability, shared moral assumptions, and predictable change. That world is disappearing.
Across education, technology, family formation, religion, and civic life, the underlying assumptions that once gave coherence to society are weakening. Artificial intelligence is reshaping knowledge. Social media is reshaping identity. Institutions that once formed character now struggle merely to maintain trust. Anxiety rises even as material prosperity remains historically high.
These are not isolated disruptions. They are indicators of something deeper: we are not merely living through a season of change. We are living through a change of age.
Every such transition forces a deeper question beneath the practical leadership questions:
What kind of civilization are we now leading within?
One of the most illuminating ways to answer that question comes from an unexpected source—a civilizational pattern embedded within the biblical narrative itself. Not myth in the modern sense of fiction, but myth in the classical sense of sacred narrative that reveals ultimate meaning. It is a pattern that describes not only spiritual history, but the developmental arc of civilizations.
It is the movement from garden to tower to temple to city.
And it may be the simplest way to understand why leadership models that worked only a generation ago now feel increasingly inadequate.
Because we are no longer living in the same chapter of the story.
The Garden: When Meaning Is Received
The biblical story begins not in a city but in a garden. This is not accidental.
A garden represents ordered nature. It is neither wilderness nor machine. It is cultivated life within a structure that is received rather than invented.
In the garden, human beings do not create meaning. They discover it. They do not construct identity. They receive it. They do not invent purpose. They live within it.
The garden represents a world where reality itself is understood as gift.
Historically, most societies have operated within some version of this framework. Meaning came from tradition. Identity came from family. Moral structure came from religion. Social order rested upon shared assumptions about reality itself.
Sociologist Peter Berger famously described this as a sacred canopy—a shared framework of meaning that made life feel coherent and intelligible.
Leadership in such a world is primarily custodial.
Leaders preserve what exists. They transmit what has been inherited. Their responsibility is stewardship of a functioning order.
This explains why leadership literature produced during stable periods tends to focus on management, efficiency, and incremental improvement. These approaches assume something rarely stated but absolutely essential: that the underlying system itself is sound.
Garden eras produce managers because the world appears manageable.
Yet gardens contain a hidden fragility. They depend upon trust—trust in institutions, trust in moral order, trust in shared meaning. When that trust erodes, the garden cannot sustain itself.
This is when civilizations begin to build towers.
The Tower: When Meaning Is Constructed
If the garden represents meaning received, the tower represents meaning constructed.
The Tower of Babel is one of the most psychologically revealing passages in Scripture. It is not primarily about architecture. It is about anthropology. Its defining declaration reveals everything: “Let us make a name for ourselves.”
Here we see the emergence of the autonomous self.
Meaning is no longer discovered. It is manufactured. Identity is no longer received. It is assembled. Community is no longer inherited. It is negotiated.
Control begins to replace trust. Technique replaces wisdom. Systems replace tradition.
This is the foundation of what we now call modernity.
Tower civilizations are extraordinarily productive. They produce science, engineering, markets, bureaucracies, and technological innovation. They scale. They optimize. They expand human capacity in remarkable ways.
But they also begin to thin meaning.
Because while systems can organize life, they cannot explain why life matters.
Cultural historian Philip Rieff warned that when cultures abandon sacred order, they do not become neutral. They become therapeutic. They begin organizing themselves around psychological comfort rather than moral formation.
Today we describe this condition as expressive individualism—the belief that identity is something we construct through self-expression rather than something we discover through formation.
This is the dominant anthropology of our time.
Leadership during tower periods becomes increasingly technical. Leaders become specialists. Expertise begins to outweigh wisdom. Competence begins to overshadow character.
The central leadership question shifts subtly but profoundly—from What is right? to What works?
For a time, this produces remarkable success.
But towers contain a hidden danger. They scale faster than wisdom develops. When scale outruns meaning, something inevitably begins to fracture.
And when enough fractures accumulate, towers give way to Babylon.
Babylon: When Meaning Collapses
If Babel represents the ambition of civilization, Babylon represents its exhaustion.
Babylon is civilization at peak sophistication and peak confusion. It is what happens when systems become powerful but purposeless, when technology becomes impressive but disorienting, when institutions become large but distrusted.
Babylon is not primitive chaos. It is sophisticated disorder.
It is what happens when a society knows how to do almost everything but no longer knows why it should do anything.
This is why late-stage civilizations consistently display similar symptoms:
Rising anxiety.
Deepening loneliness.
Falling birthrates.
Institutional distrust.
Identity confusion.
Loss of shared reality
Loss of reality itself.
These are not random social problems. They are meaning problems.
This is why our moment cannot be understood merely through economics or politics. At its core, it is anthropological. It concerns what it means to be human.
I have elsewhere described this condition as algorithmic nihilism—a society increasingly organized by powerful systems that cannot answer the most basic human question:
What is life for?
This is also why leadership feels unusually difficult today.
Most leadership models assume stability. They assume shared assumptions. They assume functioning institutions. They assume that improvement is primarily technical.
Babylon offers none of these conditions.
Instead, it produces what anthropologists call a liminal environment—an in-between space where the old order no longer functions but the new order has not yet fully emerged.
This is precisely the environment that produces the need for liminal leadership.
Liminal Leaders: Interpreters of Reality
Liminal periods remove the maps people once trusted. This tends to produce two kinds of leaders.
The first kind of leader attempts to preserve outdated maps. They double down on familiar models. They attempt to manage decline rather than understand change.
The second kind of leader recognizes that the terrain itself has shifted. They become interpreters of reality rather than defenders of systems.
Liminal moments emerge when the garden no longer holds, the tower no longer convinces, and Babylon no longer satisfies. This creates a vacuum in which a different kind of leadership becomes necessary.
The primary work of liminal leaders is not control. It is clarity.
They help people understand what time it is. They give language to what others sense but cannot yet articulate. They rebuild coherence where fragmentation has taken hold.
They become what every transitional age requires: architects of meaning.
This is why liminal leadership differs fundamentally from managerial leadership. Managers optimize systems. Liminal leaders rebuild foundations. They understand something essential that stable eras often forget:
Civilizational renewal never begins with policy. It begins with formation. Always. Because every durable society ultimately rests upon formed people.
The Temple: When Meaning Becomes Embodied
Alongside Babel, Scripture presents another building project: the Tabernacle and later the Temple.
Unlike Babel, nothing about the Temple is accidental. Every dimension, every material, every practice reflects intentional design. It is a place of sacrifice, reconciliation, encounter, and presence.
The Temple represents meaning not merely believed but embodied.
It reminds us that civilizations cannot survive on systems alone. They require institutions and practices that reconnect people to transcendent reality.
Yet the Temple also carries a warning.
When the structure becomes more important than the presence it was meant to house, meaning begins to drain away. Jesus confronted this danger directly when He declared: “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”
His warning remains relevant today. Institutions that lose their formative purpose eventually become performative rather than transformative.
This applies equally to churches, universities, corporations, and civic organizations. When institutions prioritize preservation over formation, they may continue to exist structurally while losing their civilizational purpose.
The City: When Meaning Is Rightly Ordered
The biblical story does not end with a return to a garden alone. Nor does it end with the abandonment of civilization. It ends with a city.
This is a profound insight.
The answer to Babel is not primitivism. It is rightly ordered complexity.
The New Jerusalem represents civilization brought back under moral order. Technology is not rejected. It is rightly ordered. Culture is not abandoned. It is redeemed. Power is not eliminated. It is stewarded.
This represents the final stage of mature leadership: stewardship.
The steward understands what the controller does not: We do not own reality. We are responsible for it.
The steward asks not, How do I control this? but How do I order this toward flourishing?
This is the leadership posture the next era will require. Not domination. Not withdrawal. But stewardship.
What Time Is It?
Every leadership challenge begins with diagnostic questions:
A garden moment requiring preservation?
A tower moment requiring excellence?
A Babylon moment requiring preservation?
Or a liminal moment requiring reconstruction?
The central mistake of our time is that many leaders are applying garden leadership to Babylon problems. They attempt to manage what must be reframed. They try to optimize what must be reimagined. They attempt to preserve what history has already moved beyond.
History shows something remarkably consistent: When meaning collapses, renewal begins with leaders who see clearly before others do. The future rarely belongs to the loudest leaders. It belongs to the clearest ones.
The Leadership Question of Our Time
Civilizations do not ultimately fail because they lose wealth, technology, or military power. They fail because they lose moral purpose.
Renewal never begins with scale. It begins with recovered clarity about what human beings are for. This is why the deepest leadership question in a change of age is not strategic.
It is anthropological.
What is a human being?
What is life for?
What is worth building?
Until these questions are answered, towers will only grow taller while confusion deepens. But when they are answered, something remarkable begins to happen.
Gardens begin to reappear. Not outside civilization. But inside it.
The Work of Liminal Leaders
This is the calling of liminal leaders:
To plant gardens inside Babylon.
To form people inside systems.
To rebuild meaning inside complexity.
To prepare the foundations of the next city before it is visible to others.
Because every lasting civilization begins the same way: Not with systems.
Not with power. Not even with vision. But with formed people who remember what life is for.
This is why the future will not ultimately belong to the most efficient leaders. Efficiency can scale systems. Only formation can sustain civilizations. The next era will not be led by those who can merely optimize complexity. It will be led by those who can restore meaning within it.
And every great city—every flourishing society, every lasting culture—begins the same way it always has: With leaders who have learned how to cultivate gardens again. For in the end, the future does not belong to those who build the biggest towers, but to those who remember how to grow gardens.
 | A guest post by
|