Christian Leadership should be an oxymoron to the world. Here is why. If we look at our prime example. If we look at the foundation of our faith. If we look at our Chief Shepherd, if we look at the originator of our faith, the sustainer of the our faith, the Alpha and the Omega, if we look at the Firstborn over all of creation and evaluate and define His leadership it looks like this:

5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Now, lets look at the architect of our faith. God wrapped in human flesh. What is His leadership disposition? Is it the best parking spot? Is it an elaborate salary? Is it people (armor bearers) waiting on Him hand and foot (we will talk about hand and foot in a second)? Is it designer suits and custom shirts? Is it a nice benefits package? Is it having people at their beckoning call? How about Pastor Anniversaries? No? What about the best seat in the house? No? His name on the marquee? No? What about a special office? A personal secretary? (they did have a treasurer right)? How about a special title He wanted to be addressed by and if not He looked at you funny (He called us friends)? No? None of these? Well….

Why is it today that so many leaders want to be recognized and served? Why is it today you have to compensate them so well? Why is it today they get a special place to park? A special committee to serve them? Special days where they get bonuses and gifts laid at their feet? They want you to address them as Pastor or Bishop or Apostle or Reverend. Why is that these so called leaders (and I ain’t just talking Olsteen or Jakes) demand so much service while the Master did so much serving? You tell me, is that “biblical” leadership? And I should submit to such people? A person who demands their rights, while our Master displayed such divesting of Himself, such servanthood such humility!

Honestly I am sick of such foolishness. These leaders use scripture such as:

9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain.” Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 10 Does he not speak entirely for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop. 11 If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? 12 If others share this rightful claim on you, do not we even more?

But forget about scripture such as:

23 Are they servants of Christ? I am a better one—I am talking like a madman—with far greater labors, far more imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death. 24 Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. 25 Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I was adrift at sea; 26 on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from robbers, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers; 27 in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure

Listen to me. You want to know if your leader is a biblical shepherd? Reconcile his life with that of Philippians 2:1-13. See if he would do his job for not only free, but would use his hard earned money to serve others (Acts 20:32-34). See if he demands that you submit, that someone serves him, that he is given the highest and most important place in the congregation, see if he would wash your feet (John 13:12).

Outside of that, you may be a leader. I don’t doubt that, you have followers; however, you are not a Christian leader. You may lead Christians in a building called a church, you may read and preach the bible, you may use biblical words in your title, you may even go to a “Christian Leadership” Conference even worse host one. However, if you leadership doesn’t push you downward and lead others downward you are not like Jesus at all in your leadership. We have the blueprint my friend and you look nothing like the specs.

I don’t have a problem with leadership. I have a problem with “Christian” leadership. The reason is because the leadership I see exemplified in scripture is not the one I see practiced amongst Christians today. As the picture so eloquently depicts,  Christian Leadership puts the individual leader on top while everyone serves him/her.

If you have read the New Testament even casually, what you will begin to see is that this “Kingdom of God” that is often referred to seems to be upside down in relation to the “Kingdom of the World”. Phrases like “turn the other cheek”, “love your neighbor as yourself”, “when your enemy is thirst give him something to drink”, “present yourself a living sacrifice”, “think of others more highly than yourself” and even “deny yourself”. These types of words are the exact opposite of what the world says. Just look on television or listen to the top 40, but even worse just walk into the typical church and tell me what you get.

Not let me zone in on that last comment about the church. You see the church are the “called out”, the “set apart”, “aliens”, “citizens of heaven” and “slaves to God”. However, the very language that the world uses, especially as it relates to leadership has found its way into the Church, so the church isn’t effecting the world with its leadership, the church actually takes its cue from the world, how backwards is that.

You see today, leaders demand to be heard. The demand to be upfront doing all the speaking. They demand to be the decision maker. They demand to be served (we have “ministries” that are exclusive to serving the servant ironic right). And most of all they demand you pay them for such leadership. In the world the CEO negotiates pay this should never occur in the church. In the world the CEO demands you obey his direction, in the church this should never occur (Philippians 2:1-3). In the world the CEO is the most important person, in the church every member is important, no one is expendable. And in the world, the CEO is the last to take a loss, in the church the leaders are to first to lay down their lives and be a servant (Mark 10:45).

You see whatever the world does the church is to do the opposite. But when I survey the land it is very hard to distinguish between the two types of leadership. What is strikingly odd is that many of these leaders believe they are students of the scripture, yet their practice says something totally different.

Lets take Jesus for example. Did Jesus come down demanding his rights? Did He come down as a great king, living in a great palace, having a stallion, with thousands of people honoring Him? He was born in a stable, raised in practical anonymity, served those He called to be His representatives and died on a cross. Lets take Paul, if we read 2 Corinthians 11:16-33 we see Paul living a life of luxury right? No! No we don’t. We see him barely having enough to eat, his life threatened daily. We even see him in prison often. Financing his own missionary campaign. What about John, he was the man right? History tells us that he was Patmos Island and that is where he most likely died, a prisoner, amongst the criminals probably not having a penny to his name. What about Peter? What about James? One lost their head the other got prayed out of prison. What about the other leaders? If I read Romans 16 many were “fellow prisoners” with Paul for the sake of the Gospel. Listen Paul has to write a letter to defend his ministry, even after they saw what God had done through him.

Here is what I am getting at. Leading in American Christianity costs me nothing. As a matter of fact if I am really good, I can host conferences, write books and make a great living. If I am a bit manipulative I can own a jet and a helicopter, have my face plastered all over the city on billboards, maybe even being invited to speak at some nation convention. However, the leadership in the scripture seems to lead to death (Hebrews 11:32-38) imprisoned and beaten half to death (Acts 16:23-36). Leaders are to first to give to help others (Acts 20:31-36).

Being a leader today gets you the limelight, it use to get your light taken. Being a leader today gets you the best seat in the house (even being called up to the stage) while Jesus says something totally different in Luke 22:26. Leadership gets you served today while it use be the perpetual disposition of serving then.

So do I have a problem with leadership? No, I listen to my boss, I do what I am told. Jumping high and meeting their demands is whats expected, they pay me for this. However, in the kingdom, I expect my leadership to reflect the nature of Christ. Not demanding their own way, their own pay, and me to listen to what they say (rhymes right?). If someone is going to lead, then their backs should be bending closer and closer to the feet of those they are trying to lead, not the other way around.

I want to discuss something that is near and dear to my heart. That is the role and goal of traditional pastoral ministry. I believe our current model is the direct opposite of what the scripture teaches. I will use Ephesians 4:11-16 as a basis. It reads…

11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. (ESV)

So we see that Christ Himself has given us these gifts on His own accord for the equipping of the saints for the building up of the body until we mature and grow up into the Him. I want to focus on the maturity part, which seems to be goal so that entire body works together in line with the Head.

Traditional Pastoral Ministry and My Problem With It

I have written about this extensively in the past, but I have to say I am still perplexed by our current model. The end result of pastoral ministry is the equivalent of a horse having a carrot dangled in front of them in order to keep them moving. The carrot never gets eaten (unless the string is cut) and the horse is forever trying to satisfy his desire of the carrot while the owner gets what he wants, the horse is moving in the right direction.

In every church I know the pastor always own the stick and carrot and you will never ever get the carrot. Unless of course you kick the owner off of your back and go find your own carrot. It is one of the greatest pyramid schemes in history. They tell you that you can be as mature as they are, yet they will always be more mature than you. You actually pay them to keep them more “mature” than you. If you are lucky you may get recognized as a lesser among equals, but only if you are lucky and you get in early. Much like other pyramid schemes. You can get close to the top but you can never step into the capstone, unless you get out of the scheme and start your own.

You my friend can never provide care, counsel, mutual accountability, you can never teach, disciple or give insight or wisdom to your pastor. He will always be the most wise, smart and greatest among the body, well, because God has put Him there right? Wrong! In Ephesians there seems to be the goal of maturity. These gifts were given to the body in order for maturity and when I look at 1 Timothy and Titus it seems that maturity is the mark of leadership in the body of Christ, yet you are artificially held back by some logistical hogwash.

For example, I have seen in bylaws that only a fixed amount of elders are needed with the Senior pastor being the ultimate authority. If we have 1o0 qualified men then 100 men should be elders (I throw women in there but that is a different discussion altogether). So you are kept at bay because of logistics over and above what scripture says. Not to mention our churches grow upwards not outwards so unless one of the older guys die you can never be an elder. How does that work exactly?

Listen the goal is maturity, that maturity has to be defined as the ability for us to pursue a mutual relationship which leads to my next and final point.

The Goal of a Family is to Produce Mature Adults

The fundamental goal of a family is to take children, instill in them values, help them mature so that they will become full functioning, productive ADULTS. Now I don’t know about your family; however, my goal as a father is to raise my son, equip him for adulthood then release him in hopes that we would one day be PEERS. Once my son has proven that he is an adult (which for the most part is a direct reflection of my parenting) then we are no longer father/child. We are father/adult child and the entire dynamic of our relationship shifts to something wholly different. My son is no longer dependent on me for decision making, he can actually help me make better decisions. He is no longer dependent on me for his welfare, he can actually contribute to the family name. He no longer looks at me to tell him what is right and wrong, he actually contributes to the shaping of my value and morals. This is my goal from the onset. Every parent has a clear goal. Raise a child to be an adult.

However, in the church it is the exact opposite. We purposely cut the legs off of members, by making this perpetual pastor model the standard and most of the children of the faith will never become adults. And even if they are granted some adult privileges, they can never contribute to the family the way the “father/senior pastor” does, because he will always be the ultimate authority. But if I read Ephesians the way I do, I see this relationship is only a bridge to a greater and more fulfilling relationship. Once a person is mature enough to acknowledge Christ is the head then I no longer function as this persons parent/superior we actually become peers. So the codedency is eradicated by the person personally walking with Christ. He/She no longer needs me to guide them, we need each other to guide one another.

Again this NEVER happens in traditional pastoral ministry. The minister is professionaly trained, professional paid and professional staffed to prevent this from every transpiring and I believe it is to the detriment of the body. People are as about as codependent as a vantriliquest act. They both need each other or the show can’t go on. In traditional pastoral ministy, the show goes on every sunday and we entrench it by making it the “biblical” model. I disagree with such a model and hope that you begin to question it.

I wrote a previous post called “whose sheep are they”. I decided to stay with the name for this post.  This post was actually in the think tank; however a dear blogging buddy over at New Leaven posted this about small groups. This actually rekindle my thoughts and motivated this post.

Lets be clear about something. Leaders, have no right to tell Christians how often they can or can’t meet, what they can and can’t discuss and who they should or shouldn’t listen to. Leaders do not own the church. They possess a certain giftedness amongst the church coupled with upstanding moral behavior and good decision making which then causes others to allow them to speak into their lives in order that they may also pursue Christ and mature into Christ who is the Head (Ephesians 4:11-12).

Decision making for each individual Christian belongs to that Christian. That Christian is to be taught how to discern the voice of God on their own behalf, approaching the throne of Grace on their own behalf and being filled with the Spirit on their own behalf. Now this does not take away from the corporateness of the local church. Simultaneous with all I said above we are to lend our ear to the community of faith. We are to be sensitive to the discerning and loving voice of the whole. If a group of loving and biblically aware believers whom I have known and trusted are instructing me, then I am to listen and take heed and ask the Lord for clarification (they could be a bunch of wackos also).

However, decision making does not belong to the leaders, there is no such evidence of this. The church makes decisions guided by the hands of mature men. The biggest problem today is that most men do not come up among the ranks so we have nothing to judge them on. We have no history to judge them off of so with our current church planting techniques what I am currently proposing may seem far off base. When we enter a church relationship with leaders and non-leaders and these very leaders already posses all of the decision making power, then we are already headed down the wrong road at exuberant speeds.

So back to T.C.R’s post. He says that many church leaders do not trust small groups. One of the reasons being that such small group can fall into false teaching and be led astray (he is not saying this is true, he is only observing, he is actually proposing the exact opposite). The problem with that is that large groups often fall into false teaching (this is very kin to the women not being able to teach because of false doctrine which is altogether woeful). Whole denominations have fell hook, line and sinker to the Gay Rights movement. Others have traveled great distances only to engage in mass suicide. Others have split from their denomination because the entire denomination was attempting to snuff the people of God out and make decisions that no such person should make.

Let me be clear here. Each believer has been born from above. They now have the Holy Spirit indwelling them and they belong to Jesus Christ. They don’t belong to a pastor, a church or anyone else. They belong to Jesus and as an expression of their new commitment they are to meet with other believers, let other gifted believers spur them and teach them and admonish them and edify them and they are to do the same in return.

Whenever a leader attempts to usurp the headship of Christ then we have a serious problem on our hands. The problem is this has been going on for so long that we think the opposite is wrong. Elder Ruled, Senior Pastors, Elder Board and the likes are all theological jargon which has no place in scripture that encourages the exact opposite of what scripture really says. Churches make decisions for churches and individual Christians make decisions for themselves. I can’t be any more clearer than that.

To say otherwise is to undermine the work of the Spirit in each believer. It is to block their access to the throne, it is to prevent them from hearing from Christ on their own behalf, also the behalf of others, (that is why prophecy is mocked today), it is to tell Jesus He has done an incomplete work while Peter said “you have been given everything” it is to treat them as infants when the scriptures tell them they should be teachers. You see a Spirit indwelt believer has all he or she needs, though they are incomplete because we need one another and the only person who seems to be noninclusive in this “we” are leaders who seem to be the capstone in the great Christian pyramid.

A local church should do nothing to prevent Christians that meet with them to meet whenever and however they like. They actually have no right to do such a thing. A local church is not to police what is taught from an oversight perspective. If something false does come up, it can be address corporately through centralized teaching. Or a concerned leader or member could ask questions on how such teaching crystallized and attempt to present the more biblically faithfully position.

None the less one thing that can’t happen is that of disallowing Christians to meet together to build one another up. They are Jesus’ sheep and Jesus has given the command and liberty to meet as we please under His headship. This is disheartening and only contributes to the perpetual immaturity of so many believers and their sole dependency on leadership. Churches usually keep Christians at bay by electing small amounts of controllable men called elders who often time function as yes men to the “senior” or now “lead” pastors. Very disheartening I must reiterate.

Anyway those are some thoughts. If you are a Christian you are free to start a home bible study, share your position on scripture (though you may be corrected), you have the right to start community fellowships, back yard bible study, fun groups, life skill classes or anything else for that matter. Please ensure that you are submitted the Jesus Christ and if your church will not allow such freedoms they are usurping Christ’s authority. Again my thoughts. God bless.

No, I am not asking are you in “church” this Sunday, I am asking are you doing what should be done when the church meets.

You see I have come to the conclusion that for the most part, I won’t get much out of a Sunday service from most churches. I have also come to the conclusion that neither will you, and most of us, will sit in a pew Sunday after Sunday becoming more and more atrophied until what is abnormal become normal and we go through the redundant weekly “service” and convince ourselves that we are doing the right thing. Now this may sound odd, but so would it to a man who has been convinced that he is paralyzed when he can slam dunk.

The Spurring

The purpose of the coming together for those who received, read and or heard the letter to the Hebrews was not for them sit and be passive consumers. It was for them to spur one another along. Lately there has been a good amount of writings on this subject, mostly through post but also a few publication. Some would argue that 1 Corinthians 14:26-32, was probably the most detailed look inside a regular church meeting, others believe this was only a descriptive peep that has no bearing on the church today. As you can tell I am of the former rather than the latter.  The biggest reason is that I am hard pressed to see what goes on today in church buildings having even a remote similarity to what went on in houses 2000 years ago.

Now you might say that was 2000 years ago and since that was an infant church, which had many struggles, that this is not to be the regular meeting of the church and what we have today is really what should be going on. I beg the differ for one big reason. It seems that the meeting, again at least from the writer of Hebrews, was to spur one another along and my friends, 1 Corinthians 14:26 looks much more like a spurring meeting than does our consumerist model today.

Consume, Consume, Consume

Here is another point. Our models today build consumers of gatherings and very little does it develop contributors. Here is what I mean. Today people argue about the “seeker sensitive” churches or even more recent “the consumer driven church”. This usually comes from the mouth of people who believe their preaching is more “biblical” than say Joel Olsteen’s preaching thus they are not consumer driven they are Christ Centered because they preach better sermons and have “biblical” membership. Hogwash my friends, hogwash. People go to Piper’s, Driscoll’s, Sproul’s and MacArthur’s church to consume! Yep I said it. They just go to consume a different type of product. While the product at Joel seems to be great worship music and encouraging messages, the product at the afore mentioned churches are good sermons, that make you fill tingly all over, sprinkled in with some greek usage, theological terms and clever wording. Again in neither church is there much of any spurring going on amongst the body, the stage and its occupants  in both instances are doing all of the spurring while those in the audience (especially in churches where sermons are cabled in) are passive consumers, ready to do it again next week!

Even if we look over the corriders of history we see quite easily this consumerism has always played a part and the person with the best product wins. From Llyod-Jones to Spurgeon, from Olsteen to Jimmy Baker (not putting the two in the same category), it doesn’t matter come, sit give your money so that we can entertain you again and if you give some special money we can even entertain you and your kids better, we will give them their own pastor   . And we start our children off with this consumer Christianity and they will only perpetuate the norm.

So What Do You Contribute???

So often the only time anyone else beside the paid professionals are allowed to contribute is doing money time. You have practically sat passively by consuming a product (rather good sermons, music or a combination of both) but now you are called forward to “worship God with you giving”. As if the other stuff you were doing was actually worship.

You see the one/two gift domination is not contributing to the growth and development. It is true that they may can do this much better, shoot they should they are paid for it, but to substitute the responsibilities of all members encouraging, building up, and spurring while the church meets for success in the short-run seems to undermine the Holy Spirit who has indwelled every believer in order that they may be responsible to helping others grow up into the Head! Here is what David Norrington says on the subject of the sermon:

Many church-goers enjoy sermons and may become connoisseurs of sermons wedded to one particular form. Others, through lengthy exposure and internalization of ecclesiastical dogma, accept the sermon as the only valid form. yet others enjoy the passivity and anonymity of merely listening and would find more active methods threatening……God’s people frequently misunderstand deliverance when it is offered and prefer the familiarity of bondage to the uncertainties of liberation; the emotional security of institutionalized immaturity to the rigours of responsible adulthood (To Preach or Not to Preach, pg 91)

You Were Really Called To Be A Priest So Function As One

Look, you are really a priest and much like all priest function in some capacity and contributed at some capacity so should you and I. We only have one high priest and his name doesn’t begin with pastor, reverend, doctor, nor any other title. His name is Jesus to Son of God. He is our one High Priest and now calls us to function together for the good of His Kingdom.

I know this may sound overly simplistic, or even outright heretical and I am ready to engage with both responses immediately upon posting this. But I think the reason people move from group to group is not because there is something particularly wrong with that group, it is the because that person consumption changes and when you are only use to consuming when you have eaten one field bare and the land is no longer stable to yield fruit people just go to the next one.

However, I believe if that person is in tune with the Spirit and has opportunities to contribute while simultaneously being edified this musical chairs church thing would become much less frequent.

Anyway I will end where I started. Will you be wasting time consuming this Sunday or will you have an opportunity to be a contributor/edifier? If the former ask your pastor can you contribute to the teaching this Sunday and if not why? If it is the latter how?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I say this  with all the humility I can muster. We are all submitted to each other but we are only under the authority of Christ alone.  This may be a radical statement to some and a normal practice for others; however, I want to convey this clearly. If we are to take the Priesthood seriously then we must embrace this statement recklessly.

Let me explain. In most church relationships, there is an authority and there are those that submit. However mature the believer might be,  this relationship never becomes reciprocal. The Leader will always lead and the submitter will always submit! We continue in these relationships perpetually and the only way to get out of the perpetual relationship of submission is to become a leader yourself; however that works in your specific assembly. Maybe you tell them you want to be an elder, or a deacon, or you start your own church, you will have to do something and have a status change to come from under someone’s submission and then you now assume the position of a peer to the leaders and an authroity figure to your old peers. Here are the imperatives by Paul again (I believe there is someone smart enough out there to write an entire book on this passage and still not scratch the surface Alan? Kieth? Hutch? Phil Fletcher?)

6 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God. 17 And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

Again if we are to obey these imperatives when we gather, something must functionally change in our local congregations. For the life of me I don’t understand why we just don’t. I talked to a good friend of mine and I asked him about this. I was asking why are we slack in fighting for and pursuing mutuality recklessly. He really couldn’t answer. I am saying we should equip all of the saints to function at a level where on any given Sunday a man could get up and address the assembly. I am not talking house church, lets take for example a nice sized evangelical biblically sound nationally know church. There are at least 2000 members. Are we saying that we don’t have at least 50 gifted individuals who could “preach” thus the church be known by its body not by its “pastor”? Can anybody tell me why we couldn’t function that way?

That’s preaching now lets take to what I am really getting at. In the typical church the leaders drive the church, while the members are passive passengers. All of the exhortation, encouragement, rebuke, edification, admonishment and teaching flows from the top down. I am proposing that we flow from the middle out. Where Christ is the center piece and we all equally stand eye level around Him. Christian leaders should be willing and even encouraging their members toward this type of priestly ministry and function. Women should function within these imperatives above, young children should function in these imperatives, parents to children and children to parents, husbands to wives and wives to husbands and ultimately leadership to congregation and the congregation to the leadership. This is nearly impossible in our celebrity type churches where if you are only lucky will get to meet your pastor in any real way and if you do meet him mutuality will never ever be established.

I say that to say this. When we meet we are to be under the authority of Christ and submitted to one another. Everyone! Everyone is to function this way. We are all priests and though priest have different functions the end goal is mutual edification and mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21 anybody)? Leaders are to take instruction just as much as they give it if the body is equipped properly and the priesthood is functioning as I believe it should (again my premise could be wrong). If I am doing all I can to ensure that those God place in my life is functioning at their best capacity eventually we should sharpen one another. It is funny that when we talk about sharpening it is usually pulpit to pew or pew to pew but never pew to pulpit or very rarely anyway. 

Now most may think I am crazy but as God opens doors for leadership this is my pursuit and goal. I want every priest who was brought into priesthood by Christ and not a school, or some human element to function at the level of their greatest potential. That means that they should be given to opportunity to instruct me, they should be given the opportunity to function freely in their gifts as God has so sovereignly given them by the Spirit and finally they should be given the opportunity to fulfill the imperatives found in Colossians 3. Not pew to pew but pew to pulpit.  I want to teach them everything I know so that eventually I don’t have one up on them but that we are walking hand in hand side by side not four steps behind and two steps to the right.  I will end that maybe I got this thing all wrong and I have a false premise but as I read all of the epistles the only one that has a hint of leader/non-leader submission is Hebrews and Alan Knox has broken this down in every way possible. and specifically here.

I pray that you are encouraged and you enjoy the Labor Day weekend.

Richards, Lawrence O. A Theology Of Church Leadership. The Zondervan Corporation, Grand Rapids, MI, 1980. Ppg 399.

Throughout one’s reading collection, there are books that rattle our cage, others strengthen our positions one way or the other, others move you from one position to the other at rapid speeds, others awaken curiosity, while other cause such deep impact that you wonder why no one ever told you such beautiful truths before. Well this work did a few of those things for me. I had already begun to question much of what Christians call leadership especially in the local church. That is because my view of the Church had already moved from organization to organism. I had already begun to view the church for a radically different paradigm than I had during the early and formative years of my Christianity and “Church Leadership” gave me the gentle nudge and encouragement to help solidify such a position.

This book is broken up into four main parts with about 26 sup-points under them. The four main points are: Theological Foundation: The Church and It’s Leadership, Understanding Enterprise, Biblical Principles of Church Leadership: A Description of Allegiance and How Leaders Build Allegiance and finally The Shape of Tomorrow. The first and the third parts are the vast majority of the book and rightfully so, because there is where the meat of church leadership is found. I will write about each part, what I felt  was important in those parts and then sum it up at the end.

Theological Foundation

Mr. Richards gets off on the right foot. He says on page 37:

Scripture teaches that in its essential nature the church is a living organism. We are members of a body, not an institution. Any expression the church takes must be an expression in harmony with its nature, not a stumbling copy of man’s notions for organizing institutions.

If we miss this we miss it all. This is the cornerstone of church leadership. If we treat the church like a common organization then its purpose and plan will be missed and the practical outworking will start off fast in the wrong direction and as we have seen it is nearly impossible to convince it that it is going the wrong way because it has been travelling the road for so long.

This following quote is long but I have to type it all so none of it is missed and the context misapplied. On page 75 he says:

One of the drawbacks to working with the church as though it were an institution is that an institutional approach to Christian life gradually robs us of our awareness of the supernatural.  It is not hard to understand why. Leaders in an organization are always dealing with problems related to maintaining the institution and planning for the achievement of its goals. They must deal with budget and staffing. They must plan new buildings and maintain the old ones. They need to set goals and then set up committees and councils and other organizations to reach them. Even in their counseling and teaching they tend to focus on problems in their relationships with people.  Even with the use of good management techniques, the come to think of the saints in relation to whether they help or frustrate the leaders’ plans and hopes. The exercise of managerial skills being to dominate more and more of their attention and demand more and more of their time. Many who entered the pastorate burdened to minister have left, discouraged by all they are required to do simply to keep the organization functioning and its agencies and activities on track.

Enough said there.  On page 77 he talks about how many leaders have taken on responsibilities that “are not really theirs”. And says “no wonder they feel burdened”. He brings in a principle called release (I wrote about this and must find it) This is the practice of simply “affirming Jesus as the head of His church and giving the burdens that are His back to Him”.

On page 92 he moves into what the responsibility of leaders are. He says:

The responsibility of leaders is not to manage the church. They are not to be God’s voice of authority in the body. The responsibilities of leaders is the care and nurture of believers. The Human leaders in the church use their wisdom and maturity to “guide” the congregation and individual members into growing ways of life so that when Jesus speaks, His body will be healthy and responsive.

He then moves into the identity of leaders which is servanthood. Much has been written on this subject and many sermons preached but I have rarely seen the servanthood of Jesus practiced by leaders today.

Understanding Enterprise

Mr. Richards does a great job distinguishing organization from organism and the goals of each in part two of his work. Here plain in simple he says the goal of an organization is the organization itself, the health, survival of and even the profitability and people are second. In an organism such as the church this can never be and whenever a church begins to operate in the survival of the organization over the growth and development of the people at all cost, you best believe that church is not functioning under the direction of the head. It has adopted enterprise goals and has lost its ability to do what it is called to be. (ppgs 161-173)

Allegiance

This part of the book alone is worth its weight in platinum! There are too many quotes and I have practically highlighted the entire part. But here are two and hopefully if you are a leader or even if not you would meditate on these two quotes, please read this part of the book. On page 22o he says:

Allegiance to one another in the body of Christ is based on love, expressed as love and experienced through love. We cannot live as the church unless we are growing in our personal relationships with each other, and deepening in our devotion to each other.

A little longer quote is found on 226 in relation to leaders developing interaction:

How do we develop a climate of love and openness where impersonal institutional patters may have long been established? Some suggest that the institutional church must be abandoned and a new form adopted. Others opt for starting new congregations, where they fell there will be no need to “fight” established patterns. It’s true that it is difficult to work toward a change of patterns that are deeply ingrained. But since the church is the body of Christ, and Jesus is the Lord of the church, He is powerful and able to work within His people. We would be wrong to quickly or lightly abandon brothers and sisters because we are discouraged about the unbiblical patterns that have become established in the congregation. Instead we need, without criticism, or antagonism, for what the body now is, to work toward the reality described in Scripture as the heritage of a church that is family and that is body.

Some other subpoints that I enjoyed were Body Organization and Ownership, Consensus and Freedom. Both are huge in the way we build allegiance to one another and to Christ.

The Shape of Tomorrow

The final part is the shortest. However, he asks a question that I wanted to quote on page 399 he asks:

Why then would anyone choose the type of leadership suggested here rather than one of the “success” models taken from secular management systems or recommended by “superchurch” promoters? We can think of only one compelling reason: It is biblical. It honors Jesus as the living, capable head of His own body, and we must honor His instructions.

Conclusion

Mr. Richards does a fine job of not promoting in “step” related methodology. He simply promotes and advocates a living, thriving, discerning relationship with the Head of the Church. Why turn to plans we Jesus knows best. Also why turn to secular leadership models or borrow from pseudo-christian leadership networks that are just modified business strategies cloaked in theological jargon? We don’t need them folks! We don’t need them. Success in the church is not defined by success in the world. An organism does not employ the same methods to grow and become successful that an organization does. We need to scratch the way we have turned the church into an enterprise and ask the head what does He want, unless of course we believe we know better! I recommend this work 100 times over please it is worth every penny then more.  Not to mention it was written 30 years ago

Jon Zens has decided to write a book addressing the contervesial women and the church issue that has been argued greatly but especially recently. I had the privellage of reading some earlier manuscript work and can’t wait to see the published version of it. No matter where you fall on the issue, I think it should be read, for us who have struggled with the issue to the point of embracing it but wanted some conservative evangelical work on the issue here it is. I can’t wait to see what Jon has to say and what others have to say to it. Should be fun   Here is a direct link to purchase it for preorder

Purchase Here

Let me first start by saying, I know that this is a very sensitive topic. Let me also add that I will not attempt to argue all of the perspectives from 1 Corinthians 9 nor 1 Timothy 5. Alan Knox has done a very good job explaining this, rather we disagree or not. I think he provides a very balanced approach; however, with a specific conclusion. So I want to come from a slightly different angle.

What Does Pastor’s Do That Prevents Them From Working?

I have thought about this a hundred times over. Exactly what is in the functional job description of a pastor that would somehow inhibit him from working a 9-5 like other believers? Exactly what does he do for the church on a day to day basis that other Christians are not to be doing? The only difference is that he has been set apart because he has the character of an elder brother.  I just can’t find anything that would prevent him from caring for the church while simultaneously earning a living for his family.  Unless of course…

Well… if we move into our modern model of church going and organizational hierarchies we may be able to quickly propagate and defend the case for paid ministers. “Times our different” we hear. The culture is different, what church looks like is different (the church in the scripture is not as enlightened as we are right?) and obviously we have moved outside of homes until buildings and we have staff, and all this other stuff, who else can do it besides the paid staff? I usually ask the question, is any of that stuff needed? If it is not in the scripture then it doesn’t seem to be necessary to the health, well being nor deployment of the Church. Those things have been added on by years of institutionalization and what was not even a thought for the Apostles has become the standard of what church should look like in our enlightened time.

What Greater Example?

It is odd to me, when a young men who has never worked a job outside of packing some books and helping people enroll in college for 20 hours a week, jumps behind a pulpit to tell me how I should work on my job. That is like a blind man instructing a famous painter about hues. My friend, if you have went from bible college to seminary to pastoral ministry with never having the hard task of balancing a family, job and church life and remain faithful and sane then my friend, you can’t tell me ANYTHING about “work”.

However, if you are currently caring for a family, holding down a job (with all of its stresses and messiness) and caring/serving others (not serving pulpits and business meetings) then I would be apt to listen to and give heed to a mature man living faithfully with outsiders, and caring for the saints. However, what I find is that many pastors, MANY, have the audacity to complain about how members aren’t serving the church. My friend that is because after working 8-10 hours, commuting, helping the wife with the children, helping instruct our families with the gospel and build relationships with others, we are tired and no we don’t want to help you fulfill your vision we want to sleep 8) 

Ohhhhh but what an example when a man has worked all day (Paul) preaches the Gospel, care for others in the midst of suffering has something to share with you. Not a man who gets a two month sabbatical, but a man who is juggling all pins and remains afloat like the rest of us have to do.

But Who Will Lead? A Case for Shared Ministry

The first question is then who will lead? Who will preach and instruct? Who will cast the vision? Who will care for the saints? Who will, who will, who will, who will????? WE WILL that is who! First we have to understand this can not be done on the one pastor model. This can only occur with a plurality of men working hand in hand to help provide ADEQUATE and personal care for those God has given them charge over. This is the easiest thing to fix. Depending on how many are in your local fellowship, bring other men, with the help of the church, before the church to set more aside. This alleviates any need for one man to prepare hours upon hours for teaching every week. The alleviates any need for one man to be visiting and it alleviates the pressure of this “vision” hocus pocus that is so prevalent today! A plurality of elders just isn’t the right thing, it is the best thing, the most healthiest thing, and most stress relieving thing, not to mention Holy Spirit wise thing to do!

Next equip the saints for the work of ministry and stop taking on tasks that you are not equipped to do. Christ gave us His Spirit who in turn gave us gifts, so that the entire body may be built up. This includes teaching. Just because a man is not an elder doesn’t mean he can’t teach, even multiple times throughout the year. This not only frees a few men from the task of teaching, it encourages others to prepare (teaches them how) and it encourages others to speak to one another from personal experience and theological thought.

Christ is our ultimate leader but he has gifted some men specifically to care for others in unique ways. However, this doesn’t mean that all of the real ministry work are done by them and the extracurricular stuff is for the “laymen”. No! Every believer is a full adult child in the Kingdom of God and because of this they posses real value and can contribute as early as the Spirit leads them to help others “grow up into the head”. It is a ridiculous notion that is being conveyed by many of churches and the perpetual infancy among the saints should be embarrassing! Ministry belongs to the Spirit and to inhibit such shared expression is a slap in the face of the Spirit of God who was sent for this purpose.

Some Last Remarks

I don’t believe that it is sin for churches to pay leaders unless of course they only pay certain ones. The text in 1 Timothy says “especially” not “exclusively” so if one is paid they all should be paid, unless of course we are showing partiality. Also I do believe traveling ministers (call them apostles/missionaries/evangelists/church planters…) should have a right to eat and have his means provided for by the body. This man is doing what many of us are not gifted to do and if he would do it for free, then I think he is God’s man. Traveling ministers have the right to “bring a believing wife” (maybe translated family) with him as he travels so their means should be provided for also. These men have forsaken the collection of goods, homes, and a steady life for the Gospel ministry and compensation is the least we can do to show honor for such work. However, the day he decides to take root in an area then he should turn to earning with his own hands.

Please understand that I won’t divide on such an issue, but I do believe this is the best road to take. I think we can show honor by helping those who teach us and care for us with financial resources, and I believe we can share honor in other ways. However, I don’t believe this is a salary. This would fly in the face to what Paul says in Acts 20. I understand that what I am presenting is a bit non-compliant with common thought, but I just wanted to share my opinion. Thanks a bunch.

My good blogging buddy Larry Cochran posted a video of Piper (one of my favorite theologians/teachers and who was instrumental in my understanding) answering a question about seminary and the local church. I am neither  pastor nor theologian, so what follows will be my opinion of the entire matter. I want to discuss a few things and get you to see some other perspectives.

Academics Is Important

First thing first. We have a problem today that did not exist 2000 years ago. We now have language barriers, we are void of the context of some of the scriptural writings, we don’t have the apostles to help clarify, we are outside of the culture and thus just opening our bible and letting the “Holy Spirit” interpret and give us clarity is a harmful at best if not even destructive.

I know many, many today whose lack of biblical understanding has caused some of the deepest of misrepresentations (at least what I believe to be misrepresentations). How to interpret the scripture is as foundational to our Christianity as an engine is to a car and because of a2000 year gap, various barriers and cultural chasms we have the hard work of bridging the gap and this my friend takes some understanding. From understanding what type of literature we are reading to biblical and systematic theologies, from Old and New Testatment introductions and analysis I will tell you that these things are very, very important. But….

Seminary Should Be The Result of Not the Cause Of

The problem is that today, seminary is the catalyst or the foundation and not gifting and modeling. I know of quite a few people, whose education was their all access pass into pastoral ministry instead of their lives, understanding, love, service, leadership and hospitality (Gifting???) being their access into such ministry. Thus seminary has encouraged something that I just can’t agree with. A man can run OFF (off being the operative word) to seminary get his paper qualification and then come back (be parachuted in as it is coined) and start a church based on the foundation that he has been to school (circular reasoning?). I think this to be to the detriment of the Body.

As I said in the first section academics/teaching is very important, we can’t get around that.  In both epistles to Timothy and the one to Titus, “didaskō” (with discourse being the context) dominates. Not to mention Paul does not seem to hold back/dumb down what He is trying to communicate to the churches, to the fact that He has to write a few follow ups for understanding purposes. However if I was a betting man, I would bet the ratio of cognitive/philosophical to action/practical would be in the area of 70/30. Seminary seems to take this and make information 90% plus of the educational process, these men are then released into the local churches and then they take this model and produce the same type of disciples who keeps the cycle going. That is why churches who talk a great deal about “discipleship” seems to want this to happen in the context of the classroom. I am not against such education; however, this is only a small part of discipleship.

The Local Church and Seminary I

I personally believe that “pastoral” type of degrees should not be handled at the seminary level. I am not saying that they can’t be trained there but they shouldn’t “qualify” a man for such a task. I do believe seminary is important. It is important for various reasons. Things like Church History, Textual Criticism, people who specialize in specific disciplines, men who will go off to write, men who will help us translate newly found manuscripts, men who will help us in apologetics, help us understand the bible in light of social sciences and even natural sciences; however, pastoring is such a hands on, practical, caring, loving, serving, giving, sacrificing and modeling type of work in the body that it is IMPOSSIBLE to learn this in a vacuum called a classroom. And many of the well respected, have no hands on the people they are supposedly caring for the most. How backwards is that?

The Local Church and the Seminary II

Finally then what role should the play if any in the education of the pastor? I think Dave Black has hit a hole in one in his exhortation “Returning Biblical Education To the Local Church” .  Here is one quote that really stood out:

We in the church of Jesus Christ are always in danger of magnifying titles and degrees and forgetting that a formal theological education guarantees neither sound doctrine nor mature character. The essential mark of Christian leadership is love not ability, humility not arrogance, wisdom not knowledge. We must cease viewing knowledge as an end in itself, but must pursue the mind of Christ, remembering that “truth is in Jesus” (Eph. 4:21). I wonder if anything is more urgent today, for the building up of the Body of Christ, than that its leaders should be, and should be seen to be, men who have “been with Jesus” (Acts 4:13).

This is coming from one the brightest men I know. One who is a Seminarian, Professor, Theologian and one who makes His living by such means (though who says that this is not His business, He is in the Gospel business ).

But the relationship is simple. A man gifted and “called” (I use that in the modern sense) if He has no one to help Him gain such an education should enroll into seminary. I think the robust education will help him be a more effective pastor; however, one such man should NEVER leave His congregation to pursue such an education. And if he must then I think a time of testing should be his prerequisite for reentry and shepherdship but often times he comes back more “qualified” then when he left and that seems to be backwards to me. As Dave says in this quote:

The seminary exists to serve the local church, not vice versa. So when opportunity occurs to return biblical education to your local church, I say grasp it with both of your hands!

I concur. With the Internet, books upon books and even some seminaries offering free classes like the Covenant Seminary. There is no need to ever leave those you have been gifted to serve, to do so would be to put the cart before the horse. And just in case you don’t think it can be done. There are many men doing that right now with their own gas money .

Thoughts?