Monthly Archives: May 2011

Some Things Leaders Do

In an ongoing effort to understand and get a picture of what a genuine leader looks like we will use the acronym LEADER to examine some of the things leaders do.

 

Listen

People are more inclined to follow those who hear them and their ideas and opinions. Increased undermining in organizations and families takes place where this is lacking. Wise leaders realize they do not have to agree with everything they hear, but if they don’t take the time to genuinely listen others are not likely to agree with anything they want to do. Good leaders work on developing their listening skills.

 

Envision

New ideas, dreams and hopes for progress and advancement are very important in any organization. Developing and sharing their vision with others is a must if the vision is to be accepted and acted upon. Leaders provide the vision and they get others on board to help map out the way to see the vision become a reality.

 

Ask

Keeping an idea or thought to yourself that requires others’ assistance is a sure way to keep it from happening! Asking others to help or join you is a hallmark of leadership. Good leaders are not “loners.” Real leaders have a manner of asking for advice and asking for help that is hard to turn down, because those who are being asked receive a sense of importance.

 

Delegate

Wise leaders know when and how to delegate. Frustration may often arise when a person is given responsibility but little or no authority. Wise leaders delegate and empower people with responsibility and authority for the task(s). Good leaders are secure enough to overcome the “I can do it better” syndrome and wisely delegate in a way that encourage and develops others.

 

Empower

Leaders help other people to be successful. They are not held back by jealousy or thoughts of who is getting the credit. The leader’s focus is on seeing the vision happen and setting the tempo by their example.

 

Respect

Often times we will see leaders who appear to be gruff, domineering, and short-tempered with people. Yet they are still able to get results. Why? Because they care for and respect people. It is like a football coach who is demanding and somewhat dictatorial in his coaching style and the players and team will battle for him all the way.

(Adapted from seminar materials by William Vermeulen)

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Leadership

The Perfect Pastor? The introduction to the book

          Twenty-nine-year-old Paul served as a youth director before taking on his first pastorate.  He, his wife and three little children entered the small town church with high hopes and abundant enthusiasm.  The little church was started by a conservative group who had broken away from a mainline denomination.  Initially, they maintained their denominational name, style of worship and form of government.  Paul, at his core a Baptist, agreed to take the call since many of the members were comfortable with his theology.

However, only a few months into his ministry he encountered the first real challenge.  During a regular board meeting, Paul was informed that he was not fulfilling his duties.  Without a formal or written job description, the board, nevertheless, had particular expectations of Paul as the sole pastor.  Paul, too, had expectations largely informed by the pastor of the church in which he grew up whom he considered his mentor.  With his seminary training still fresh on his mind, he was operating on the assumption that what he had been taught was indeed the right and biblical way to minister.  He was also enough of an idealist to think that the congregation and the board would follow his lead because he believed he was operating on biblical principles.

The board was composed of business and retired military men and women.  Some were charter members.  A few of them had purchased the acreage and built the facility with their own generous funds.  They liked their old Southern denominational roots and church traditions.

In the minds of these board members, the pastor was an employee of the board, a submissive servant hired to do their bidding.  Any job description would be determined by them and adjusted as they saw fit.  This young man’s recoiling at their demands  surprised and angered them.

Paul was baffled and became frustrated with the board.  How could they insist that he was failing to measure up? After all, they had failed to communicate their expectations, and he was working very hard as the new pastor. It was an even greater challenge for him because previous pastors willingly submitted to the board.  A precedent had been set and the board liked what they had before. Now he was kicking himself because he did not ask more probing questions during the interview process.  How could they ask him to do all that a pastor is to do and also serve as the youth minister, church custodian and groundskeeper?

After wrestling through these issues, Paul and the board were able to come to a workable solution.  A man was hired part-time to clean the church and different people signed up to take care of the lawn.  The rest of the facility maintenance would take place during workdays.  But the initial conflict was not without a cost.  Paul’s refusal to keep house and mow lawns led most of the board members to believe that he lacked humility and was lazy.  Sadly, the tension between the two parties lasted the entire three years Paul served in the church.

Paul was the first pastor with whom I developed a friendship.  My wife and I entered the church a couple of weeks after he and his family started at the church.  Though I was still in the military, Paul came to treat me as his very part-time, unofficial and unpaid assistant.  I was more of a confidant, gopher and yes man than anything else.  The role was easy because we shared a heart and service for the Lord, biblical convictions, youthful idealism, and  a philosophy of ministry.  Paul provided me with many opportunities to gaze into the world of pastoral ministry.  Upon sharing his first ministerial challenge, I was likewise angered.  The trouble was, neither of us comprehended the heart of the matter.  It was not so much about who was in control, though there was some of that to be sure.  Rather, both parties were operating on different presuppositions and paradigms.  Both sides defined and described ministry differently.  What’s more, each board member had in mind his or her own personal perspective as to what a pastor is and does, which at times in conflict with the other members.  The board seemingly lacked an objective or absolute standard upon which to define and describe the person and role of a pastor.

Over the years, in many different churches, I have observed and experienced this dynamic again and again.  Conflict between members in the congregation and the pastor or between the governing body of the church and the pastor has often times resulted from divergent expectations.  People place expectations on the pastor and the pastor places expectations on the people.  Most often these expectations are unspoken or at least poorly communicated.

Most church members have good intentions toward their pastor.  However, their often unrealistic understanding of what a pastor is supposed to be and do is based on an ignorance of the Bible’s teaching.  Thus, I resolved to research the Scriptures’ teaching on the relationship and role between a pastor and his people.

The purpose of this book is not merely to address conflict between people and pastors, per se.  Other books and resources are available to help resolve conflict between pastors and church people.  The purpose is not even merely to define and describe the qualifications and work of a pastor.  There are many good books which speak to that subject too.  My purpose is to provide a tool to improve relationships between church members and their pastors, and bring them into greater proximity to God’s purposes.

Such a tool is not only useful, but necessary.  This conclusion is borne out of thirty-six years as an active member in various churches (independent, Baptist, and now conservative Presbyterian).  This includes two years as a church board member, one year as youth director, four years as an elder, and ten years as a pastor.  In other words, God has blessed me with many years on both sides of the proverbial fence.

Before becoming a pastor, I had a strong admiration for a few pastors, was ambivalent about a few, and also had little trust or respect for a few.  The latter were those with whom I had some conflict.  Hindsight has taught me that the conflict was often  because they disappointed my expectations.  Admittedly, most of those expectations were at best, personal, or at worst, unbiblical.

After I became a pastor, I encountered people who were disappointed or angry with me.  Why?  Some of the time I missed the biblical mark as a pastor, but most of the time I had disappointed their expectations.  For them, I failed or violated their personal preferences.  Time has taught me that a significant portion of the interpersonal problems and conflicts between a member of the church and me as pastor, centered upon misguided or even sinful expectations we had of each other.

There is much written about pastors, particularly their role and duties toward God’s people.  Yet, nearly all of it is addressed to ministerial students or pastors.  On the other hand, virtually nothing is written about the member’s role and duties toward the pastor.

The Bible is the God-given authority for all matters pertaining to life and godliness (2 Peter 3:1-11).  Since this is true, the Bible is the standard against which to evaluate a pastor’s call, character and competency.  It is also the authority on a congregant’s service to his pastor and other church members.

So, this book is designed to be a tool.  Church members will be better equipped to choose a pastor, to relate to him and to support him.  Pastors, likewise, will find ways to relate to the varieties of people in their church.

This book is also a story.  It’s about a fictional pastor named Dan, and his family.  It tells the realistic, practical, humorous, exasperating real-life experiences of a pastor.  Dan attempts to apply the Bible’s requirements, roles and responsibilities of every pastor to his own strengths and shortcomings and to a diverse, and sometimes difficult, body of believers.

Leave a comment

Filed under Pastor & Church Relationship, Pastoring, The Perfect Pastor? (book excerpts)

What Does a Wise Leader Look Like?

God’s Word puts a premium on wisdom; therefore, so should we.  God not only expects his people to seek wisdom, but also to be wise. What’s more, he wants his leaders to also be wise in every way (Deuteronomy 17; Psalm 1; Proverbs).

However, just what is wisdom?  That’s what this Bible study is about.  Check out the attached lesson.

A Wise Leader

Leave a comment

Filed under Church Leadership, Men's Leadership Studies, Wisdom and the Church

A Matter of Pride (A Study from the Bible)

“…pride, most likely the chief of sins. Some even think that pride is the root of other sins. It well may be; as it leads to so many other particular offenses. Older commentators (Chaucer, p. 554, Canterbury Tales, London: J. M. Dent and Sons, 1958) spoke of pride as a “chief sin”, in that other twigs grew from its fertile and fatal root. From pride, grow the branches of disobedience, vaunting, hypocrisy, defiance, Arrogance, Impudence, insolence, impatience, strife, presumption, irreverence, and others. Chaucer even divides pride into external and internal categories, and refers to it as the sin of “superfluity”, an over-abounding, so as to bring fame to a person.

Satan’s first sin was characterized by and manifested itself in pride – perhaps the greatest sin. It always violates the first commandment – to have other gods before our Creator. Pride puts self before God. It seeks elevation above divinity.

Pride is willful arrogance, arrogating to yourself what is really God’s. It is essentially a lust for power … and it is far more prevalent than in rulers alone. Pride besets the commonest of people. It is no respecter of persons or position. In a power-centric society, pride is at the top of the list of sins.

Today, many of us are routinely tempted with pride. Much of our very environment seduces us with pride. It is a sin of which we should constantly be aware, and seek to restrain. If a person tells me they have no pride, then I know I’m dealing with a person who does not know himself very well, or else a person who is in dangerous denial.

Today, let’s look at its biblical diagnosis, and seek a cure. We need a pride-ectomy, or at the very least, an antidote for it.

– Rev. Douglas Hall

__________________________

One of the prevailing challenges a leader has, even leaders within the local church, is that of pride. Enclosed is a study on what the Bible says about pride.  It is not comprehensive, but it is a start.  Work through the study, if you dare.

A Matter of Pride stdt

A Matter of Pride tchr

Leave a comment

Filed under Character, Church Leadership, Men's Leadership Studies

Aspiring to be a Real Man (A Study)

Aspiring to be a Real Man PDF

The PDF file attached to this blog is one of the lessons I put together for a men’s discipleship group called Band of Brothers. The purpose of this group was to provide dynamic training for intentional living as a man or as men in Christ.

The material may be used, copied and circulated without limit provided proper acknowledgment is given to the source.

Leave a comment

Filed under Discipling Others, Leadership, Men's Leadership Studies

Characteristics of a Cult

Someone recently objected to the statement that Harold Camping is a cult leader.  Yet, when he and his teachings are compared to the standard definition(s) of a cult, he fits the bill.  What are some of those main characteristics?  See the short list below.  I am indebted to Mr. Matt Slick of the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry for outlining the basic traits of a modern cult.

1. Unorthodox, esoteric, with a devotion to a person, object, or set of new ideas.

.

2. Often isolationist.

.

3. Many cults have non-verifiable belief systems. In other words, they tend to have special beliefs no one else can know or verify, or special revelation no one else outside of the cult’s inner circle has.

.

4. The leader, who is often charismatic,  is supposedly very special because he or she:

a. Has received special revelation from God, or special knowledge about God and God’s will that no one else has.
b. Claims to be appointed by God for a mission.
c. Claims to have special abilities (wisdom, power, talent, gifts, insight, etc.) no one else has.
c. Is considered above reproach and is not to be denied, contradicted or rebuked.
.

5. The ethics of a cult:

a.  They typically seek to do good works.
b.  Usually moral and possess a good standard of morality.
c. The Bible is often used or additional  “scriptures” are penned. When the Bible  is used, it is distorted with the leader’s private  interpretations.
d. Many cults recruit Jesus as one of their own and redefine him accordingly.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Rebuking Harold Camping

Because of the erroneous, unbiblical teachings Harold Camping continued to invent which caused many to leave their churches in order to follow cult leader Camping, the Northern California Presbytery of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church drafted and sent a no-nonsense, straightforward rebuke to Camping.

Camping, an engineer and contractor, who had built several church buildings, including the one for the congregation in which I served while in the San Jose/San Francisco area, was a friend to many Reformed churches.  For many years he broadcast sermons and radio devotionals by local pastors and big-named radio Bible preachers. However, something happened, and he became more and more convinced that he alone was privy to true interpretations of the Bible.

As a consequence, many of the regional pastors began to confront him. Solid seminary professors, pastors of large churches, friends, relatives were among the throng who called him, wrote to him or spoke with him directly to address his aberrant teachings.  Rather than listening to any, he either ignored them or rejected them out of hand. None of his responses were logical, let alone biblical.  Nevertheless, he did find a way to counter the waves of admonishment:  he declared that God made clear through the Bible that all churches were apostate and evil, and all pastors demonic.

It was then that avid followers of Camping, chose to follow a self-taught, over-confident man than to believe their own schooled pastors and learned elders. I recall talking to one of our members who declared that Harold Camping, the man of God, knew what he was talking about, while I, his pastor who had trained in exegesis and the original languages, did not know anything.  The week after he made that angry declaration, he left the church; as did a number of other families.

Camping’s followers caused many churches to split or to lose many former members. Like Camping himself, these families were solid in their belief that Camping was absolute right and everyone else in the world was wrong.  Further, like Camping, they also said the only ministry that was truly preaching the gospel message was Camping and his Family Radio.  The sad thing has been, there was and is no gospel (which means “good news”) message. It has been a message of judgment and fear with absolutely no hope other than to believe that there will be judgment, and a rapture for the select few (the number is now 200 million) who apparently listen to Camping.

It was at this point that the Northern California presbytery (pastors and elders of the regional Orthodox Presbyterian Church) issued a public call for Camping to repent and to return to the essentials of the historic, Biblical, Christian faith.  From what I recall, he received the notice, but rejected it as nonsense.   Here is a copy of the call for Harold Camping to repent:

RESOLUTION AGAINST MR. HAROLD CAMPING’S

UNSCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH

Whereas, we, Presbyters of the Church of Jesus Christ – ministers and ruling elders of the Presbytery of Northern California of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church – are to protect and guard that which has been committed to our charge;

Whereas, we, ministers of the Word, are duty bound to warn the uninstructed and erring not to receive or to teach that which is unscriptural especially in regard to the biblical existence of Christ’s holy Bride, the Church, and ought to give authoritative direction to those members tempted to follow such erroneous teaching;

Whereas, we, ministers of the Word, are commanded to propagate the truth of the doctrine of the Church;

Whereas, Mr. Harold Camping proclaims publicly on Family Radio stations (a worldwide Christian radio network) his doctrine of the denial of the God-ordained institution of the church visible;

Whereas, Mr. Camping arbitrarily decides which scriptural texts refer to the so-called eternal church and which refer to the so-called temporally “cursed” local church;

Whereas, Mr. Camping argues that the Spirit of God has abandoned the local church and is no longer working in it at all;

Whereas, Mr. Camping argues against the continued validity of the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, even exhorting members of the Church to cease from partaking of the sacraments and new converts from experiencing the sign and seal of the covenant;

Whereas, Mr. Camping denies the legitimate authority of the ordained offices of the church: pastor (teaching elder), ruling elder, and deacon;

Whereas, Mr. Camping’s doctrine has never been submitted to any ecclesiastical authority for review and correction, in effect, denying all ecclesiastical authority; thus making himself the sole defining authority and communicator of this so-called new insight;

Whereas, Mr. Camping teaches that those members who continue in the church visible are disobeying God’s Word and thus sinning by remaining faithful to the local church;

Whereas, Mr. Camping counsels that even if one’s own particular church is teaching the “true gospel”, short of this particular doctrine, he still must forsake even this assembly of saints;

Whereas, some of our churches have lost members because they have received and believed such false doctrine, repudiating their vows of membership;

Whereas, Mr. Camping cuts himself off from the visible and local church of Jesus Christ, thus committing a form of excommunication;

Therefore we, the Presbytery of Northern California of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, do condemn this teaching against the church and exhort the members of the church visible to refuse to heed his teaching to forsake the visible church;

And we, the Presbytery of Northern California, call Mr. Harold Camping to repent of this heresy and turn back to the Church of Jesus Christ visible, and to stop teaching such on the public airwaves and in his published literature (1 Tim. 1:3-7);

And that this Resolution be circulated to the Presbyteries of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and to the 71st General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and to anyone else we believe ought to know of our church’s stand on this issue and need to be encouraged and reassured of the true doctrine of the Church visible and invisible.

May God have mercy,

The Presbytery of Northern California of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

An Annual Pastoral Evaluation for Elders and Pastors

Have I/we functioned according to the New Testament biblical images for elders?

  •  As a father of the household of God (Matt. 13:52; 1 Tim. 3:5).
  •  As a shepherd of God’s flock (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2).
  •  As a ruler in God’s assembly (Heb. 13:7, 17; 1 Thess. 5:12, 13)

Have I/we kept our priorities right?

  • Serving the Lord first of all (Acts 20:19; Gal. 1:10; 1 Thess. 2:4; Eph. 6:6-7; Col. 3:22-24)

By emphasizing God’s Word and prayer (Acts 6:4; 20:20,27)

By confronting opposition with sound teaching (Eph. 4:15)

By feeding the flock of God (1 Pet. 2, 5)

  •  Serving the congregation:

 By equipping the saints for service (Eph. 4:11,12)

By confronting opposition with sound teaching (Eph. 4:15)

By arming them for spiritual warfare (2 Cor. 11:13ff; Eph. 6)

  • Have I/we been faithful in our duties as elders?

As an example to the flock of God (Ti. 2:7,8; Heb. 13:7; 1 Pet. 5:3)

As an example in life (1 Tim. 4:6):

Keeping myself/ourselves right with God:

by guarding myself/ourselves (Acts 20:28), and walking in the Spirit (Gal. 5:16)

by growing in grace and knowledge of Christ (2 Pet. 3:18)

by prayer and study (Acts 6:4; 1 Tim. 4:13-16; 2 Tim. 2:15)

by proper delegation of certain tasks to deacons (Acts 6) or others

by separating from selfish interests (Acts 20:33-35; Rom. 13:8)

Holding myself/ourselves in wise and biblical balance:

Keeping my/our homes in order (1 Tim. 3:4-5)

Being good stewards (1 Cor. 4:1-2; 9:17; Col. 1:24-25)

Through the study-application of God’s Word (2 Tim. 2:15)

As true living sacrifices unto the Lord (Phil. 2:17; 2 Tim. 4:6; Acts 20:24; 31:13; Phil. 3:7-8)

As an example(s) to the flock in doctrine (1 Tim. 4:16)

Have I/we been faithful in my/our duty as a sound teacher(s) of the Word of God?

(Mk. 6:34b; 1 Cor. 12:28,31; Col. 1:28; 1 Tim. 3:2; 5:17; Ti. 1:9; Jas. 3:1; Rev. 7:17)

In public teaching?

In private teaching and instruction?

Have I/we been faithful as a shepherd(s) of God’s flock?

(Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:1-2)

  • By comforting them and nourishing them with compassion (Matt. 9:36; Mk. 6:34; Jas. 5:14)

Through hospitality

Through pastoral visitations

Through personal counsel

Through diaconal help

  • By protecting them (Jn. 10:11,15; Acts 20:28-30; Ti. 1:9; Eph. 4:14; Heb. 13:17)

From outer enemies (2 Cor. 11:12-15)

From inner enemies (2 Tim. 2:16-18; Jude 12-13)

Have I/we been faithful as a godly ruler(s)

(Heb. 13:7,17; 1 Thess. 5:12-13; 1 Tim. 5:17)?

  • Through the proper interpretation and application of Scripture to life within the  church.
  • By making provisions for the good order and well-being of the church.
  • By justly exercising the keys of discipline (Matt. 18:15-18).

© D. Thomas Owsley

Leave a comment

Filed under Church Leadership, Elders, Pastoring

Evaluating the Potential Church Elder or Pastor

Seeking to Evaluate and Select Qualified Men to Serve as Elder or Pastor

(Men called to office must exhibit the character qualities of a spiritual leader.

See 1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:6-9; Acts 6:1-6)

Here is a simple form that can be used to evaluate a potential candidate for church elder or pastor. This can also be used as a self-evaluation for an elder or a pastor, or for the church leadership to use in order to evaluate an active elder or pastor.

(Score:  0 – shows an absence of this characteristic; 1- means there is weakness, 5 – means the man is strong in this area and it is evident)

This means that these men:

__            Maintain a regular, daily practice of time alone with God in Bible reading and prayer

__            Have lives marked by moral and spiritual integrity.

__            Have a wholesome reputation among believers and unbelievers alike.

__            Have a firm grasp and conviction of the truths of the Christian faith as revealed in the Scriptures.

__            Must have the spiritual capacity to discern, expose and withstand the assaults of heresy and unbelief (elders).

__            Must have homes that reflect an atmosphere of harmony, godliness, and hospitality.

Specific Questions for Evaluation:

A.            Personal Life

__             Does he meet the moral and spiritual qualifications of 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1? (Substantially, not

perfectly)

__            Does he practice daily, regular Bible reading and praying?

__            Does he fear and love God?

__            Is he serious about obeying God and obeying God’s Word?

__            Is he killing sin and growing in grace?

__            Is he teachable, eager for learning more spiritual truth?

__            Does he hunger for righteousness?

B. Family Life

__             Does his home reflect an atmosphere of harmony, godliness, and hospitality?

__            Does he have a good relationship with his wife that evidences conformity to the standards of Ephesians 5:25-28? Is he practicing self-denying love that serves, nourishes and cherishes his wife?

__            Does he rule his children with a graceful, loving, but firm hand?

__            Does he consistently practice biblical discipline and love toward his children (ie: verbal instruction and corporal correction)?

__            Is his marriage and family life a model you can commend to others?

__            Does his wife respect him?

__            Do his children respect him?

__            Does he provide spiritual leadership to his family?

__            Does his wife and children follow his spiritual leadership?

__            Does his home evidence a commitment to spiritual priorities?

__            Does his wife have godly priorities?

__            Is his wife committed to ministry with him?

__            Is his wife supportive of him serving as an elder or deacon?

C.  Church Life

__             Is he enthusiastic about the vision of building a biblically healthy church?

__             Is he committed to the local church of God’s people, and faithful in attendance when God’s people meet?

__            Is he friendly, open, cordial, approachable, gracious to others?

__            Does he show a genuine concern for others?

__            Does he give himself in time and talents to the Lord’s work?

__            Is he willing to serve without seeking applause?

__            Is he opinionated and contentious?

__            Does he take correction gracefully and with humility?

__            Is he teachable?

__            Can he disagree in a gentle manner?

__            Can he see another’s viewpoint?

__            Is he a good listener?

__            Does he keep confidences?

__            Does he pray with and for others in need?

__            Is he enthusiastic about the Bible and the Gospel, and can he communicate the truth to others?

__            Can he defend the Bible against attack?

__            Is he slow to judge others and quick to commend and encourage?

__            Is he firm in rejecting gossip and slander?

__            Do he and his wife practice hospitality toward others in the local Body of Christ?

__            Has he demonstrated a capacity for spiritual leadership by serving?

__            Does the church respect him and follow him as a leader?

__            Has he demonstrated a capacity for ruling, oversight, and shepherding?

D.  Life in God’s World

__             Is he honest in money matters?

__            Does he pay his debts promptly?

__            Do his employer, employees, work associates and neighbors respect him?

__            Does he seek to glorify God through his vocation or calling?

__            Does he use his money in a godly way?

__            Does he respond in a godly way to disappointment and worldly reversals?

__            Does he have compassion for the lost and a desire to carry out the Great Commission?

__            Does he pray for the salvation of lost friends, relatives, and acquaintances?

__            Does he build bridges of friendship and service to lost people?

__            Does he have a heart for inviting people to hear about Christ and to be exposed to Christ’s church?

Leave a comment

Filed under Church Leadership, Elders, Pastoring

Effective Church Leadership

This book was written by Kennon L. Callahan (Jossey-Bass; August 15, 1997).

Amazon.com’s description for the book: Kennon Callahan shares a new understanding of leadership, and helps missionary pastors grow their leadership by cultivating new understandings and practices in seven key areas. Callahan guides pastors and key leaders in building on their creativity and imagination in order to revitalize their local churches and advance their missions.

Excerpts are provided below:

            Professional ministers are at their best (and they do excellent work) in a churched culture.  But put them in an unchurched culture, and they are lost.  In an unchurched culture, they do a reasonably decent job of presiding over stable and declining and dying churches.  They maintain a sense of presence, dignity, decorum, and decency—with a quietly sad regret—much like the thoughtful undertaker who sees to keeping things in good order throughout the funeral. P. 4

New understandings of doing ministry must be created with each new generation for the church’s mission to move forward.  When an older generation imposes its understanding on the new generation—however innocently—both groupings become dysfunctional.  Each new generation must carve out an understanding of ministry that matches with its time. P. 4

That concern for the “care of a church, the administration of a community” became subsequently a preoccupation with the institutional care of the church.  And as the mainline denominations began to decline, the preoccupation with institutional survival increased.

At rock bottom, the understanding of the nature of leadership inherent in the view of that time was:

1.  The minister serves inside the church.

2.  The laity ministers in the world.

3.  The world is seeking out the church.

P. 9-10

But what happens when the world quits seeking out the church?  We are left with well-intentioned, “inside the church” ministers, whose understanding of the nature of leadership—with its related behavior patterns, values, and objectives—works best in a churched culture. P. 10

Old ways die hard—and the second reason is that they are familiar and habitual.  Behavior patterns of any kind that have been ingrained and repeated for years upon years are not easily extinguished.  It is not simply that these behavior patterns have been consistently rewarded over and over during the past nearly forty years.  The rewards may have been diminishing over a long period of time.  But as long as the familiar and habitual behavior receives even occasional rewards or intermittent reinforcement, it will persist.  P. 15

            Some persons might suggest that the invitation to be a missionary pastor has the ring of romanticism about it.  To the contrary, the fact that we now live in an unchurched culture is not a romantic perspective, it is realistic.

The romanticists are those who behave as though it were still the churched culture of the 1950s, who still long for the busy, bustling suburban churches of the 1940s and 1950s.  The romanticists look back to those grand times when their sanctuaries were full and long for that bygone era when people sought out the church on their own initiative.  The romanticists are those who continue to spend most of their time in their offices, committee meetings, and administrative sessions, believing that this will somehow help.

The realist is the one who knows that this is a mission field and who behaves as a missionary pastor.   P. 17

            In recent times, the church growth movement has had an important influence in church life.  And it has done us a good service in helping us to be outside in the world.  The church growth movement has accurately assessed that this is a mission field.  It has drawn on the biblical and theological understandings of evangelism to point toward the fundamental concern for witness and outreach on a mission field.

And it has done us a disservice as well; namely, it has reduced the issue to growth alone.  Our current problems cannot be conveniently reduced to whether the church membership statistics are growing or declining.  Our current problems have more to do with mission than membership, more with service than survival, more with the planet than the church plant, more with the human hurts and hopes of the world than the hemorrhaging of a denomination. P. 19

To be sure, atheism, secularism, and materialism are strongly present in an unchurched culture. But these are present in a churched culture as well.  It is not so much that these are more present in an unchurched culture.  More to the point, no major cultural value says that the church is important.

In an unchurched culture, people do not necessarily view the church as harmful or hurtful.  Rather, people simply view the church as not particularly relevant or helpful. P. 20

             The nature of leadership of a mission outpost takes seriously the distinctive qualities of that mission outpost.  Leadership of a mission outpost is practiced with faithfulness and compassion, knowing that the congregation may, for many years to come, happily be a mission outpost. Leadership of a mission outpost does not have a goal of becoming a churched-culture local church.

Mission outposts may be of any size—small, medium, or large.  What counts is not their size, but their spirit.  The spirit of a mission outpost is one of mission, whereas the spirit of a churched-culture local church is one of maintenance.  P. 23

 

RELATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS

The first distinguishing mark of a missions outpost is that it delivers the relational characteristics of an effective congregation.  The relational characteristics are:

1.  specific, concrete missional objectives
2.  pastoral and lay visitation in the community
3.  corporate, dynamic worship
4.  groupings of significant relationships of sharing and caring; roots, place, and belonging
5.  strong leadership resources
6.  a solid, participatory decision-making process in a stream-lined organizational structure
There are also six functional characteristics:

7.  several competent programs and activities

8.  open accessibility

9.  high visibility

10.  adequate parking

11.  adequate space and facilities

12.  solid financial resources

A mission outpost delivers five out of the six person-centered, people-centered relational characteristics of effective churches.  A mission outpost may also deliver several (three or four) of the functional characteristics. Pp. 28-29

Second, in helping the grouping to discover and fulfill the four foundational searches in this life’s pilgrimage, the missionary pastor, as leader, is the one who is primarily:

  • proactive
  • relational
  • missional
  • intentional

The leader is not basically reactive, responsive, organizational, or institutional.  Given their human failings, doubts, and misgivings, however, leaders continue forward with a consistent sense of direction and work at being increasingly proactive, intentional, relational and missional.  P. 75

Their sense of belonging is discovered and, as best it can be, fulfilled in a relational neighborhood of acquaintances, work associates, and friends—the new “extended family” of relationships.  Sometimes this relational neighborhood of friends overlaps with the sociological neighborhood in which one lives.  And thus the sociological neighborhood becomes also a source of belonging.

Seldom does the relational neighborhood overlap with the geographical neighborhood.  In some small towns and some rural areas the relational neighborhood and the geographical neighborhood may yet overlap.  But the geographical neighborhood has receded as a primary source of belonging.  The search for belonging is primarily lived out in the relational neighborhood—the network linkages of our time.  P. 105

People come to a church longing for, yearning for, hoping for this sense of roots, place, belonging, sharing, and caring.  People come to a church in our time with a search for community, not committee. P. 106

About now, you should be asking, “If there are so many out there searching, how come our church isn’t full?”   Some of them have probably visited your church.  Eventually—and inevitably in some churches—the visitor discovers that the perspective is so institutional, the mentality and values are so organizational, and the behavior patterns are so functional that the people of that church are simply too preoccupied with their own busyness to welcome them, to share some personal warmth with them.  Pp. 106-107

It is ironic that the program emphasis on small groups in many local churches has further contributed to this heterogeneous diffusion.  Frequently, these programs and activity groupings have represented the epitome of socioeconomic exclusiveness.  There is considerable need for local churches to create new communities of reconciliation, wholeness, caring, and justice.    P. 108

As the culture has become more heterogeneous, we see a fourth consequence in the enormous diversity of local churches.  Our pastors have greater difficulty in this current time than in the time gone by when they move from one church to another.  One reason is that when a pastor moved from Grover’s Corners to another town, the culture was relatively homogeneous—there was some parallel commonality with where he had moved to.  It may not have been George and Emily next door, but it was Bill and Sue.

As pastors move now from one church to another, there may be little commonality at all.  Indeed, the high probability is that in our time a pastor is moving from one collection of socioeconomic, cultural, vocational, and theological groupings to an entirely different collection of subcultural groupings.  Sometimes it is like moving from rural North Dakota to Los Angeles; sometimes it feels like moving from northern Indiana to South America. P. 111

People learn to be leaders.  Leadership is learned.  Leadership cannot be taught.  The opportunity and possibilities are within the person who seeks to develop his or her own leadership competencies.  Mentors help.  Teachers and resource persons will contribute greatly.

But all the efforts to “teach” leadership come to naught, not because there are not excellent teachers involved, but because the focus is on what the teacher is teaching the person, rather than on what the person is proactively learning.  You are the person who can learn leadership.  You are the person who can best grow forward your leadership competencies as a missionary pastor.   P.141

People are helped best with their foundational life searches, in relation to the emerging trends in the culture, by a grouping that has selected and that reinforces and rewards leadership values set A.  Thus, both unchurched persons and churched persons are drawn primarily to local churches with set A.  Precisely in these missions teams persons learn best the nature of leadership important for these times.  Pp. 149 & 151

People learn leadership best in a leadership environment of objectives, not activities.  In an environment of objectives, people learn a sense of intentionality and direction.  In an environment of activities, people learn busyness and fragmentation.   P. 153   

            People learn leadership best in an environment wherein there is a high delegation of authority, not responsibilities.  People do not learn leadership in an environment of responsibilities.  They learn passive behavior there, not leadership.

Two principles will help.  First, the greater the range of authority, the more likely the level of leadership competencies is to grow.  The more fully persons are given authority, the more likely they are to develop their leadership competencies.  P. 154

The church is particularly good at not doing that.  One of the pivotal reasons the church loses competent leaders daily is because it is perfectly willing to give them a multiplicity of responsibilities but virtually no authority.  People tend not to continue participating in organizations that stifle their own growth and development. Pp. 155-156

The point is that more authority and fewer responsibilities help persons grow forward their leadership; less authority and more responsibilities help persons develop passive behavior.  P. 157

The better way forward—particularly if you want to develop solid leaders—is to leave them alone to do good work and to grow as leaders as long as the following five criteria hold:

1.  They are accomplishing significant objectives (doing good work).

2.  They are matched with their best competencies.

3.  They are “growing in the work” (their leadership competencies are advancing).

4.  People are satisfied with their results.

5.  They work vigorously to add new people in new leadership posts.  Pp. 163-164

 

The key posts—the real power posts, if you will — relate to the central characteristics of:

1.  specific, concrete missional objectives

2.  pastoral and lay visitation in the community

3.  corporate, dynamic worship

4.  significant relational groupings

P. 164

 

An environment of rules and regulations, legalism and laws best develops passive, dependent persons.  Leadership values set B thrives on the development of policies and procedures, requirements and standards, penalties and punishment.  The result is passive, organizational, institutional, reactive—persons who are primarily dependent. P. 168

There are trade-offs in every system.  Since it is not reasonably possible to do all three with equal strength, which two are the best two to focus on?

A.  unchurched persons and groupings on the local mission field

B.  persons and groupings in the congregations

C.  the organizational and institutional structures of the local church

Professional ministers choose B and C.  Missionary pastors choose A and B.

            A denomination that chooses B and C will want to train pleasant funeral directors who will wait patiently until the dying patient has succumbed; they will then preside, with solemn dignity and grave decorum, over a thoughtful funeral.  A denomination that chooses A and B will best focus on the local development of excellent missionary pastors and mission team leaders.   P. 173

There is a direct correlation between the evaluation process used by a denomination and the morale of its ministers. The more hierarchical the orientation of the evaluation process, the lower the morale among the ministers.  The lower the morale among the ministers, the more likely a denomination is to be fading and dying.  P. 179

The list of competencies in the evaluation form is usually a list of professional minister competencies.  Study the list closely.  The weight of the competencies is toward activities inside the local church.  Regrettably, pastors are heavily influenced by the list.  They conclude that the list is the norm for what is (sic) means to be an effective pastor.  They pattern their behavior accordingly.  The personnel committee and the denomination reinforce these conclusions.

The result: The evaluation process creates pastors who try to improve competencies that used to work well in a long-ago, churched culture.  Key principle: The way people are evaluated shapes who they become.  P. 181

Note this word of caution: The statement, “We should take care of our own before we take care of others,” is not a plea favoring local mission.  The comment really means, “We should take care of those who are already inside this local church.”  Persons who say we should take care of our own are rarely involved in any hands-on way in local missions.  The phrase is mostly used in a self-centered way.

Those persons who contribute money to their local church (some of which goes to support national and world missions) tend to use their financial contributions as their excuse not to become involved in hands-on local or world mission.  They rationalize by saying, “Oh, yes, we are in mission.  We give money to the following causes…”  Financial support for missions does not relieve a congregation from its responsibility to give personal support for mission(s) and mission teams.   P. 207

Key principle: Have just enough people on just enough committees to achieve wise decisions and accomplish significant results.  Note clearly that the goal is not fewer people on fewer committees.  The goal is wise decisions and significant results. P. 210

A leader can gather a committee.  A committee cannot gather a leader.  The best way to kill a cause is to give it to a committee.  A cause needs a leader.  P. 211

Effectiveness is more valuable than bureaucracy.  Bureaucracy has its value.  Effectiveness is more valuable.  A bureaucracy is of value when it generates green tape—policies and procedures that “move things rapidly forward.”  Some bureaucracies are capable of generating green tape.

Regrettably, many bureaucracies are more skilled at generating red tape—policies and procedures that block and stop, bog things down, slow them to a crawl.  Enormous bureaucracies have developed in our time, each with its own special agenda.  Frequently, that agenda includes the bureaucracy spending considerable energy in justifying its own existence and increasing its size.  P. 218

The organizational principle of effectiveness does encourage the concomitant values of excellent mistakes and creativity.  There is a direct correlation between the value of excellent mistakes and the level of creativity in an organization.  This correlation does not condone a pattern of inept, incompetent, mediocre work.  Rather, it encourages the value of creativity.  Quite simply, the more positive the recognition for excellent mistakes, the higher the level of creativity in the grouping.

People’s creativity is advanced when the organization encourages improvisation, initiative, spontaneity, and new ideas.  In many organizations it would help to give an annual award for the best mistake of the year.  P. 220

A commitment to decentralization and a corollary commitment to “frontline” action, accomplishment, and achievement are dynamic commitments for proactive grass-roots leadership.  They stand over against centralization and coordination as ineffective qualities for contemporary organizational structures.  Someone once said, “In a centralized system, we were top-heavy in management.  We were keeping beautiful track of what we were not doing.”  People interested in productivity are drawn to action-oriented, decentralized groupings. P. 225

            The missionary pastor discerns that what helps one with despair is mission, not success.  At bottom, despair has to do with whether one’s life will count.  The string of quick successes is used to create the illusion that one’s life does count.  But what is eternal is the mission of God, not the fleeting successes of humankind.  As a missionary pastor, the art is to discover constructive ways in which you can participate in God’s mission in this world.  Stay the course in that mission.  Then one’s life does count, in enduring and abiding ways.  P. 249

As we have moved from a churched culture to an unchurched culture, many of these Third churches have found themselves in an even more desperate plight.  In the churched culture, they had perhaps only three of the twelve central characteristics well in place.  And they came to depend on the churched culture to deliver to them a range of “new” churched people.

When the culture shifted to unchurched, their plight worsened.  New people were no longer showing up.  They could no longer depend on the culture to sustain them.  Hence, they turned to the pastor or the denomination.  They had depended on the churched culture.  Now they would depend on the pastor or the denomination.  They simply shifted the focus for their dependency.  P. 250

            Fourth, constructive help provides positive reinforcement and recognition to those persons in the local church who are advancing and developing their mission.  Sadly, some pastors are preoccupied with persons in their stable and declining or dying church who demonstrate a dependency pattern.  The focus of energy and resources is on them.  As a result, they overlook or neglect to boost along the persons who are developing some strength and vitality.  P. 253

It would not be helpful for the founding participants to consist solely or even primarily of already longtime churched persons.  Mostly, their experience will have been in stable and declining or dying churches.  They will have learned well how to build stable and declining and dying churches, having learned the behavior patterns that focus on the functional, institutional approach to the local church.  P. 258

The primary focus in the first and the second years is on helping people to discover a sense of mission, involving shepherding and visitation; worship and prayer; and roots, place and belonging, sharing and caring.  In this new emerging community of the faith, mission teams would be encouraged and would be the major value.  Small, short-term organizational task forces would do modest work.  P. 258

These communities have an abiding strong focus on justice.  They are not communities of pleasant generalities and pious statements.  They are missional communities that take seriously the difficult ambiguities of societal and ethical concerns in our time.  These communities wrestle with those concerns.

These communities are more interested in societal issues than social graces; more interested in poverty than platitudes; more interested in inequities in the culture than in study committees in the church.  These communities live out compassion and courage, not timid, calculating pieties. P. 263

1 Comment

Filed under Book Review and Excerpts