As you are aware of, I look for articles on church leadership. I found this one that I jive with by David Alan Black. It was written in December of 2003. After reading this article, ask yourself the question, How much closer are we today in Biblical leadership?
************************************************************************************
Church Leadership According to Philippians 1:1
by David Alan Black
Paul said, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tim 3:16). The word “all” is very important. Theologians call this “verbal-plenary inspiration.” Perhaps we could just say, “Every word, everywhere, is inspired by God.” In fact, we can take it a step further. Not only is every word inspired by God, so is every tense, voice, mood, person, number, gender, case, part of speech, word order, phrase order, clause order, structure, etc. Moreover, not only is the Bible inspired, Paul says in the very same passage that it is also “profitable” or “useful.” In other words, the Bible was not given for our information but for our transformation, every word, everywhere!
As we turn to Philippians 1:1, we note that Paul greets “all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, along with the overseers and deacons” (so most translations). In the New Testament there are two Greek words that are used interchangeably to describe church leaders. The word presbuteros is usually rendered “elder,” while the word episkopos is usually rendered “bishop” or “overseer.” The uniform practice of the early church in the New Testament was to have a plurality of elders or overseers. This is because leadership by one person always tends to exalt one man over others, while the Bible clearly teaches that only Christ is to be exalted, for He alone is the head of the church (Col 1:15-20; Matt 23:8-12). Thus, Paul does not greet the “pastor” (singular) or the “overseer” (singular) of the church in Philippi, but the “overseers” (plural). Though the churches we attend may have a “pastor,” this is not the teaching of the New Testament.
It is instructive that Paul describes these believers in Philippi, not as being “under” their leaders (in which case the Greek preposition would have been hupo), but rather “along with” (Greek sun) the overseers and deacons. This is not accidental. In terms of biblical teaching, every Christian is a minister. There is no separate class of those who minister while others stand by and watch. Though some ministers may devote more of their time and energy to the ministry, and some may even be paid for their ministry, all Christians are “in the ministry.” As Alec Motyer of Christ Church, England, writes: “Within the local church there was fellowship (all the saints) and leadership (the bishops and deacons). The leadership, however, was not an imposition upon the fellowship but an expansion of it. For the saints are not ‘under’ but with (‘in company with’) the bishops” (The Message of Philippians, p. 33). Motyer adds, “As is always the case in the Bible, the existence and activity of such ministries arise out of the needs of the church, and they can be exercised only in ways that are suited to what the church is. Thus, for example, the New Testament never speaks of any ministry as mediating between God and the church” (p. 35). Motyer is referring to the great New Testament doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, which is an essential part of the biblical idea of the church.
It is also important to note that neither “overseers” nor “deacons” is used with the Greek definite article. This is highly significant. In Greek, the use of the definite article generally points out particular identity, whereas the absence of the article generally emphasizes qualities or characteristics. Apparently Paul uses this construction to emphasize the work these individuals do, and not their titles. Evidence for this functional meaning of the terms comes from other Pauline epistles as well (see 1 Thess 5:12-13; 1 Cor 12:28-31; Rom 12:6-8). The clear impression we receive is that of local churches under apostolic authority, with each church managing its own affairs under the leadership of men who oversee and serve the congregation.
The implications of this are tremendous. If you were to go into practically any Protestant church today, you would likely encounter a hard and fast clergy-laity distinction, and very often a church ruled by one man with an iron fist. Or you may find the leadership divided into pastors, elders, and deacons, or into ruling elders and teaching elders, with the ruling elders functioning more like administrators who are involved in very little pastoral ministry. None of these models is truly biblical. While some passages suggest the presence of an elder who became the spokesman for the leadership, there is no suggestion anywhere of one man who was viewed as the pastor. Such a person was always accountable to the other elders and never led in a hierarchical manner, as was the case with Diotrephes (3 John 9-11). Thus the church is never viewed as a one-man team with the “pastor” doing all the work while the “laypeople” watched. Because of the limited capacity of one man to lead the church, New Testament leadership was plural and equal, with no system of hierarchy. Of course, certain people will generally function as leaders among the leaders because of their wisdom and experience, but all are equal and accountable to each other.
Moreover, in the worship of the church the leaders are never seen as dominating. Instead, a pattern of multiple participation by the congregation seems to have been the mark of all apostolic churches (see Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 14:26; Eph 4:11-16; 5:19; Col 3:16; Heb 10:24-25; 1 Pet 4:10-11), regardless of their geographical location (see 1 Cor 4:16-17; 11:16; 14:33). The New Testament teaches that the congregational meeting is to be a place where all Christians exercise their spiritual gifts and stimulate one another to love and good deeds. There is no division into two classes of people: clergy and laity. In addition, the leaders in the congregation did not take upon themselves honorific titles that might set them apart from the rest of the “saints.”
Alexander Strauch, author of Biblical Eldership, correctly notes (p. 259):
There were prophets, teachers, apostles, pastors, evangelists, leaders, elders, and deacons within the early church, but these terms were not used as formal titles. For example, all Christians are saints, but there is no “Saint John.” All are priests, but there is no “Priest Philip.” Some are elders, but there is no “Elder Paul.” Some are pastors, but there is no “Pastor James.” Some are deacons, but there is no “Deacon Peter.” Some are apostles, but is no “Apostle Andrew.” Rather than gaining honor though titles and position, New Testament believers received honor primarily for their service and work (Acts 15:26; Romans 16:1, 2, 4, 12; 1 Corinthians 8:18; 2 Corinthians 8:18; Philippians 2:29, 30; Colossians 1:7; 4:12, 13; 1 Thessalonians 5:12; 1 Timothy 3:1). The early Christians referred to each other by personal names—Timothy, Paul, Titus, etc.—or referred to an individual’s spiritual character and work: “…Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit…” (Acts 6:5); Barnabas, “…a good man, and full of the Holy Spirit and of faith…” (Acts 11:24); “…Philip the evangelist…” (Acts 21:8); “Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow-workers in Christ Jesus” (Romans 16:3); “Greet Mary, who has worked hard for you” (Romans 16:6); etc. The array of ecclesiastical titles accompanying the names of Christian leaders today is completely missing from the New Testament, and would have appalled the apostles and early believers.
In light of what we have said above, there is a great need for reformation within local churches in the way we view leadership. Traditional pastoral ministry promotes an unbiblical one-man model of leadership under the self-styled “pastor.” In contrast, the New Testament teaches oversight by a plurality of men called elders. Some elders might be gifted differently and may even excel in specific pastoral tasks, but there is no biblical warrant for dividing church leaders into separate “offices” with honorific titles.
Traditional concepts of “pastor” are clearly unscriptural. The New Testament does not speak of two classes of Christians, as we do today. According to the Bible, all Christians are the people of God who through the exercise of spiritual gifts do the work of the ministry. Such is the teaching of Paul in Philippians 1:1.
Once again, Alec Motyer summarizes it well (p. 40):
How is leadership to be exercised? What is the relationship between leaders and led? The one word with provides the answer: ‘…the saints’, writes Paul, ‘…with the bishops and deacons.’ The strong natural leader chooses the easy path of being out front, taking it for granted that all will follow; the low-profile leader ‘plays it cool’, submerges his own identify and takes the risk that the tail will soon wag the dog. The more demanding exercise, the sterner discipline and the more rewarding way are found in companionate leadership, the saints with the overseers and deacons.
This kind of leadership has many facets. It involves realizing that leader and led share the same Christian experience: both are sinners saved by the same precious blood, always and without distinction wholly dependent on the same patient mercy of God. It involves putting first whatever creates and maintains the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. It means that leaders see themselves first as members of the body, and only then as ministers. In this way they face every situation from within the local body of Christ and not as people dropped in from the outside (or even from above!). It involves patiently waiting for the Holy Spirit to grant unanimity to the church in making and executing plans. It involves open relationships in which the leaders do not scheme to get their own way or play off one against another, but act with transparent integrity. It involves willingness to be overruled, to jettison role-playing and status-seeking, to be ready to cast a single vote with everyone else. It involves putting the welfare of the body of Christ before all personal advantage, success or reputation and it involves co-equal sacrifice for the Lord and his gospel. It is the leadership of those who are content to stand among the saints as those who serve.
December 11, 2003
David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.
************************************************************************************
It's now almost half way through 2006! How much closer are we to Biblical Leadership? Spread the word, raise awareness!
Saturday, May 27, 2006
Thursday, May 25, 2006
Article by John Maxwell
Leadership Is Influence: Nothing More, Nothing Less
How to overcome the common myths of leadership. by Dr. John C. Maxwell
Maxwell will be featured as a plenary speaker at the 2005 Catalyst Conference, October 6-7 in Atlanta, Georgia, along with Andy Stanley, Bill Hybels, Louie Giglio, Erwin McManus and Donald Miller. Catalyst is a convergence of 10,000 Next Generation Leaders. For more information or to register, visit www.catalystconference.com.
Leadership is influence—nothing more, nothing less. When you become a student of leaders, as I am, you recognize people's level of influence in everyday situations all around you.
FIVE MYTHS ABOUT LEADERSHIP
There are plenty of misconceptions and myths that people embrace about leaders and leadership. Here are five common ones:
1. THE MANAGEMENT MYTH
A widespread misunderstanding is that leading and managing are one and the same. Up until a few years ago, books that claimed to be on leadership were often really about management. The main difference between the two is that leadership is about influencing people to follow, while management focuses on maintaining systems and processes. As former Chrysler chairman and CEO Lee Iacocca wryly commented, "Sometimes even the best manager is like the little boy with the big dog, waiting to see where the dog wants to go so that he can take him there."
The best way to test whether a person can lead rather than just manage is to ask him to create positive change. Managers can maintain direction, but they can't change it. To move people in a new direction, you need influence.
2. THE ENTREPRENEUR MYTH
Frequently, people assume that all salespeople and entrepreneurs are leaders. But that's not always the case. You may remember the Ronco commercials that appeared on television years ago. They sold items such as the Veg-O-Matic, Pocket Fisherman, and Inside-the-Shell Egg Scrambler. Those products were the brainchildren of an entrepreneur named Ron Popeil. Called the salesman of the century, he has also appeared in numerous infomercials for products such as spray-on relief for baldness and food dehydrating devices.
Popeil is certainly enterprising, innovative, and successful, especially if you measure him by the $300 million in sales his products have earned. But that doesn't make him a leader. People may be buying what he has to sell, but they're not following him. At best, he is able to persuade people for a moment, but he holds no long-term influence with them.
3. THE KNOWLEDGE MYTH
Sir Francis Bacon said, "Knowledge is power." Most people, believing power is the essence of leadership, naturally assume that those who possess knowledge and intelligence are leaders. But that isn't automatically true. You can visit any major university and meet brilliant research scientists and philosophers whose ability to think is so high that it's off the charts, but whose ability to lead is so low that it doesn't even register on the charts. IQ doesn't necessarily equate to leadership.
4. THE PIONEER MYTH
Another misconception is that anyone who is out in front of the crowd is a leader. But being first isn't always the same as leading. For example, Sir Edmund Hillary was the first man to reach the summit of Mount Everest. Since his historic ascent in 1953, many people have "followed" him in achieving that feat. But that doesn't make Hillary a leader. He wasn't even the leader on that particular expedition. John Hunt was. And when Hillary traveled to the South Pole in 1958 as part of the Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition, he was accompanying another leader, Sir Vivian Fuchs. To be a leader, a person has to not only be out front, but also have people intentionally coming behind him, following his lead, and acting on his vision.
5. THE POSITION MYTH
As mentioned earlier, the greatest misunderstanding about leadership is that people think it is based on position, but it's not. Stanley Huffty affirmed, "It's not the position that makes the leader; it's the leader that makes the position."
WHO'S THE REAL LEADER?
I personally learned the Law of Influence when I accepted my first job out of college at a small church in rural Indiana. I went in with all the right credentials. I was hired as the senior pastor, which meant that I possessed the position and title of leader in that organization. I had the proper college degree. I had even been ordained. In addition, I had been trained by my father who was an excellent pastor and a very high-profile leader in the denomination. It made for a good-looking résumé—but it didn't make me a leader. At my first board meeting, I quickly found out who was the real leader of that church. By the time I took my next position three years later, I had learned the Law of Influence. I recognized that hard work was required to gain influence in any organization and to earn the right to become the leader.
LEADERSHIP WITHOUT LEVERAGE
I admire and respect the leadership of my good friend Bill Hybels, the senior pastor of Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Illinois, the largest church in North America. Bill says he believes that the church is the most leadership-intensive enterprise in society. A lot of businesspeople I know are surprised when they hear that statement, but I think Bill is right. What is the basis of his belief? Positional leadership doesn't work in volunteer organizations. Because a leader doesn't have leverage—or influence—he is ineffective. In other organizations, the person who has position has incredible leverage. In the military, leaders can use rank and, if all else fails, throw people into the brig. In business, bosses have tremendous leverage in the form of salary, benefits, and perks. Most followers are pretty cooperative when their livelihood is at stake.
But in voluntary organizations, such as churches, the only thing that works is leadership in its purest form. Leaders have only their influence to aid them. And as Harry A. Overstreet observed, "The very essence of all power to influence lies in getting the other person to participate." Followers in voluntary organizations cannot be forced to get on board. If the leader has no influence with them, then they won't follow. When I recently shared that observation with a group of about 150 CEOs from the automobile industry, I saw lightbulbs going on all over the room. And when I gave them a piece of advice, they really got excited. I'm going to share that same advice with you: If you are a businessperson and you really want to find out whether your people are capable of leading, send them out to volunteer their time in the community. If they can get people to follow them while they're serving at the Red Cross, a United Way shelter, or their local church, then you know that they really do have influence—and leadership ability.
This article was excerpted from the Catalyst GroupZineTM, a brand-new group study resource from Nelson Impact and INJOY. Available in stores January 2006, the GroupZine will premier at the Catalyst Conference on October 6-7, 2005.
How to overcome the common myths of leadership. by Dr. John C. Maxwell
Maxwell will be featured as a plenary speaker at the 2005 Catalyst Conference, October 6-7 in Atlanta, Georgia, along with Andy Stanley, Bill Hybels, Louie Giglio, Erwin McManus and Donald Miller. Catalyst is a convergence of 10,000 Next Generation Leaders. For more information or to register, visit www.catalystconference.com.
Leadership is influence—nothing more, nothing less. When you become a student of leaders, as I am, you recognize people's level of influence in everyday situations all around you.
FIVE MYTHS ABOUT LEADERSHIP
There are plenty of misconceptions and myths that people embrace about leaders and leadership. Here are five common ones:
1. THE MANAGEMENT MYTH
A widespread misunderstanding is that leading and managing are one and the same. Up until a few years ago, books that claimed to be on leadership were often really about management. The main difference between the two is that leadership is about influencing people to follow, while management focuses on maintaining systems and processes. As former Chrysler chairman and CEO Lee Iacocca wryly commented, "Sometimes even the best manager is like the little boy with the big dog, waiting to see where the dog wants to go so that he can take him there."
The best way to test whether a person can lead rather than just manage is to ask him to create positive change. Managers can maintain direction, but they can't change it. To move people in a new direction, you need influence.
2. THE ENTREPRENEUR MYTH
Frequently, people assume that all salespeople and entrepreneurs are leaders. But that's not always the case. You may remember the Ronco commercials that appeared on television years ago. They sold items such as the Veg-O-Matic, Pocket Fisherman, and Inside-the-Shell Egg Scrambler. Those products were the brainchildren of an entrepreneur named Ron Popeil. Called the salesman of the century, he has also appeared in numerous infomercials for products such as spray-on relief for baldness and food dehydrating devices.
Popeil is certainly enterprising, innovative, and successful, especially if you measure him by the $300 million in sales his products have earned. But that doesn't make him a leader. People may be buying what he has to sell, but they're not following him. At best, he is able to persuade people for a moment, but he holds no long-term influence with them.
3. THE KNOWLEDGE MYTH
Sir Francis Bacon said, "Knowledge is power." Most people, believing power is the essence of leadership, naturally assume that those who possess knowledge and intelligence are leaders. But that isn't automatically true. You can visit any major university and meet brilliant research scientists and philosophers whose ability to think is so high that it's off the charts, but whose ability to lead is so low that it doesn't even register on the charts. IQ doesn't necessarily equate to leadership.
4. THE PIONEER MYTH
Another misconception is that anyone who is out in front of the crowd is a leader. But being first isn't always the same as leading. For example, Sir Edmund Hillary was the first man to reach the summit of Mount Everest. Since his historic ascent in 1953, many people have "followed" him in achieving that feat. But that doesn't make Hillary a leader. He wasn't even the leader on that particular expedition. John Hunt was. And when Hillary traveled to the South Pole in 1958 as part of the Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition, he was accompanying another leader, Sir Vivian Fuchs. To be a leader, a person has to not only be out front, but also have people intentionally coming behind him, following his lead, and acting on his vision.
5. THE POSITION MYTH
As mentioned earlier, the greatest misunderstanding about leadership is that people think it is based on position, but it's not. Stanley Huffty affirmed, "It's not the position that makes the leader; it's the leader that makes the position."
WHO'S THE REAL LEADER?
I personally learned the Law of Influence when I accepted my first job out of college at a small church in rural Indiana. I went in with all the right credentials. I was hired as the senior pastor, which meant that I possessed the position and title of leader in that organization. I had the proper college degree. I had even been ordained. In addition, I had been trained by my father who was an excellent pastor and a very high-profile leader in the denomination. It made for a good-looking résumé—but it didn't make me a leader. At my first board meeting, I quickly found out who was the real leader of that church. By the time I took my next position three years later, I had learned the Law of Influence. I recognized that hard work was required to gain influence in any organization and to earn the right to become the leader.
LEADERSHIP WITHOUT LEVERAGE
I admire and respect the leadership of my good friend Bill Hybels, the senior pastor of Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Illinois, the largest church in North America. Bill says he believes that the church is the most leadership-intensive enterprise in society. A lot of businesspeople I know are surprised when they hear that statement, but I think Bill is right. What is the basis of his belief? Positional leadership doesn't work in volunteer organizations. Because a leader doesn't have leverage—or influence—he is ineffective. In other organizations, the person who has position has incredible leverage. In the military, leaders can use rank and, if all else fails, throw people into the brig. In business, bosses have tremendous leverage in the form of salary, benefits, and perks. Most followers are pretty cooperative when their livelihood is at stake.
But in voluntary organizations, such as churches, the only thing that works is leadership in its purest form. Leaders have only their influence to aid them. And as Harry A. Overstreet observed, "The very essence of all power to influence lies in getting the other person to participate." Followers in voluntary organizations cannot be forced to get on board. If the leader has no influence with them, then they won't follow. When I recently shared that observation with a group of about 150 CEOs from the automobile industry, I saw lightbulbs going on all over the room. And when I gave them a piece of advice, they really got excited. I'm going to share that same advice with you: If you are a businessperson and you really want to find out whether your people are capable of leading, send them out to volunteer their time in the community. If they can get people to follow them while they're serving at the Red Cross, a United Way shelter, or their local church, then you know that they really do have influence—and leadership ability.
This article was excerpted from the Catalyst GroupZineTM, a brand-new group study resource from Nelson Impact and INJOY. Available in stores January 2006, the GroupZine will premier at the Catalyst Conference on October 6-7, 2005.
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Saturday, May 20, 2006
Introduction to Church Leadership Training
Let me introduce myself: My name is Steve Blanchard and I have been involved in two church ministries thus far. The first was in small town Montana as a youth pastor for two years. The position ended because they couldn't support a full time person. The next church was in South Dakota, and I was an associate pastor of Christian Education (Basically still a youth pastor, but a cooler title). During my time at the church 2nd church, the senior pastor resigned to take a regional ministers position 9 months after I came. The church went without a senior pastor for 6 months. It then hired a senior pastor who later was accused by his previous church about having pornography on his computer. This of coarse alarmed our leadership and we ended taking the whole year of 2004 to sort what was true and what wasn't all to have a church split in Feb. of 2005.
Something was wrong! I had to find out why we couldn't handle the situation!
During the year of 2004 when our leadership was trying to decide what to do, I began my study of church leadership. It bothered me that we had a bunch of commitees in the church that were elected by the congregation every year to fill slots. Why did we have so many committees? Why did we have a deacon board, but no elder board? Can women be in leadership or just men? What does the Bible say about all this stuff?
As you can see the questions just kept coming. In my search, by the Grace of God, I found a book that was called, "Biblical Eldership" by Alexander Strauch. Read more about it here: http://www.peacemakers.net/resources/strauch/biblicaleldership.htm
This book had such an impact on me that I believe this is the Biblical ordained model of church leadership. Why? Strauch takes you through the scriptures!!! See a review of this book here: http://www.9marks.org/CC/article/0,,PTID314526%7CCHID598026%7CCIID1744846,00.html
As this site develops, you will begin to see more and more resources for church leadership training.
Let me leave you with a leadership thought by a pastor that understood it:
"Leadership is Influence"
Think about it for a moment! If you have influenced someone today to do something, you have exercised leadership!
Something was wrong! I had to find out why we couldn't handle the situation!
During the year of 2004 when our leadership was trying to decide what to do, I began my study of church leadership. It bothered me that we had a bunch of commitees in the church that were elected by the congregation every year to fill slots. Why did we have so many committees? Why did we have a deacon board, but no elder board? Can women be in leadership or just men? What does the Bible say about all this stuff?
As you can see the questions just kept coming. In my search, by the Grace of God, I found a book that was called, "Biblical Eldership" by Alexander Strauch. Read more about it here: http://www.peacemakers.net/resources/strauch/biblicaleldership.htm
This book had such an impact on me that I believe this is the Biblical ordained model of church leadership. Why? Strauch takes you through the scriptures!!! See a review of this book here: http://www.9marks.org/CC/article/0,,PTID314526%7CCHID598026%7CCIID1744846,00.html
As this site develops, you will begin to see more and more resources for church leadership training.
Let me leave you with a leadership thought by a pastor that understood it:
"Leadership is Influence"
Think about it for a moment! If you have influenced someone today to do something, you have exercised leadership!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
