Six Shifts That Will Shape the Church
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Wed, April 27, 2005
- Viewed 300
- (18) comments so far
The local church has been transformed since the early 90's as well: contemporary music can be found in most churches, small groups have become an essential part of body life, ethnic diversity is multiplying, PowerPoint is being used instead of hymnals, the emerging generation is being ministered to?just to name a few.
Put simply: change inspires change, which requires increasing levels of leadership.
The church, God's church, will continue venturing into uncharted waters. That will necessitate strong, flexible, growing leadership and leadership development. Therefore, the goal of the church, in this unparalleled season of change, ought to be generating new ways to inspire and develop leaders within the local body.
Here are 6 necessary shifts that I believe the church needs to make:
1. Being to Becoming.
If I asked you to name the top five leaders of all time, you might list men like: Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., Bishop Tutu, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Then, if I asked you to list the characteristics that make them great leaders, you might say: charisma, boldness, servitude, a caring heart, trustworthiness, good listener or integrity-filled.
Historically, the church has sought out born leaders; however, a shift is occurring. We are beginning to realize that the characteristics of a great leader can be learned or developed. Living a life of integrity or serving others in love are all things that can be ours, as Christians.
We are all leaders. If you have children, you're a leader. If you're a Christian, you're a leader. If you teach Sunday School, you're a leader. In short, anyone in the congregation has the potential of growing into leadership. Some may grow stronger than others?but everyone has potential.
It is not a question of who you are but in what ways will you work with God to become more?
2. Technical to Spiritual.
A primary shift in educating leaders involves moving away from teaching tactics to developing the spiritual. The inner working of the heart is pivotal to leadership growth. Mentoring prospective leaders to live lives of honesty, integrity and respect for authority will produce greater eternal dividends than a list of tactics.
3. Control to Empower.
An organizational shift is just beginning to take place in the church. The age-old paradigm that leaders run and control the church, and then the congregation comes, out of no where, once a week to check out what has been going on, is changing. No longer is it only the formally recognized leader who serves.
Though hierarchical leadership is still necessary, leaders, now, share power with a growing number of lay-leaders by offering tools and training. As we continue to move from traditional models, collaboration, coaching, networking and servant leadership will continue to be on the rise.
4. Individual to Team.
As traditional church leaders continue to empower servant leaders another shift will emerge in tandem: moving from an individual to a team-oriented work system.
Not everything can be done as a team. Church leaders must be able to designate those things which are best done on an individual level (i.e., data entry) and team level (planning programs, developing processes, goal-setting, etc.) As team participation grows within the church, so will commitment, excellence and love.
5. Bureaucratic to Entrepreneurial.
To encourage servant leaders to take an on-going ownership and delight in ministry an intentional move away from bureaucratic operations to entrepreneurship must take place.
As a pastor if you are hearing, "Pastor, what should I do next?" bureaucratic strongholds have not yet been lifted. When you begin to hear, "Pastor, I have this idea, is it okay?" you have successfully entered entrepreneurial leadership.
Under this shift leaders become permission-givers, allowing people to dream and create new ways of serving the community.
6. One-Time Training to Life-Long Learning.
For years businesses have conducted corporate-training programs, with limited success. Why? The training is typically a one time event. The trainees sit down soak it in, regurgitate it back, and then promptly forget the entire session by the time they leave the classroom and buckle their seat belts.
Great leadership development is a process. It's about mentoring and continually finding new ways to discuss it, live it and apply it.
The people who perform the best in leadership roles have been forced to stretch, learn, grow, adapt and rely heavily on God. Leadership training is not a one time event but consists of life-long learning.
What do you think? Is Paul dead-on?
Today’s church definitely looks a lot different than the church of 20 (or even 10) years ago. Where is the church heading? Paul Sorensen wrote the following about where he feels church leadership is headed. Take a read, and let me know what you think. Paul writes…
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
Pastor Al on Wed, April 27, 2005
“Great leadership development is a process. It’s about mentoring and continually finding new ways to discuss it, live it and apply it.”
You know, I sometimes don’t know how the great men of the past were able to have great revivals for God, without all this introspection!
Is it me or are we the most self-consumed and self-important people that have ever lived on this planet?
I’m not trying to be negative – hey I am part of this generation just like you – I just can’t help but think that we so over analyze everything we do and say that we seem very self-centered.
Do I have a point, or should I spend some time talking to a therapist?
gavin on Wed, April 27, 2005
one of my current readings is about using the rule of St. Benedict in application to the business world through management and leadership. it’s not a heavy read (which i am enjoying that part) but it is inciteful. part of what you are suggesting is creating the environment that promotes these principles, i like your entrepreneurial section, i have called it initiative and building that into people. part of the rule is to allow people to make decisions and be innovative within there circles of influence. the rule would also promote the life long learning you jot down in #6. these are just some thoughts, but it is remarkable that practices that have been around for hundreds of years are considered old and outdated, when in actuality, they are relevant for today as any other time as they have proven through their longevity.
Chuck on Wed, April 27, 2005
Without clear leadership team leadership will flounder. There is still the need for a strong leader who HEARS FROM GOD and repeats that to the people. .All throughout history there has been a need for strong leadership and it will continue until Christ comes back.
I find it interesting that the shortest point he states is #2 Technical to spiritual. Is it that we have become so shallow in the Spiritual aspect of our ministry that all we can do is go on and on about leadership?
bernie dehler on Wed, April 27, 2005
I think #3 has a direct conflict with “megachurches”. Rather than planting churches and raising up new leaders, one megachurch Pastor does a huge service plus appears at other locations via video.
Number 3 was:
3. Control to Empower.
An organizational shift is just beginning to take place in the church. The age-old paradigm that leaders run and control the church, and then the congregation comes, out of no where, once a week to check out what has been going on, is changing. No longer is it only the formally recognized leader who serves.
...Bernie
http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/247
Ricky on Wed, April 27, 2005
Chuck said:
“Without clear leadership team leadership will flounder. There is still the need for a strong leader who HEARS FROM GOD and repeats that to the people. .All throughout history there has been a need for strong leadership and it will continue until Christ comes back.”
Chuck, there has always been “strong leadership” throughout history and that leadership has been Jesus Christ, the Head of HIS Church.
To say that there needs to be a “strong leader” is to say that we need what amounts to a pope, which is ridiculous.
The Body of Christ has done quite well without the “strong leaders” that you seek and it will continue to prevail against the gates of hell. To say otherwise, is to imply that Jesus needs help in “running” His Body, which is simply not the case.
Church further stated:
“I find it interesting that the shortest point he states is #2 Technical to spiritual. Is it that we have become so shallow in the Spiritual aspect of our ministry that all we can do is go on and on about leadership?”
The reason that there is such a perverted emphasis on so-called “leadership” is that the American church has bought into, lock stock and barrel, the structure of corporate America where the CEO’s (i.e., pastors) run their organizations with an eye on the bottom line.
And, as a result of this perverted emphasis, the spiritual aspect is virtually on its deathbed.
Ricky on Wed, April 27, 2005
Quote:
“Though hierarchical leadership is still necessary,”
Only in an organization, but NEVER in the Church.
This statement tells me that the writer has no clue as to the New Testament understanding of the Church. He does, however, have an excellent understanding of corporate America.
bernie dehler on Wed, April 27, 2005
Art says:
“Is it me or are we the most self-consumed and self-important people that have ever lived on this planet?”
It’s the same the world over… called “Human Nature.” The goal of true spirituality is moving from being self-centered to being Christ-centered. Then Christ can live through us…
...Bernie
http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/247
Ricky on Wed, April 27, 2005
Quote:
“Great leadership development is a process. It’s about mentoring and continually finding new ways to discuss it, live it and apply it.”
You’re right, it is a process; a process of dying to ambitions of becoming a “leader.”
Instead of “applying it,” why not just serve (I mean really serve) and be content with being out of the spotlight. You know, “decrease so that He can increase.”
Articles like the above say good things but there’s always the kicker that “leaders” instead of servants, are always needed.
We don’t need any more Bill Gates, we need more John the Baptists.
Chuck on Wed, April 27, 2005
I agree totally that Jesus is the leader of the church but we where would we be without the apostle Paul, Luther, Calvin, Moody, Graham, and others who have served the body as a whole through their gift of leadership. I am not buying into this tribal mentality of lets spread the lead amongst a team. While Christ is the head he always brings an Elder/Overseer who is going to be the shepherd to the flock.
Phil in CA on Wed, April 27, 2005
“Though hierarchical leadership is still necessary” … to which Ricky quips: “Only in an organization, but NEVER in the Church. This statement tells me that the writer has no clue as to the New Testament understanding of the Church.”
Ricky, leaderless ecclesiastical anarchy is NOT a Biblical concept, in either the new or old covenant. In the OT, God had judges, prophets, etc. In the NT, we have the church—and organization you greatly misunderstand. The office of “overseer” is one of authority, and is it is a “noble” thing to desire according to Paul [1 Timothy 3:1]. A few verses later ( vvs. 4 & 5), regarding qualifications of those “overseers” in leadership, Paul tells Timothy that leaders should first lead his family well before he can be considered to lead or rule in the church. You cannot argue that human leadership in the church is unbiblical when the Bible gives qualifications for leadership.
1 Timothy 5:17 says, “Let the elders who RULE WELL be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.” (emphasis mine). So clearly there is leadership ruling in the first century church.
In Thessalonians 3:10 Paul recounts a “rule” he gave the Thessalonians about denying assistance to those who were willfully lazy. That’s RULING. That’s leadership.
In 1 Corinthians 7:17 Paul notes: “Nevertheless, each one should retain the place in life that the Lord assigned to him and to which God has called him. This is the RULE I lay down in all the churches.” Yup, that’s authority all right.
Through your own words it’s clear (”...out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” - Matthew 12:34) that you have some real trust/authority complex issues, compounded with broad resentment. This is driving you to deny the Biblical model of church and spew falsehoods (lacking Scripture, of course) around here. I’m sorry if you’ve been burned, but you really need to come to grips. As one who’s been burned, too, I’m not speaking hypocritically here, as I’ve had to take my resentment about bad leadership to the Cross, and LEAVE it there.
Ricky on Wed, April 27, 2005
Chuck said:
“I am not buying into this tribal mentality of lets spread the lead amongst a team. While Christ is the head he always brings an Elder/Overseer who is going to be the shepherd to the flock.”
No one is asking you to buy into anything.
The New Testament form of “leadership” is that Christ is THE Head of His Body and we are all members, no one higher than another.
However, to simplify things as pertaining to local fellowships, the NT understanding is not “an” overseer but elderS, as in plural.
The single “pastor” model has been nothing but damaging to the Church and is nothing more than a protestant version of the catholic pope.
Ricky on Wed, April 27, 2005
Phil opines:
“Ricky, leaderless ecclesiastical anarchy is NOT a Biblical concept, in either the new or old covenant. In the OT, God had judges, prophets, etc. In the NT, we have the church—and organization you greatly misunderstand. The office of “overseer” is one of authority, and is it is a “noble” thing to desire according to Paul [1 Timothy 3:1]. A few verses later ( vvs. 4 & 5), regarding qualifications of those “overseers” in leadership, Paul tells Timothy that leaders should first lead his family well before he can be considered to lead or rule in the church. You cannot argue that human leadership in the church is unbiblical when the Bible gives qualifications for leadership.”
Wow, Phil, you really want to go there?
The qualifications for overseer/elder in the New Testament was/is not an endorsement of some supposed “leadership” position, as in a “pastor” or “bishop” or “pope.” Instead, Paul is calling for those who have expressed a burden for the church to live in such a way that builds influence, an influence that attracts others to him/her and from which he/she can teach others how to live. That’s why such qualifications, if that’s what you want to call them, usually mean that a certain degree of maturation is necessary.
But, Phil, NEVER in the New Testament (where the Church came to life) does Paul or any other writer set in place a rigid structure of leadership. Why? Because authority is not based upon a position but rather truth. When someone, any one regardless of age, stands upon the truth of God’s word (i.e., representing it truthfully and in love), they are IN authority at that moment. This is what we see in Galatians when Paul, the least of all apostles (i.e., “junior” to many), nonetheless confronted Peter over his hypocrisy. Because Paul was representing Christ at that moment of truth, he was “in authority.” The same is true for us today.
Biblical authority is not something that is given to someone, as in a badge or certificate, but rather something that we enter into, based upon our representation of THE truth.
Phil further states:
“1 Timothy 5:17 says, “Let the elders who RULE WELL be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.” (emphasis mine). So clearly there is leadership ruling in the first century church.”
Wrong. Again, the “rule” you seem to be fixated upon is referring to “influence,” not some supposed office or position. As a result of living an exemplary life, they are deserving of double honor because their devotion to Christ and to His flock thrusts them into danger, especially at the time it was written.
Again:
“In Thessalonians 3:10 Paul recounts a “rule” he gave the Thessalonians about denying assistance to those who were willfully lazy. That’s RULING. That’s leadership.”
Phil, this “rule” was nothing more than a standard which was suggested to the Thessalonians because there were apparently some men who refused to work but wanted assistance from the church. You must remember, Paul NEVER wrote a letter to a church that was addressed to the “pastor” or “leader” but rather to the ENTIRE church. Had there been an established heirarchial system in place, don’t you think that Paul would have named those elders or leaders in the letter’s salutation?
And once again (this is getting old):
“In 1 Corinthians 7:17 Paul notes: “Nevertheless, each one should retain the place in life that the Lord assigned to him and to which God has called him. This is the RULE I lay down in all the churches.” Yup, that’s authority all right.”
I’m surprised at you, Phil, taking a verse completely out of context.
Paul was writing regarding the marriage relationship and as to whether how a believing spouse could experience the potential salvation of their unbelieving better half.
Paul said that he directs the same in all of the other churches, as in instruction as in the biblical principles, NOT his supposed place as the Vicar of Christ. It is the general rule of thumb that is based upon the characteristics of a God that never changes and is merciful.
Finally (at least I hope so):
“Through your own words it’s clear (”...out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” - Matthew 12:34) that you have some real trust/authority complex issues, compounded with broad resentment. This is driving you to deny the Biblical model of church and spew falsehoods (lacking Scripture, of course) around here. I’m sorry if you’ve been burned, but you really need to come to grips. As one who’s been burned, too, I’m not speaking hypocritically here, as I’ve had to take my resentment about bad leadership to the Cross, and LEAVE it there.”
I do have a problem with those who have elevated themselves into ficticious levels of “leadership.” My “problem” is that they should know better, having the time and privilege to study the Scriptures far more intensely than do most. But, instead of seeing the truth, most “leaders” only regurgitate the same pablum that they were taught by others throughout the ages that can be traced to the rule of the priests/bishops/cardinals of the Medieval Church, who sought to keep people stupid so they could stay in power.
I know from firsthand experience what damage this baton passing has done to the Body of Christ because I was involved in it as a member of the staff of a large megaorganization. People would hang on every word that the senior “pastor” and/or I would say, as if we knew it all.
When God showed His mercy toward me and began to pull back the curtain, I was able to see the little man (i.e., our pride) that was controlling everything. And, as someone whom I feel God has gifted to have the privilege to influence others, I never want to knowingly mislead others as to what the Scriptures teach in CONTEXT and in truth.
So, my heart is definitely with the precious souls who have entrusted their souls and spiritual upbringing to MEN. Because I have a great deal of experience with human nature (I was a police officer for over 14 years before going into the “ministry), I know how easy it is to become drunk with the adoration of others and to forget that we are privileged to be able to speak into someone’s life. This amnesia leads to abuse, nearly every time.
So, are there “leaders” in the Body of Christ? Certainly. But they are grudgingly so, meaning they are in the background watching, praying and weeping over the Church, and ready to stand between the sheep and a wolf whenever necessary.
Pete King on Thu, April 28, 2005
Leadership is not only a matter of nature but also part of God’s plan regarding the Church. In Paul’s writings we find there are positions of leadership such as pastors, teachers etc. However, even in the Old testament we find a “Leader” or in this case a king ruling the government. Even though when Isreal was being once again rebelious God approved of the idea of a king and appointed “Saul”. God would not have granted there request if this was not a prossible way to lead his people. Even though throughout OT history we are brought into the lives of such leaders as Mosses, David, Solomon, and Abraham seeing there human frailties and faults, God clearly used this model as a means to guide his people. For those of us who argue, “That only existed in the OT and not the NT” are overlooking some patterns that mimic OT. I would agree that “Christ centeredness” is the overall direction for the church in the NT. However, Let’s not forget Paul’s role for example. True his writings(Thessalonians, Corinthians, Ephesians etc.) are addressed to those churches and not to a head leader of the body. However, it is very clear that he is serving as a Head leader in regards to the spiritual gudiance of these churches. If this were not true why would he interfer with the affairs of a church that he did not play a leading role in. Obviously, Paul was funtioning more than an advisor, but one who heard from God and was given the authority to aid these churches in spiritual maturity. Understandibly, he did not preach for these body of belivers in the concept we are modeling in church today, but it would be extremely difficult to argue that he wasn’t a key figure in leading these churches. Let us not get confused with a “Head Pastor” position emulating “The Pope’s” role in the catholic church. First off in my opinion, “The Pope’s” position was a missinterpretation of the NT scripture refering to “Christ” not “Peter” as the foundation of the church. With that being said, it is very silly to utilize the “Pope” as an analogy of comparison to the “Superority Complex” of the Head Pastor. I’m affraid we are trying to compare apples to oranges here. Truth be told the issue is not whether God uses the “Head Pastor or “Leader” model the issue is man’s inability to be perfect with any system. In OT we find Mosses appointing elders. In NT we find Timothy being sent by Paul and Christ being helped by his desciples. Now there’s a thought why did Christ pick disciples to help his ministry? Because He needed them to be the forefront(leaders if you will) of the first century church. One could even argue that Peter, James, and John were leaders among the disciples. Did Jesus value them more than the others. No. He worked closely with them because they would serve a very important plan God was setting into place after Christ’s death. There are more examples but I’m pulling these from memory.
Daniel Zepeda on Thu, April 28, 2005
This article is very interesting and brings to mind how we the church have come to this point where we feel that totalitarian control is needed to make good leaders. We all have different gifting and our gifts should be used as God directs in the body of Christ.
The current totalitarian leadership (that requires full submission without question) found in so many churches today is not the biblical leadership displayed in Acts where everyone comes to honor God with their gifts.
To prevent this type of totalitarian control the scriptures speak of the qualification of those who seek to be leaders in the church that if followed will lead to the Acts church full of power and grace.
But how did we end up with the current totalitarian control, and all the secular teaching, that in many instances excludes the gifting of many, and hinders and grieves the Spirit of God?
Below are some scripture references concerning the “hardness of heart” in man, that has often robbed him from being in the direct will of God, and has moved him into the permissive will of God, and at times completely out of the will of God.
As you read through the scriptures listed keep in mind, the point Jesus is addressing to those who are trying to trap him.
Matthew 19:3-8
3The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?”
4And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?
6So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
7They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”
8He said to them, “Moses, because of
the hardness of your hearts ,
permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.
In Matthew 22:23-32 Jesus speaks of the wisdom of knowing the scriptures and the power of God and exposes an erroneous teaching that the Sadducees held to due to not knowing scripture.
Matthew 22:23-32
The same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, 24saying: “Teacher, Moses said that if a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother.
25Now there were with us seven brothers. The first died after he had married, and having no offspring, left his wife to his brother. 26Likewise the second also, and the third, even to the seventh. 27Last of all the woman died also.
28Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.”
29Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.
30For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. 31But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, 32‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’?? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”
So far, we have read about “the hardness of heart” and the teaching error that lack of knowing the scriptures can lead to.
The following verses from scripture will reveal to us how we have developed into the current totalitarian leadership style that is so prevalent today.
It goes way back to when the children of Israel rejected God ruling over them for a king and their desire to be like the world or other nations.
Read carefully the following scriptures and compare them to today’s institutionalized church. Also look at the use of the word “His”
1Samuel chapter 8:7-20
7And the LORD said to Samuel, “Heed the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them.
8According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even to this day—with which they have forsaken Me and served other gods—so they are doing to you also.
9Now therefore, heed their voice. However, you shall solemnly forewarn them, and show them the behavior of the king who will reign over them.”
10So Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who asked him for a king. 11And he said, “This will be the behavior of the king who will reign over you: He will take your sons and appoint them for his own chariots and to be his horsemen, and some will run before his chariots.
12He will appoint captains over his thousands and captains over his fifties, will set some to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and some to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots.
13He will take your daughters to be perfumers, cooks, and bakers.
14And he will take the best of your fields, your vineyards, and your olive groves, and give them to his servants.
15He will take a tenth of your grain and your vintage, and give it to his officers and servants.
16And he will take your male servants, your female servants, your finest young men, and your donkeys, and put them to his work.
17He will take a tenth of your sheep. And you will be his servants. 18And you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, and the LORD will not hear you in that day.”
19Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, “No, but we will have a king over us, 20that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.”
Our rejection of God ruling over us by his presence has lead us to lose sight of the Acts 2 church description for leadership, and our laziness has given rise to pastoral abuse because we the people no longer want to fight our own battles.
We would rather let the pastor do it and many a wolf has taken advantage of our spiritual slumber and laziness to develop his own personal kingdom that ensures the slavery of its members.
I fully agree that leadership in the body of Christ is necessary, but all leaders must meet the biblical qualifications as listed in scripture for those who desire leadership roles. Men and women full of the Holy Ghost and a true passion to serve God whether they lead or follow makes no difference to them as long as God is being glorified and His will is being accomplished.
Ricky on Thu, April 28, 2005
Pete said:
“In Paul’s writings we find there are positions of leadership such as pastors, teachers etc.”
Wrong! These are not “positions” or “offices,” but rather GIFTS that flow throughout the Body of Christ through any one at any time that He desires.
And again:
“However, even in the Old testament we find a “Leader” or in this case a king ruling the government.”
Now THIS is exactly the mindset that has established the “single pastorate” form of control in our religious organizations. An OLD TESTAMENT form of “government.”
It’s the pope in a protestant suit of clothes, that’s all.
Page 1 of 2 pages 1 2 >
Post a Comment