Archive for the ‘Leadership’ Category

What Could Be Better Than a Pay Raise?

Posted: April 1, 2013 in Leadership
Tags: , ,
0

“The big idea is that poor leaders demand a great deal from people and never give them a pat on the back for a job well done. Effective leaders realize that most people are motivated more by affirmation and encouragement rather than by financial reward.”

Hans Finzel stresses three summary points:

1. Everyone thrives on affirmation and praise.

Most people are not like the Energizer Bunny who just keep going and going and going. Most people who work for us or live with us need their emotional batteries charged often. Phyllis Theroux said that compliments are highly biodegradable and tend to dissolve hours or days after we receive them.

2. We wildly underestimate the power of the tiniest personal touch of kindness.

Tom Peters wrote “And of all personal touches, I find the short, hand written ‘nice job’ note to have the highest impact.”

Hans Finzel said, “Every day I have as a goal of writing at least three words of kindness to someone. Keep boxes of various kinds of note cards and encouragement cards at your desk at the ready. Oftentimes you need not even bother with a separate card or letter when sending an affirmation. Just scribble a ‘good job, well done’ on the margin of a memo, or shoot a quick e-mail reply.”

3. Learn to read the varying levels of affirmation your people need.

Finzel instructs us “that the people who work with you will require different amounts and different kinds of affirmation.” He has developed The Affirmation Continuum.

At one end of the continuum is the Desperados. These persons needs lots of affirmation. They have little confidence, lap up affirmation, and are fragile.

Next are the Up-and-downers. These persons can go a long time without affirmation but then they get discouraged and need affirmation to survive.

Then there are Normal people who come from stable homes and need very little affirmation.

Finally there are those Energizer Bunnies called Autopilots. They are actually annoyed at praise and some view affirmation with suspicion. Kindness is all this rare breed needs.

Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:14 recognized that different believers have unique needs for us to respond to.

Finzel closes this chapter with some practical advice from Buck Rodgers in Getting the Best out of Yourself and Others.

1. Get out of your office and pay a visit to someone who does a good job. Pay a visit to say thank you.

2. Don’t let good work be secret. Praise privately with notes any good work so our people will not feel their effort is wasted or even worse that their boss is taking the credit. Rodgers mentions the “Three-Compliments-a-Day Club.” Let’s join today.

3. Thank people publicly. Formalize thanks whenever possible, in house organs, memos, at meetings, and at conferences.

In Romans 13:7, Paul admonished us to give affirmation when affirmation is due.

The motivation that Nehemiah used with God’s people to rebuild the wall was not external bonuses or an all-expenses-paid vacation to Hawaii. This kind of extrinsic incentive has to be repeated in bigger doses. Nehemiah appleaded to a far nobler motivation, removing the reproach from God’s name (Nehemiah 2:17-18). Nehemiah challenged, “Let us build the wall of Jerusalem, that we be no more a reproach.” The people responded, “Let us rise up and build.”

The Difference Between a Mission and Vision Statement

Posted: February 12, 2013 in Leadership
Tags: ,
0

Leaders focus on the big picture that is stated in The Mission Statement. In the mission statement the “why we exist” and “what are the means to this purpose” and “whom do we serve” are all answered. For local churches these questions of purpose and means are answered in the Great Commission. Our overarching purpose is to “make disciples.” Not just converts but disciples i.e., learners and followers of Christ. Christ also provides the means: by winning people to Christ, by baptizing or assimilating them into the life of the church, and by teaching them to practice God’s Word. The who is the church. For my ministry, practically what does the Great Commission look like? How are we winning sinners to Christ? How are we assimilating them into the life of the church? How are we teaching them God’s Word so that it is changing their attitudes and lifestyle?

Leaders focus on the end that is stated in The Vision Statement. Not only must we leaders keep before our people the big picture of “why”, “what”, “who”, but also “what will this success look like.” For the local church the success of the fulfilling the Great Commission is the book of Acts. The early church practiced the Great Commission and God blessed them with spiritual and numerical growth (Luke is always giving progress reports that include how believers are spreading the Word and number of converts that results).

A challenge for all of us who lead ministries: In five years what should this ministry look like? How is the book of Acts reflected in our church? How can I lead this ministry to this vision? What are the means God have me use to arrive at the vision?

Are We Training our Successors?

Posted: February 5, 2013 in Leadership
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

John F. Kennedy was right when he said, “It is time for a new generation of leadership.” That thought provokes a debate concerning leadership: Are leaders born or are leaders developed. Max Depree wrote, “Leadership is Art,” i.e., leadership can be learned. Jesus commanded, “Make disciples” in the Great Commission. Making disciples means making followers of Christ who will produce leaders for Christ. Are leaders born or are leaders developed? The answer is “yes.” Some individuals are born with leadership ability which still must be developed. But, leadership can be learned by every person who has a desire to impact his or her culture.

John Maxwell’s now famous definition of leadership is “Leadership is influence, nothing more, nothing less.” The greatest spiritual leader in my formative years was my Christian mother. She does not have a college education. She has never held a powerful corporate position. She has never received political awards. But she read God’s Word to my brothers and me nearly every night, prayed with us and took us to church three times a week. She was light and salt. She influenced me to Christ.

If Maxwell’s definition is true then leadership can be developed. As Maxwell says, “If you are a 6 on the leadership scale of 1 to 10, you can become an 8.” If we are going to be light and salt then we must develop as leaders and develop others as leaders. If you work in Sunday School, you are a leader developing leaders. If you listen to verses from clubbers in AWANA, you are a leader developing leaders. If you sponser a youth group, you are a leader developing leaders. If you are a Christian, you are a leader in your classroom or at your work site developing leaders. You are a leader with influence.

There is a difference between a leader and a great leader Henry Blackaby said, “Leaders lead followers. Great leaders lead leaders.” That means, great leaders leave a legacy of leaders. Peter Drucker in The Effective Executive challenged, “There is no success without a successor.”  After I surrendered to the Lord and to the call to preach my first opportunity to serve in my local church was as teacher of Junior High Boys. I helped each boy teach a Sunday School lesson. The boys ministered to shut-ins and alcoholics in an Alcoholic Home. Several of the boys trusted Christ as Savior. One is a pastor and others are faithfully serving the Lord in local churches.

There are Biblical examples of the Law of Legacy. Joshua succeeded and exceeded Moses. Elisha succeeded and exceeded Elijah. The Twelve disciples succeeded Christ and exceeded Christ according to Jesus own words in John 14:12.

Samuel was a leader. But Samuel was not a great leader (1 Sam. 8:1) because Samuel led followers. Samuel left no successor. The Christian life is not a 100 yard dash but a Relay Race where the baton is handed off to another. To whom will you pass the baton of leadership?

Let’s look at one leader who left a legacy of leadership. God deposited truth with Paul (1 Tim. 1:11; Luke 12:48) at Paul’s conversion. Paul invested that deposit of truth with Timothy (1 Tim.1:18). How? He won Timothy to Christ in Acts 14. He invested time and energy into Timothy’s spiritual growth (Acts 16:1-3). Timothy was then to deposit the same truth to other leaders (2 Tim. 2:1, 2). Timothy is now pastor at the church of Ephesus when Paul writes 2 Timothy.

Timothy is a 2nd generation leader who is depositing the truth in a 3rd generation of leaders. Those leaders, the 3rd generation, were to deposit the truth into the next generation, the 4th generation (2 Tim. 2:2b). In whom are you depositing the truth of God’s Word?

Only leaders produce leader

David produced leaders (giant killers) because he was a giant killer (2 Sam. 21:1-22). Saul did not produce leaders (giant killers) because he killed no giants. What are some practical ways we can grow as leaders and  produce leaders?

1. Never do ministry alone (Acts 13:2).

2. Create a leadership atmosphere or culture through seminars and preaching on leadership.

3. Train leaders through training sessions. Take your leaders or potential leaders through a book on leadership like Maxwell’s 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership or Henry Blackaby’s Spiritual Leadership.

4. Expose your people and family to leaders.

5. Associate with leaders yourself (boards, fellowships, etc). Les Olila wisely said there should be three kinds of people in our lives. We need a mentor or a Paul who is stretching us spiritually. We need a disciple or a Timothy whom we are mentoring. We also need a partner or a Barnabas who is encouraging us. Our Barnabas is not a mentor or disciple, just a friend.

6. Study leadership and read about leaders such as “Walking with the Giants” by Warren Wiersbe.

7. Watch leaders and learn from them.

8. Lead! The question is not, “What will be my legacy?” But, “Who will be my legacy?” Your lasting value as a leader will be measured by your successor.

Are We Empowering Others?

Posted: February 5, 2013 in Leadership
Tags: , , , , ,
0

Stephen Covey emphasizes two kinds of delegation. The first is gofer delegation which emphasizes the methods. The Gofer’s Creed is “Just tell me what you want me to do and I will do it.” The second and better kind of delegation is stewardship delegation which emphasizes the results. Stewardship delegation is the delegation of responsibilities or ministries that the person has been equipped to accomplish; not menial errands. Covey’s stewardship delegation is closer to Maxwell’s empowerment.

Maxwell, however, sees a difference between delegation and empowerment. An example of delegation would have been Paul on the first missionary journey immediately after leading Timothy to Christ, Paul would have sent Timothy to a church like Ephesus. Empowerment is what Paul actually did. Paul instructed first Timothy, modeled what he wanted Timothy to be and do (Acts 16), gave Timothy some experience and accountability (Acts 18:5). Then Paul sent Timothy, having empowered him, to his greatest assignment with the authority to be the pastor (1 Tim. 1:1-3).

Insecure leaders do not empower. Secure leaders surround themselves with the best and the brightest people and are not jealous or threatened. Maxwell writes about the Henry Fords (Senior and the Second) who did not empower their leaders but undermined them to the detriment of The Ford Motor Company. Maxwell writes, “Any time an executive gained power and influence, Henry Ford II would undercut the person’s authority by either moving him into a position with less clout, supporting the executive’s subordinates, or publicly humiliating him. This continued all the days Henry II was at Ford.” The Fords did not practice the leadership law of empowerment which says that only secure leaders give power to others.

Another reason leaders do not empower and give responsibility and authority to others is the co-dependency of the leader on his followers. The leader should be a launching pad for those he is training. But if the leader is co-dependent, the leader is a leaning post. When you need people you cannot lead them. If you need people’s approval you will never make the tough decisions.

Maxwell teaches us how to empower others.

First, you must trust your people with responsibility.

If you want them to grow you must let them go. Was Jesus threatened when He knew His disciples would accomplish more that He would as far as man hours and ministries opportunities as He predicted in John 14:12? No! That is exactly why Jesus poured three years of His life into them. This also means that we must let those we are empowering make mistakes and then learn those valuable lessons that only mistakes teach.

Also, you must train them for competency.

When we and our leaders stop growing so will our ministries. This means we must budget money for specific training in their areas of ministry. This money can be spent on books, periodicals, seminars, or master level courses. This line item in the budget sends a message to the entire church about how serious this church takes leadership training.

Next, you must unleash them with authority.

How did Jesus train? He first instructed His disciples (Matthew 10:1-42). He showed them how ministry is done (Matthew 11:1). Jesus then sent His disciple out for field experience (Luke 10:1). He also gave them authority that was equal to the responsibility (Luke 10:9). Finally, Jesus held them accountable (Luke 10:17).

You must monitor your people through accountability.

Jesus held His disciples accountable for their ministries (Luke 10:17). Accountability is not following our people around like a highway patrolman tailing us. Accountability is planned follow-up where they know they will report on the progress of the project or the ministry.

Lastly, you must care about them and believe in them for maximum potential.

The leader cares enough for his people that he believes in them and wants them to succeed. How do you know if you are an empowering leader? The moment you experience more joy in the success of others than in your own success.

Technology and The Church

Posted: January 17, 2013 in Leadership
Tags: ,
0

I reread Driscoll’s chapter on “How Can A Church Utilize Technology?” in his book Vintage Church and wrote this quick reveiw.

“Every church is culturally contextualized; the only difference is to what year” is an important thought with which churches must come to terms.

Driscoll traces the history of the church contextualizing its method of impacting the culture. His first example is the church incorporating benches in the 13th century. Before the 13th century members stood the entire service. The first organ was introduced to churches in the 14th century. Of course some churches rejected the organ as “an instrument of the devil because it was also used in pubs to accompany drunks singing bar tunes.”

The most recent example of contextualizing is the internet discovered in 1990. The “internet has become the new front door for churches and the place people visit before showing up at any physical location.”

Driscoll mentions two reasons the internet should be used by churches: Nearly everyone is on the internet and people are on the internet are looking for content and connections which the church should be providing.

Driscoll discusses how technology can help with the phases a church uses to contextualize in its community.

Phase 1: Attracting

“In order to attract people to your church, two things need to occur.” The first is name recognition in the community. This can be done through the local media which requires building a relationship with local reporters. To these befriended reporters you send press releases of church events. Next, people need to be invited to your church through personal relationships and your Web site. Driscoll gives several ways to attract visitors via your church Web site. One way is provide a question-and-answer section on your Web site.

Phase 2: Entering

Driscoll lists a number of ways technology can make your church approachable from the outside. One way is to “hand them a bulletin or send them one via email if they sign up online or fill out a visitor card.” The church can also provide Wi-Fi so people can take sermon notes on their laptops.

Phase 3: Enduring

After the visitor is in the service, how can we use technology to keep them focused on the message? The preacher can “have a large screen on stage with him, like a late-night talk show host does, so he can interact with various media content shown simultaneously on larger screens.” The preacher can use props and allow questions through screened text messages that are answered at the end of the sermon.

Phase 4: Exiting

If you use a prop during the sermon give it away at the end.

Phase 5: Extending

Driscoll answers this question: “Once people have left the church service, how can you extend your teaching to them?” Here is one suggestion that we use at our church: “Your sermons should at least be on your church Web site in audio format.”

“Technology is a tool for the church to connect with people and provide them with gospel content about Jesus.”

Are Leaders Made or Born?

Posted: January 17, 2013 in Leadership
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
1

J. Oswald Sanders in his classic “Spiritual Leadership” believes that leaders are both born and made. “While conversion does not normally make leaders of people who would never become such otherwise, Church history teachers that in the hour of full surrender the Holy Spirit sometimes releases gifts and qualities that have long remained latent and dormant. It is the prerogative of the Spirit to bestow spiritual gifts which greatly enhances the leadership potential of the recipient” (page 21).

But then Sanders make this comment which comes closer to my thinking: “Spiritual leadership and authority cannot be explained solely on the grounds of natural ability is strikingly exemplified in the life of St. Francis of Assisi. On one occasion Brother Masseo, looking earnestly at Francis, began to say: ‘Why thee? Why thee?’ He repeated it again and again as if to mock him.

‘What are you saying?’ cried Francis at last.

‘I am saying that everybody follows thee, everyone desires to see thee, hear thee, obey thee, and yet for all that, thou art neither beautiful, nor learned, nor of noble family. Whence comes it that it should be thee whom the world desires to follow?’

When Francis heard these words, he was filled with joy, raised his eyes to heaven and, after remaining a long time absorbed in contemplation, knelt praising and blessing God with extraordinary fervor. Then he turned to Brother Masseo:

‘Thou wishest to know? It is because the eyes of the Most High have willed it so. He continually watches the good and the wicked, and as His most holy eyes have not found among sinners any smaller man, nor any more insufficient and sinful, therefore He has chosen me to accomplish the marvelous work which God hath undertaken; He chose me because He could find none more worthless, and He wished to confound the nobility and grandeur, the strength, the beauty and the learning of this world’” (page 23).

1. Are Leaders Born Leaders? I would say some leaders are born.

Martin Lloyd Jones believed that God equipped a preacher to speak at birth as a natural ability and if you did not have the natural ability to think deeply and communicate clearly then God would not call you to preach (Preaching & Preachers, pages 110-111).

We all know capable but unsaved men and women who are leaders. Some of these were born with the raw ability to be out front. The Presidents of the USA and Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom for several decades have been close allies: Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher and also Bill Clinton and Tony Blair. More recently President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Blair forged a very tight friendship and camaraderie in their allied fight against terrorism. These Presidents and Prime Ministers were great leaders but not all were believers. We might even say they were born to leave their mark on their generation.

2. Are Leaders Made? I would also say that other leaders are made.

Vince Lombardi, the great NFL football coach of the Green Bay Packers said, “Leaders are made, they are not born; and they are made just like anything else has ever been made in this country—by hard effort” (James Montgomery Boice. Nehemiah: Learning to Lead. Old Tappen: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1990, page 16).

One of the emphases of John Maxwell’s literature on leadership is the encouragement that you can grow as a leader. On a scale of 1 to 10, if you are a three or four you can develop into a five or six if you concentrate for one month on each of his 21 irrefutable laws of leadership.

3. Are Leaders Made When Born Again?

Because there is a spiritual gift of leadership (Roman 12:8; 1 Corinthians 12:28) I would say that God equips some believers at salvation with an ability to excel at leadership. Just as there are also the spiritual gifts of helps, mercy, teaching, etc. God equips some believers to lead at higher levels in ministries and organizations.

4. Who is a Leader?

What is one common word in all of the following definitions of leadership?

Hans Finzel, “Leadership is influence….A leader takes people where they would never go on their own” (The Top Ten Mistakes Leaders Make. Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2007, page 19).

Chuck Swindoll, “What do we mean when we use the word leadership? Influence. You lead someone to the measure you influence him” (Hand Me Another Brick, page16).

J. Oswald Sanders “Leadership is influence, the ability of one person to influence others” (page 19).

John Maxwell, “Leadership is influence. Nothing more, Nothing less” (21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership).

Leadership is not holding a title or position. Judas had the title and position of Apostle, but Judas had no spiritual influence. Jesus said all believers must have the influence of salt and light. Since leadership is influence, then every believer should be leading and influencing others. Leadership is not just for believers who have the gift of leadership any more that showing compassion on the suffering is limited to believers who have the gift of mercy.

5. Where Do We Start? If leaders can be made, if leadership is influence, where do we start?

Since leaders are readers then reading books on leadership is the place to start, such as the following:

Peter Drucker’s “The Effective Executive”

Dale Carnagie’s “How to Win Friends and Influence People”

Stephen Covey’s “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People”

J. Oswald Sanders’ “Spiritual Leadership”

John Maxwell’s “The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership”

Hans Finzel’s “The Top Ten Mistakes Leaders Make”

One of my favorites is Henry Blackaby’s “Spiritual Leadership”

The Importance of saying, “Thank You.”

Posted: August 6, 2012 in Leadership
Tags: , ,
1

“What could be better than a pay raise?” Hans Finzel answers in chapter three in The Top Ten Mistakes Leaders Make. The answer is affirmation.

“The big idea is that poor leaders demand a great deal from people and never give them a pat on the back for a job well done. Effective leaders realize that most people are motivated more by affirmation and encouragement rather than by financial reward.”

Hans Finzel stresses three summary points:

1. Everyone thrives on affirmation and praise.

Most people are not like the Energizer Bunny who just keep going and going and going. Most people who work for us or live with us need their emotional batteries charged often. Phyllis Theroux said that compliments are highly biodegradable and tend to dissolve hours or days after we receive them.

2. We wildly underestimate the power of the tiniest personal touch of kindness.

Tom Peters wrote “And of all personal touches, I find the short, hand written ‘nice job’ note to have the highest impact.”

Hans Finzel said, “Every day I have as a goal of writing at least three words of kindness to someone. Keep boxes of various kinds of note cards and encouragement cards at your desk at the ready. Oftentimes you need not even bother with a separate card or letter when sending an affirmation. Just scribble a ‘good job, well done’ on the margin of a memo, or shoot a quick e-mail reply.”

3. Learn to read the varying levels of affirmation your people need.

Finzel instructs us “that the people who work with you will require different amounts and different kinds of affirmation.” He has developed The Affirmation Continuum.

At one end of the continuum is the Desperados. These persons needs lots of affirmation. They have little confidence, lap up affirmation, and are fragile.

Next are the Up-and-downers. These persons can go a long time without affirmation but then they get discouraged and need affirmation to survive.

Then there are Normal people who come from stable homes and need very little affirmation.

Finally there are those Energizer Bunnies called Autopilots. They are actually annoyed at praise and some view affirmation with suspicion. Kindness is all this rare breed needs.

Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:14 recognized that different believers have unique needs for us to respond to.

Finzel closes this chapter with some practical advice from Buck Rodgers in Getting the Best out of Yourself and Others.

1. Get out of your office and pay a visit to someone who does a good job. Pay a visit to say thank you.

2. Don’t let good work be secret. Praise privately with notes any good work so our people will not feel their effort is wasted or even worse that their boss is taking the credit. Rodgers mentions the “Three-Compliments-a-Day Club.” Let’s join today.

3. Thank people publicly. Formalize thanks whenever possible, in house organs, memos, at meetings, and at conferences.

In Romans 13:7, Paul admonished us to give affirmation when affirmation is due.

The motivation that Nehemiah used with God’s people to rebuild the wall was not external bonuses or an all-expenses-paid vacation to Hawaii. This kind of extrinsic incentive has to be repeated in bigger doses. Nehemiah appleaded to a far nobler motivation, removing the reproach from God’s name (Nehemiah 2:17-18). Nehemiah challenged, “Let us build the wall of Jerusalem, that we be no more a reproach.” The people responded, “Let us rise up and build.”

Accountability:The Mark of a Wise and Protected Leader by Ken Sande

Posted: July 14, 2012 in Leadership
Tags: , , , , , ,
0

Josh was slowly crumbling under a steady barrage of criticism. For a few weeks after he began as pastor, the people at his new church seemed friendly and supportive. But Josh soon discovered that many of them were perpetually dissatisfied. They constantly questioned his leadership and complained about weak sermons, unmet needs, or a lack of vision and growth.

The elders did little to help the situation. They failed to confront gossip and slander, and seemed to accept accusations against their pastor as being true until he proved his innocence. He spent hours each week responding to complaints, and then the cycle started all over again. Josh might have lasted longer, but he saw how bitter his wife had become toward the church, and he handed in his resignation.

Glenn’s church had the opposite problem. His elders supported him so unquestioningly that they could not admit any wrongdoing on Glenn’s part. They stifled questions and concerns about his leadership and minimized his mistakes. They sent a clear message that any disagreement with Glenn damaged the unity of the church.

When a woman accused Glenn of inappropriate conduct during counseling, the elders assumed she had imagined it. When another woman made a similar complaint, the three elders who were closest to Glenn volunteered to investigate. After a few conversations with Glenn and the woman, they accepted his version of events and asked her to leave the church. It was not until Glenn was caught in a motel room with a third woman that the elders finally admitted that their pastor had a problem.

Chris, on the other hand, is blessed to serve a church where the leaders understand his weaknesses and are committed to helping him develop and use his gifts to the fullest. They evaluate and affirm his ministry regularly, and they do not hesitate to respectfully point out areas where Chris has erred or needs to grow. They have taught the congregation how to express questions and concerns respectfully, which helps to prevent a buildup of disagreements.

When Chris was accused of failing to fulfill an important pastoral responsibility, the elders thoroughly investigated the matter. When they concluded that the complaint was legitimate, Chris accepted their judgment and willingly confessed to the family that he had failed. Instead of losing respect, both Chris and the elders gained credibility as the congregation witnessed their commitment to genuine accountability.

I was personally involved in each of these three situations, and I have seen these patterns repeated again and again in other churches and ministries around the world. Every year hundreds of churches and ministries are thrown into turmoil when someone criticizes or raises serious questions about the conduct of a pastor or ministry executive. All too many of these situations end in resignation, dishonor, or division—usually because leadership teams commit one of two major errors.

The first error is to under-protect the leader who is questioned or accused of wrongdoing. Under-protecting a leader may involve allowing gossip and rumors to spread unchecked, jumping to conclusions about a leader’s guilt, or failing to give him a meaningful opportunity to defend himself. It may also involve expecting or allowing a leader to spend significant amounts of time responding to trivial or unsubstantiated criticisms, often about style rather than substance, voiced by a few dissatisfied people.

These patterns can lead to a “culture of criticism” that will wear down most leaders. When leaders are subjected to ongoing criticism, their credibility is needlessly eroded; this can diminish trust, commitment, and enthusiasm throughout their church or ministry. A leader who spends many hours responding to petty complaints or mere differences in style will usually lose effectiveness and productivity. And if they are eventually forced out by continual complaints or because they were not given a fair chance to defend themselves, their supporters will often launch a campaign to punish the remaining leadership team.

The second error that many churches and ministries make is to over-protect their leaders. They develop a self-confidence and blind loyalty that compels them to become defensive and automatically “circle the wagons” when a leader is questioned or accused of wrongdoing. They assume the challenge must be unfounded and immediately look for ways to minimize it or explain it away. They may rely on second-hand information or simply accept the leader’s interpretation of his accuser’s words and motives. And sometimes in an effort to justify or protect the leader, they attempt to silence, find fault with, or otherwise discredit or penalize the person who brought the accusation. As Jesus would put it, rather than humbly seeking to discern the “planks” in their leader’s or their own eyes, these leadership teams jump immediately to pointing out the “specks” in the eyes of others (Matt. 7:3-5).

This excessively protective pattern can create a “culture of denial,” where differences and problems are automatically minimized or concealed. When there is some truth in a complaint, over-protection prevents a leader from addressing a problem in its early stages, when small changes on his part might easily lay the matter to rest. If a serious complaint is true, circling the wagons can have even worse consequences. It will delay needed changes, aggravate or multiply harm to others, and diminish the credibility of the people who should have been holding the leader accountable in the first place.

Even if accusations against a leader are largely unfounded, over-protection can still cause significant damage. When sincere concerns and complaints are automatically rejected, members will feel that their voices don’t matter and give up on expressing concerns. When an investigating team fails to address complaints in a clearly objective manner, a cloud of doubt will often be left hanging over both the leader and the ministry itself. These doubts accumulate over time and steadily diminish the leader’s reputation both inside and outside the church or ministry. In addition, if an organization develops a reputation for deflecting questions and making superficial investigations, it may lack credibility when more serious issues must be addressed in the future.

Both of these errors—under-protection and over-protection—can be avoided if churches and ministries replace a culture of criticism or denial with a culture of peace, where both leaders and members are equipped and encouraged to discuss differences and resolve leadership complaints as well as other conflicts in a biblical manner. There are several concepts that are especially important when preparing people to deal constructively with differences or concerns about leadership.

  • Teach people to live out the gospel in all of their relationships. Every Christian leader will stumble and fall at times—just think of Moses, David, Peter, and Paul! Therefore, people should be regularly reminded that their leaders, like everyone else, need the benefits of the gospel on a daily basis. This does not mean that we ignore wrongdoing or fail to exercise appropriate discipline. What it means is that we approach every situation in the light of the cross, eagerly looking for ways to bring God’s truth, grace, mercy, and forgiveness to bear in a way that reveals the redeeming love of Christ (Eph. 4:29-32; 2 Cor. 2:7; 1 John 1:8-9).
  • Train all of your people, and especially your leaders, how to respond to conflict biblically. They will then be able to put off worldly reactions to conflict, such as accusing, manipulating, and controlling, and work together to resolve their differences in a way that shows the wisdom and power of Christ in their lives (Matt. 5:9). This teaching may be summarized in several foundational principles of peacemaking, and may be studied more deeply through comprehensive Sunday school classes or small group Bible studies, or through advancedtraining in peacemaking.
  • Teach people to shun gossip and slander, especially against leaders. Scripture warns us that the tongue is like a spark that sets whole forests on fire (James 3:5-6). These sparks could be substantially reduced by regularly teaching people to avoid speaking or listening to gossip or slander, to talk personally and privately with those who may have erred instead of talking about them, and to speak or write only words that will reflect well on Christ and benefit others (Prov. 16:28; 26:20; Eph. 4:15, 29).
  • Repeatedly commend the habit of making “charitable judgments.” A “charitable judgment” is an inclination to believe the best about others and look for the best in others until clear facts prove otherwise (see Matt. 7:1-2, 12; 1 Cor. 13:7). This inclination protects people from jumping to conclusions or speculating about other people’s motives, which only God knows for certain (see the article “Charitable Judgments: An Antidote to Judging Others,” which is also available in booklet form).
  • Encourage people to distinguish between style and substance. Many complaints against leaders arise because church members or ministry staff are offended by a leader’s personality or leadership style (2 Cor. 10:1, 10). While it is sometimes helpful to talk privately with a leader to discuss personal preferences, personality and style issues should not be elevated into allegations that a leader has sinned or committed a substantive wrong.

As the apostle Paul revealed in his letters, Christian leaders are often exposed to criticism, complaints, and conflict. There are several ways that churches and ministries can support their leaders as they deal with this occupational hazard.

  • Encourage leaders to be “approachable.” When church and ministry members feel that it is safe for them to approach their leaders with concerns or even criticism, there is a much greater likelihood that personal issues or offenses will be resolved personally, quickly, and constructively. In order to gain a reputation for being “approachable,” a leader needs to cultivate a number of Christ-like characteristics, which are described in detail in an associated article entitled, “Approachability: The Passport to Real Ministry and Leadership.”
  • Establish meaningful, constructive accountability. Only a fool, or a person who does not understand the doctrine of sin, will surround himself with people who will always agree with him (2 Tim. 4:3). If leaders hold one another to a high standard (1 Cor. 4:2; James 3:1), develop relationships of genuine love and trust, and respectfully correct one another when they stumble (Ps. 141:5), many leadership failures can be prevented or resolved in their early stages.
  • Provide leaders with regular performance evaluations. Candid performance evaluations conducted in the spirit of Ephesians 4:15 and 4:29 can provide encouraging affirmation of strengths and successes, and address weaknesses or failures in a positive manner instead of waiting for problems to build to explosive levels. When a leader is graciously encouraged to improve in one or two specific qualities each year, he can experience noticeable growth and continue to flourish in his ministry year after year. [1]
  • Shield leaders from minor complaints. In a large church or ministry, it is unrealistic to expect the senior pastor or CEO to respond personally to every complaint. Therefore it may be necessary to appoint a specific person (such as a member of a church’s Peacemaking Team) who can respond to initial complaints against top leaders. It is essential that this person not show favoritism toward leadership (Lev. 19:15; James 2:1). This person can often resolve minor issues and misunderstandings, so only serious unresolved complaints would have to be brought to leaders’ attention.
  • Admonish people who persist in making inappropriate complaints. If people are found to have a habit of making trivial or unsubstantiated complaints against leaders, it is appropriate to admonish them, both for their sake and that of your church or ministry. If they persist in this conduct, the leadership team may need to implement more deliberate discipline to help them understand the seriousness of their sin (Gal. 6:1; see ”Church Discipline: God’s Search and Rescue Plan“).
  • Trust God to protect your reputation. When leaders are accused of wrongdoing, they often become defensive, especially if they believe the charges are largely false. At times like this, leaders need to pray with St. Augustine, “Lord, deliver me from this lust of always vindicating myself.” Another way to maintain a calm and objective confidence in the face of criticism is to spend time meditating on the promises God gives us in passages like Psalm 37, Proverbs 26:2, Isaiah 30:15, and Matthew 11:28.

Many complaints against leaders are magnified or mishandled because people do not know how to express their concerns in a constructive way. Churches and ministries can provide needed encouragement, guidance, and support to their people in several ways:

  • Encourage and equip people to share concerns personally with their leaders. Many complaints against leaders can be resolved if people are taught and occasionally reminded to go to leaders in private to graciously discuss issues that seem too serious to overlook (Prov. 19:11; Matt. 18:15; Gal. 6:1; Prov. 22:11). This principle and other peacemaking concepts are summarized in the foundational principles of peacemaking. In depth teaching can be provided through Sunday school classes or small group Bible studies.
  • Encourage pure motives and respectful communication. Proverbs 22:11 promises that “He who loves a pure heart and whose speech is gracious will have the king for a friend.” The wisdom of this principle is illustrated again and again in Scripture (see, e.g., 1 Sam. 25:1-35; Dan. 1:1-16; Acts 24-25). Therefore, when coaching people on how to bring a concern to a leader, encourage them to pray that God will help them to put off selfish motives, discern ways to bless the leader, and use words that are filled with wisdom and grace.
  • Provide informal assistance in challenging situations. If a complaint is not satisfactorily resolved through a private conversation, or if a private meeting with the leader seems unwise,[2] it is appropriate for the concerned person to ask an objective third person go with him to discuss the problem with the leader (Matt. 18:16). This third person could be another leader, a member of the Human Relations staff, or someone in the church who has been trained in peacemaking and is part of their Peacemaking Team.
  • Develop a written grievance process. In larger churches and ministries, it would be wise to incorporate the steps above into a written grievance policy that provides clear guidance on how to communicate and follow through on serious complaints. This is especially important in the context of employment relationships, which have special legal considerations.

When a complaint against a leader cannot be resolved through informal measures, and the matter is too serious to overlook, it will be necessary to implement a formal investigation and resolution process. This process is likely to end constructively if it provides everyone involved with the “3 P’s of Satisfaction”:

  • Process satisfaction, which requires a clear and fair process where everyone involved agrees that they have had a reasonable opportunity to present their side of the matter (1 Cor. 14:40)
  • Personal satisfaction, which requires treating everyone respectfully and equally, just as you would want to be treated (Matt. 7:12, James 2:1-4)
  • Product satisfaction, which requires a final solution that is as just and equitable as is humanly possible (Micah 6:8; Prov. 28:5)

Even when people do not agree with the final outcome (product) of a complaint process, they will usually accept the result if the investigative team provided them with both process and personal satisfaction. I cannot emphasize this point too much: Give people process satisfaction and personal satisfaction, and they will usually be content, even if they disagree with your substantive decision. If, on the other hand, a church or ministry fails to give these two levels of satisfaction, their leaders will often be forced to spend many hours responding to a proliferation of complaints against them.

Each situation will have its own unique challenges and requirements, but there are several general principles that help to ensure overall satisfaction with a formal complaint process.

  • “Do to others what you would have them to do you” (Matt. 7:12). Continually ask yourself, “If I had brought this complaint, or if I was the person accused of wrongdoing, how would I want the investigators to proceed at this particular step?”
  • Appoint an investigative team whose objectivity and impartiality is beyond question (Lev. 19:15). Tell both the accuser and the accused who the nominees are for the team. If either of them doubts the objectivity of a team member, make every reasonable effort, within the limits of your governing structure, to replace that team member with a more acceptable person.
  • Seek advice from an outside conciliator. When faced with particularly complex issues, it may be wise to involve a trained conciliator who can offer advice to all those involved in the situation and help them follow a process that promotes understanding and reconciliation (Prov. 13:10). [3]
  • Insist on receiving firsthand information. Do not accept hearsay, anonymous or secondhand reports (Deut. 19:15; 1 Tim. 5:19). Do not depend on the accuser’s interpretation of the leader’s conduct or motives, or on the leader’s interpretation of the accuser’s words or motives. Go to original sources and hear the relevant information with your own ears.
  • Avoid surprises. Give people ample notice of planned meetings and discussions so that they have time to adjust their schedules and prepare what they want to say.
  • Give the accused leader the opportunity to hear testimony against him and to make a prepared defense(Deut. 19:16). In some cases it may be appropriate for investigators to gather preliminary information and talk with witnesses on their own, but the accused leader should eventually have the opportunity to hear and respond to any adverse witness or evidence that may be considered by those who will render a final decision in the matter.
  • Take time to prayerfully seek consensus. When an investigative or leadership team reaches a decision by a slight majority, it will often experience a severe backlash from people in the church or ministry who feel that the team did not diligently seek God’s will in the matter. Ensuing attacks can overwhelm the remaining leadership team, which will be weakened by its own lack of unity. Therefore, unless extenuating circumstances necessitate an immediate decision by a simple majority, it is wise to take time to thoroughly investigate a complaint and prayerfully arrive at a decision that the entire team can sincerely support, especially if others are likely to criticize their judgment.
  • Fully explain the reasons behind your final decision. Avoid every appearance of a cover-up and leave no room for doubt as to why you decided as you did. List the central facts and guiding biblical principles and explain your conclusions clearly and specifically.
  • If a leader has done something wrong, encourage him to confess it, take responsibility for his actions, and make needed changes (Prov. 28:13; 1 John 1:9). In cases of serious sin or violations of trust, or when there is a lack of genuine repentance, a leader may be required to resign his office. But when he clearly demonstrates a repentant and teachable spirit and the offense does not automatically disqualify him for office, he should be reassured of God’s grace and forgiveness, and given an opportunity to show how God is helping him to change. Similarly, if it is discovered that the accuser brought the complaint without valid grounds, the accuser should be encouraged to repent and change.
  • Provide a way to appeal unresolved issues. When a dispute between a member and a leader in a local church cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of both parties, Scripture indicates that the church should provide some kind of appeal process that allows the parties to appeal the matter to a person or persons who are not involved in the matter and whose objectivity is beyond question (see Exod. 18:19-26; Deut. 1:17; Acts 15:1-31). Most denominations have established processes for such appeals. Independent churches will still be operating within traditional independent ecclesiology if they establish processes to seek assistance from respected outside Christian leaders who can offer insights and advice (without dictating solutions) on how to resolve difficult internal conflicts involving questions of leadership, doctrine, or discipline. [4]Regardless of polity, any church can adopt a policy to resolve legal disputes through biblical mediation or binding arbitration rather than taking the matter to civil court in violation of 1 Corinthians 6:1-8.[5]

When these principles are consistently practiced, most complaints against leaders can be resolved in a redemptive manner. In the process, people can be encouraged to express their concerns productively. Leaders can be protected from false accusations and encouraged to grow where needed. The reputation of the church or ministry can be preserved. And most importantly, God’s name will be honored as his people respond to one another as Christ would, with justice, integrity, and righteousness.

If you need advice on how to apply these principles in a particularly difficult situation, please contact Peacemaker Ministries and ask for assistance from the Institute for Christian Conciliation.

_____________________
[1] For example, Peacemaker Ministries requires that “The Board Executive Committee shall perform an annual “360 degree” performance evaluation of the President, seeking candid input from the President’s family, pastor, spiritual accountability partner, Ministry executive team, other Directors, and any other person the Committee deems appropriate. At the beginning of each twelve-month evaluation cycle, the Committee shall establish specific written criteria and expectations to serve as the basis for the evalua¬tion. The evaluation process will seek to reinforce specific leadership strengths, identify areas of weakness, and propose specific growth plans. Each year the President will be encouraged to focus deliberately on improving one or more specific areas of leadership, and to report to the Board on his progress.”

[2] For examples of when it is appropriate to involve others immediately, see The Peacemaker, pp. 146-147

[3] Names of qualified conciliators may be requested from Peacemaker Ministries as well as from many denominational offices that have trained conciliator teams through our programs.

[4] For example, the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith provides that “In cases of difficulties or differences, either in point of doctrine or administration, wherein either the churches in general are concerned, or any one church, in their peace, union, and edification; or any member or members of any church are injured, in or by any proceedings in censures not agreeable to truth and order: it is according to the mind of Christ, that many churches holding communion together, do, by their messengers, meet to consider, and give their advice in or about that matter in difference, to be reported to all the churches concerned; howbeit these messengers assembled, are not intrusted with any church-power properly so called; or with any jurisdiction over the churches themselves, to exercise any censures either over any churches or persons; or to impose their determination on the churches or officers” (Chapter 26, section 15).

[5] Sample wording for a clause: “If we have a legal dispute with or within our church and cannot resolve it internally through the steps given above, we will obey God’s command not to go into the civil court (1 Cor. 6:1-8). Instead, we will submit the matter to mediation and, if necessary, legally binding arbitration, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure for Christian Conciliation of the Institute for Christian Conciliation, a division of Peacemaker Ministries (www.Peacemaker.net).”

Ken Sande is is an attorney, the author The Peacemaker: A Biblical Guide to Resolving Personal Conflict (Baker Books, 3rd Ed. 2004),Peacemaking for Families (Tyndale, 2002), The Peacemaker Student Edition (with Kevin Johnson, Baker Books, 2008) and president of Peacemaker Ministries (www.Peacemaker.net), an international ministry committed to equipping and assisting Christians and their churches to respond to conflict biblically.

This article in its entirety may be photocopied, re-transmitted by electronic mail, or reproduced in newsletters, on the World Wide Web, or in other print media, provided that such copying, re-transmission, or other use is not for profit or other commercial purpose, and that any distribution or use of this article sets forth the following credit line, in full, at the conclusion of the article: “Copyright 2009 Peacemaker® Ministries. http://www.Peacemaker.net. Reprinted with permission.” Peacemaker Ministries may withdraw or modify this grant of permission at any time.

Approachability: The Passport to Real Ministry and Leadership by Ken Sande

Posted: July 13, 2012 in Leadership
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
0
Craig was well-equipped for teaching God’s Word. He was committed to Christ, thoroughly educated, solid in his doctrine, well read, loved to study Scripture, and could preach outstanding sermons Sunday after Sunday.He also saw himself as a gifted pastor. He loved to discuss theology, debate doctrinal issues, and tell people how to apply the truth of God’s Word to everyday life. When people came to him with questions or problems, he prided himself on helping them to quickly get to the heart of the matter by identifying underlying sins in their lives and developing practical plans to grow in godliness.The trouble was that as time went by, fewer and fewer people were coming to him for pastoral advice. He would have been shocked to learn that while most of the people in his church respected him as a gifted preacher, many had lost confidence that they could approach him safely with questions, personal problems, and especially criticism, no matter how graciously it was offered. So while Craig’s pulpit ministry seemed to be thriving, his pastoral ministry was withering day by day.Jeff, a pastor in another church, was flourishing in both his preaching and shepherding ministries. He loved to dig into God’s Word and prepare practical lessons and sermons, but he was equally passionate about coming alongside his people, understanding their struggles, and helping them live out the gospel in the issues of daily life. Like the apostle Paul, he had an “Acts 20:20 ministry,” teaching God’s Word “publicly and from house to house.” His people loved him, shared their struggles, ideas, and even their criticisms freely, and together they were growing in their love for God and their passion to build his church.Craig and Jeff shared many characteristics: excellent education, solid theology, and a passion to teach and preach. But there was one major difference between them: month in and month out, Jeff’s flock had found him to be consistently approachable, while Craig’s congregation saw him as being so distant and above them that they gave up coming to him with their life concerns. Craig was a fine preacher, but he had failed to earn the relational passport needed to shepherd the flock God had entrusted to his care.Countless leaders in other settings, whether the home, ministry, or workplace, fall into this same habit, which destroys their ability to lead and minister to other people.

Without a Passport, You Cannot Enter

A passport is an authorization to go somewhere. There is no more difficult place to enter than the inner life and deep struggles of another person. If you want people to welcome you into their world—their real, messy world, not the smiling façade we all put up—you must earn a relational passport.

In order to gain a passport into the lives and struggles of other people, you must relate to them in such a way that they would answer “yes” to three key questions, each of which contains a variety of sub-questions that roll around in the back of people’s minds:

  • Can I trust you? Will you maintain confidentiality? Will you lose respect for me or judge me if I allow you to see how badly I’ve blown it? Will you be gentle and patient even when I’m exasperating? Will you reject me if I don’t do everything right? Will you assume the best about me or will you jump to conclusions and blame me for all my problems? Can I trust you with the “fine china” of my life?
  • Do you really care about me? Are you just politely tolerating me or fulfilling an obligation? Or do you really want to help me? Why? How could anyone love a person with such problems? Will you take time to listen to me? Do you care enough to push past my outer defenses and take time to help me sort out the tangled mess in my heart? Will you love me like Jesus does, even when I’m not very loveable?
  • Can you actually help me? Are you competent to deal with my issues? How are you doing with your own challenges and struggles? Do you have a track record of successfully solving these kinds of problems? What kind of training or experience do you have? If this problem is beyond the two of us, do you have the humility and wisdom to help me find another person who has the experience I need?

Every time a leader engages people, he or she is either building or destroying passport. Use a counseling story as a sermon illustration without fully concealing the identity of the counselees, and you’ve lost the trust of an entire congregation. Refer with mocking humor to a letter from a member, and you’ve signaled your entire flock not to share their concerns with you. Brush past a person who is clearly trying to catch your attention, and she may not reach out a second time. Jump to conclusions about the reasons for someone’s struggles, and the conversation will quickly come to an end. Give hurried or superficial advice and your people will look elsewhere next time.

But if you take time to be filled with the love of Christ and learn to look at your people with his eyes and care for them with his heart, they will grant you access to the deepest regions of their lives, opening opportunities for rich pastoral ministry.

The Characteristics of an Approachable Leader

One of the most effective ways to build passport with your people is to deliberately and persistently cultivate the image of being an “approachable leader.” An approachable leader makes people feel safe; they know they are welcome to come to you with questions, concerns, or even criticism. In order to gain this image and reputation, a leader needs to deliberately put off “passport killers” and cultivate attitudes and relational habits that encourage people to open up and draw near.

  • Maintain a “gentle authority slope.” The Bible teaches that God has established authority arrangements in the family, church, workplace, and in civil government to maintain peace and order. As Jesus warned in Mark 10:42-45, however, sin often tempts leaders to “lord it over” others by over-emphasizing their own authority and others’ responsibility to be submissive. As Jesus teaches, the best way to guard against this tendency is to cultivate the attitude of a servant, seeing oneself as being below rather than above others (vv. 43-45). As servant-leaders cultivate the Christ-like attitude described in passages like Philippians 2:1-11, they can replace the “steep slope” of authoritarianism with a “gentle authority slope” that is easy for people to climb and invites them to bring questions, concerns, and correction to a leader rather than letting something fester.
  • Fight pride and cultivate true humility. Leaders often have more training and experience than other people. This strength can easily become a weakness if a leader allows pride to produce a superior attitude that thoughtlessly rejects ideas, advice, or correction. As Andrew Murray writes,

All want of love, all indifference to the needs, the feelings, the weakness of others; all sharp and hasty judgments and utterances, so often excused under the plea of being outright and honest; all manifestations of temper and touchiness and irritation; all feelings of bitterness and estrangement, have their root in nothing but pride, that ever seeks itself .[1]

Many leaders conceal a proud attitude under a demeanor of humility, which is not the same as actual humility. One of the many evidences of actual humility is the inclination to “consider others better than yourself,” which results in valuing their thoughts and interests as highly as your own (Phil. 2:3-4). A closely related evidence of humility is to sincerely welcome critique and correction, no matter who brings the “observation” (Prov. 13:10, 17:10). Therefore, wise leaders regularly meditate and pray about the “pride and humility” passages in Scripture (see Prov. 11:2, 19:20; Isa. 66:3; 1 Pet. 5:5-6), asking God to help them put off self-confidence, pride, and every hint of arrogance, and to put on a humility that genuinely welcomes questions, suggestions, criticism, and anything else that might aid us in the process of presenting ourselves before God as empty vessels, so that we might be utterly dependent on and fulfilled in him, which is the essence of true humility. [2]

  • Cultivate a Shepherd’s Heart. The sheer busyness of church or ministry work can easily cause leaders to become distracted or aloof, which will send the signal that troubled people should keep their distance. Therefore, spiritual leaders must constantly pray for God to give them the heart of a shepherd, which is beautifully described in passages like Isaiah 40:11: “He tends his flock like a shepherd: He gathers the lambs in his arms and carries them close to his heart; he gently leads those that have young” (see also Matt. 18:12-14). This kind of demeanor builds trust, promises safety, and invites people to draw near with their questions and concerns, rather than hiding them or broadcasting complaints to others. One way that I seek to apply this concept when engaging people under my care is to pray, “Lord, help me to serve so-and-so in such a way, that when she reads Isaiah 40:11 a month from now, she will say, ‘That’s how Ken treated me when I went to him with my concern.’” [3]
  • Guard against institutional dynamics that can undermine approachability. There are several dynamics in some church and denominational cultures that can aggravate a pastor’s tendency to be unapproachable. A culture that has a strong emphasis on theology and doctrine can produce “relationally challenged” leaders who prefer preparing sermons over engaging people (which is a tendency in my own denomination). Approachability can also be undermined by a culture or polity that minimizes congregational influence (“We lead, you implement”) or provides no meaningful accountability beyond a closely knit leadership circle in the local church. Such cultures can easily produce leaders who are not inclined to welcome ideas and suggestions from laity, admit areas of weakness or lack of competence, or be open to seeking counsel from outside the leadership circle. Similarly, a polity that fuels political maneuvering between competing cliqueswill usually produce leaders who are guarded in their relationships. None of these factors inevitably produces inaccessible or deficient leadership. [4] Humble and spiritually mature leaders (like Jeff in my opening illustration) can counteract each of these institutional dynamics, but only if they are aware of these pitfalls and constantly vigilant against the way they can undermine approachability.
  • See God’s people as he does. One of the most effective antidotes to personal or institutional attitudes that undermine approachability is to cultivate the habit of viewing the members of your church as God does: as people made “in the image of God” (Gen. 1:27), as “God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved,” (Col. 3:12), as “a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God” (1 Pet. 2:9), as people who have been “lavished with all wisdom and understanding” (Eph. 1:8), who are filled with the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:19) and are “competent to instruct one another” and “to judge … the things of this life” (Rom. 15:14; 1 Cor. 6:3). When leaders remember that these types of descriptive phrases apply to all of the saints, not just to ordained leaders, they will be more inclined to humbly welcome questions, suggestions, and even correction from anyone in whom Jesus’ Spirit dwells.
  • Send convincing signals that you have time for people. As busy as he was, Jesus had the remarkable ability to send constant signals that he had time for people. The Samaritan woman, the rich young man, Nicodemus, Mary and Martha … all of them sensed that they could ask for his time and not be brushed aside because he was too busy for them. There are many ways to send these kinds of signals. Explicit reassurances of interest and availability need to be reinforced by an unrushed demeanor, relaxed body language, asking questions and patiently listening to answers, and sometimes by pulling out your cell phone and asking your secretary to reschedule an appointment “because something important has come up.”
  • Be transparent. People are usually reluctant to share their problems with leaders who seem to have their lives so figured out that they would not be able to relate to someone who is struggling with uncertainty, failure, or sin. But when a leader imitates people like the apostle Paul (see Rom. 7:7-25; 1 Tim. 1:15-17), and talks openly about his own weaknesses and struggles, and God’s redeeming grace, his flock can approach him as a brother who will understand and have compassion on those who are walking a similar road.
  • Pick up on hints. Troubled people often hesitate to lay all of their concerns out at once. Instead, they will drop hints of an issue and wait to see how you respond. If you brush past their words, they will pull back into themselves and look elsewhere for a caring ear. But if you show concern for even the hint of distress (“How are you today?” “Oh, I’ve been better,” “What’s going on?” “Oh, it’s no big deal, just some problems with the kids” “Hey, I’m a parent too, and I know that can be a very big deal. Can I buy you a cup of coffee so you can tell me about it?”), people may let you in on the pivotal issues of their lives (“Well, last night my son made me so mad that I told him I could hardly wait for him to graduate and leave home. He didn’t come home from school today and we don’t know where he is”). Picking up on a small hint can lead to life-changing ministry.
  • See the good in others (even if it seems outweighed by the bad). People with problems or complaints are naturally defensive and sometimes offensive. As long as they feel vulnerable to being criticized, their walls will be up. One of the best ways to relieve tension or fear is to draw attention to the evidences of God’s grace in someone else’s life, even when serious sin is also evident. Here again the apostle Paul sets a superb example. Knowing that he must bring correction to the incredibly messed-up church in Corinth, he begins his first letter with these astonishing words:

“I always thank God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus. For in him you have been enriched in every way–in all your speaking and in all your knowledge–because our testimony about Christ was confirmed in you. Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed. He will keep you strong to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God, who has called you into fellowship with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, is faithful” (1 Cor. 1: 4-9; cf. Phil. 4:8-9).

When people know from experience that you prefer and delight to focus on God’s grace in their lives, they will be more willing to pull back the curtain on areas that need more of that grace.

  • Listen deeply before jumping to problem-solving. People often know what they should do to solve a problem, but sometimes they still need to lay the situation out before someone who will listen compassionately and make them feel that they have been heard and understood. Therefore, people are much more likely to open up to a leader who has developed the discipline of listening patiently and deeply, and offering solutions only after others have shared all they want to reveal and are ready to explore solutions (see Prov. 18:13).
  • Be quick to confess sins, whether large or small. When people confront a leader with a mistake or sin that is embarrassing or seems insignificant, natural defensiveness will often tempt the leader to minimize the wrong or explain it away. An insecure leader may even shift the focus to an improper attitude or perception in the accuser (“What is going on in your heart that would cause you to find fault with me?”). This type of response will either provoke a debate or stifle discussion, both of which will confirm that it is a waste of time to approach that leader. Therefore, a wise leader will listen patiently to complaints, pray for God’s help in discerning any truth in them, even if only a grain, and then model humility by sincerely confessing that wrong and thanking the brother or sister for drawing it to his attention (see Matt. 7:3-4; Prov. 15:32, 17:10; see the article “The Cross and Criticism,” which is also available in booklet form).
  • Be slow to confront sin in others. When people are confused, suffering, dissatisfied, or feeling they have been wronged, they have often contributed to their problem in some way; it is equally likely that they may speak sinfully as they unload their complaints to others. Unless there is a clear danger of irreparable harm, it is usually helpful to give people uninterrupted time to get their thoughts and feelings out in the open, even if they are tainted with sin, so that you can accurately discern the issues that are burdening them. Once you have demonstrated your concern and compassion through patient listening, people will generally be more open to hearing words of counsel or correction (see John 4:1-30).
  • Make yourself truly accountable to others. If people believe that they will have to convince you all on their own that you are wrong about something, they may not even try to speak to you, especially if you have strong verbal skills. But if they know that you are accountable to other leaders in the church, who can be called in to help address unresolved issues, most people will be more inclined make the attempt to engage you on points of concern or disagreement. Therefore, a wise leader will make an earnest effort to demonstrate that he or she is genuinely accountable to other leaders who have the strength and willingness to deal candidly and thoroughly with questionable issues in his life (see the companion article, “Accountability: The Mark of a Wise and Protected Leader”).

Get an “Approachability Checkup.”

Even when leaders sincerely want to be approachable, they are often blind to the ways that they push people away. (This is certainly true of me!) If you have the courage to learn how approachable you are, there are several tests you can take.

  • First, read through this article a second time and ask God to help you evaluate yourself on each of the listed characteristics.
  • Second, give your spouse and children a copy of this article and ask them to give you feedback on each of the qualities listed above. Encourage them to give you specific examples of your strengths or weaknesses in each area.
  • Third, meet with your leadership team and assess your institutional culture, asking whether any of the polity or cultural dynamics described above may be undermining your approachability. Then evaluate yourselves as individuals and as a team, giving thanks for good examples of approachability and confessing areas of weakness.
  • Fourth, have the courage to go beyond your inner circle and ask for input from people who have the courage to tell you things you may not want to hear, like the Sunday school teacher who always questions your ideas, or the member who has been cool since that meeting in your office a few months ago. (Every time I’ve done this exercise myself, I have been convicted to learn that others don’t see me as being nearly as approachable as I imagine they do.) [5]
  • Fifth, if you (either individually or as a leadership team) want truly candid and uninhibited feedback, provide a way for people to communicate their thoughts to you without fear of later being reproached or marginalized for saying something that you may not like to hear. One way to do this is to commission one or two uniformly trusted members in your church or ministry to meet with a variety of people and listen to their candid feedback on your approachability, with the assurance that their comments will be presented to you as a composite rather than being identified with specific individuals. Although this approach falls short of the ideal of forthright individual communication, it follows a well established biblical principle of having mediators diffuse intimidating encounters (Ex.20:18-19; 1 Sam. 19:1-6; 1 Tim. 2:5) and will usually provide much more robust, specific, and reliable information by not putting individuals in a threatening position.
  • Finally, ask God to help you take others’ insights and advice to heart. Confess specific failures to individuals you’ve offended. If God opens your eyes to a pattern of weaknesses that have impacted many people, ask him to give you the humility and courage to confess to that entire group. If this requires confessing to an entire congregation, you may be able to do so as part of a sermon on “The Grace of Christ-Like Approachability” (which is a quality that every Christian should cultivate, especially if they are in a position of authority, whether in the family, church, or workplace).

Becoming an approachable leader and earning passport into others’ lives is no easy task. The very qualities that cause others to recognize a person as a leader can also result in an image or demeanor that keeps others closed off and distant. No one was more likely to have such an aura than Jesus. Yet his humility, love, and desire to connect intimately with others were so strong that people were constantly drawn into the safety of his presence and desirous of having him enter deeply into their lives. If you are a leader, I encourage you to make it your life-long pursuit to draw on God’s grace and develop this same approachability in your life.

_____________________
[1] Humility, Andrew Murray (Wilder Publications, Radford, VA, 2008), p. 13

[2] Two books I recommend on cultivating humility are: Humility, Andrew Murray (Wilder Publications, Radford, VA, 2008), and Humility: True Greatness, CJ Mahaney (Multnomah, Sisters, OR, 2005).

[3] For superb insights into the biblical concept of shepherd leadership, I highly recommend While Shepherds Watch Their Flocks, Tim Laniak (ShepherdLeader Publications, 2007).

[4] As Ed Clowney wisely wrote, “Better by far are imperfect structures in the hands of devoted servants of Christ than the most biblical form of church government practiced in pride or in a loveless and vindictive spirit.” (The Church, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Il, 1995, p. 202)

[5] You can begin this process with an email like this: “Dear ___, I would like your assistance in gaining an accurate assessment of how “approachable” I am to other people. Therefore, I would appreciate it if you would do me the great favor of reading the attached article and giving me your candid feedback on how approachable I am in your eyes. You may do this in any way that is comfortable for you, whether offering some general observations, or evaluating me in light of any or all of the characteristics described in the attached article. It would be especially helpful if you could provide specific examples  that illustrate my strengths or weaknesses in any of these areas. I sincerely want to become more approachable to others, so the more candid and specific your feedback, the better. Thank you!”

Ken Sande is is an attorney, the author The Peacemaker: A Biblical Guide to Resolving Personal Conflict (Baker Books, 3rd Ed. 2004), Peacemaking for Families (Tyndale, 2002), The Peacemaker Student Edition (with Kevin Johnson, Baker Books, 2008) and president of Peacemaker Ministries (www.Peacemaker.net), an international ministry committed to equipping and assisting Christians and their churches to respond to conflict biblically.

This article in its entirety may be photocopied, re-transmitted by electronic mail, or reproduced in newsletters, on the World Wide Web, or in other print media, provided that such copying, re-transmission, or other use is not for profit or other commercial purpose, and that any distribution or use of this article sets forth the following credit line, in full, at the conclusion of the article: “Copyright 2009 Peacemaker® Ministries. http://www.Peacemaker.net. Reprinted with permission.” Peacemaker Ministries may withdraw or modify this grant of permission at any time.

 

Driscoll’s View on Elder Rule

Posted: March 8, 2012 in Leadership
Tags: , , , , ,
0

Mark Driscoll makes a distinction between ruling elders, which he is not, and the teaching elder or as Driscoll calls himself, “the primary preaching pastor.” He also says that elders “should be voted in by the elders and installed as an elder by the laying on of hands by the other elders.” Driscoll’s lay-elder rule eliminates congregational rule, which is the Biblical church polity.

Wagne Grudem who also believes in congregational rule writes “we do not see a diversity of forms of govenment in the New Testament church, but a unified and consistent pattern in which every church had elders governing it and keeping watch over it” (Systematic Theology, page 913). “The New Testament does not explicitly detail a particular or excluseive ‘form.’ Yet it gives basic data in settling on a particular form” (Dr. Hoyle Bowman’s notes A Baptist Distinctive Relating to Local Church Government and Leadership).

Lay-elder rule means each church is led by a session made up of ruling and teaching elders. The pastor is the teaching elder or the ordained minister. The session has governing authority over the congregation. Some of the members of the session are also members of the presbytery in Presbyterian churches not in churches like Driscoll’s. Some of the members of the presbytery are members of the General assembly. Mark Dever has lay elder rule and congregational rule. He is first among equals.

This form of church polity is wrong because elders in Scripture only have leadership over a single congregation and not multiple congregations as in the presbytery and General assembly. At the Jerusalem Conference, the elders did not exercise authority over other churches. The “whole church” was a vital part of the decision making. The decision of the Antioch church to go to Jerusalem was purely voluntary. Acts 15 does not show the supremacy of one church over another but the cooperation of two churches of like precious faith as in 1 Cor. 16:1-3.

The congregation has the ultimate authority. There are certain issues that are determined by congregational decisions such as church discipline (Matt. 18:15-17; 1 Cor. 5:13; and 2 Thess. 3:6). The buck stops with the congregation. The congregation is the final court of appeal. Denominationalists argue that there are no independent churches in the New Testament because all churches are under the apostles. There are no official apostles today. There is, however, evidence from Acts 15 for congregational rule. The local church at Antioch voluntarily sent Paul to Jerusalem (Acts 15:3). The local church at Jerusalem received Paul (Acts 15:4). James the pastor/moderator presided over the meeting. The “whole church” at Jerusalem made the final decision (Act 15:22).

With lay-elder rule the authority is the hands of the elders who appoint the deacons and the teaching elder. This is contrary to New Testament congregational rule. Each local church elected its own officers (Acts 6; 15:22).

Mark Dever, who believes in congregational rule says “in Acts 6, we see these very apostles handing over responsibility to the congregation” (Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, page 222). The apostles, like Jesus in Matthew 18:15-17 in reference to church discipline, endorsed congregational rule in regard to the appointment of church officers.

At first an apostolic representative (Tit.1:5) appointed pastors. Later churches chose (2 Cor. 8:19 “chosen by the church” [Gk cheirotonesantes] and Acts 14:23) those chosen by the Holy Spirit (Acts 20:28; Eph. 4:11). The fact that the Head of the Church is Christ (Eph. 4:15-16) and each believer is a believer/priest (1 Pet. 2:5, 9) argue for congregational rule.

Dever makes the point that all churches practice congregational rule no matter what their official church polity: “Every local church in Christendom, from Greek Orthodox to Pentecostal, from Roman Catholic to Baptist, from Episcopalian to Lutheran, from Presbyterian to Methodist, is congregational in nature. They exist only as the people continue to participate in their activities. When the people vote—whether at a congregational meeting or (where that’s not allowed) with their funds or their feet—the leaders of the congregation must listen” (page 225).

The advocates of lay-elder rule believe that the three terms for pastors in the New Testament are interchangable based on these texts: Acts 20:17, 28; 1 Peter 5:2; 1 Timothy 3:2, 17; Titus 1:5, 7. Wayne Grudem writes, “Elders are also called ‘pastors’ or ‘bishops’ or ‘overseers’ in the New Testament (Systmatic Theology, page 913). This is also Dever’s position (page 229).

I agree that the New Testament makes no distinctions in the office of the pastor which is seen in Paul’s meeting with pastors from the Ephesian area in Miletus. In Acts 20, the pastors are called the elders in Acts 20:17 (Gr. presbuterous), overseers  in Acts 20:28 (Gr. episkotous), and pastors in 20:28 (Gr. poimaineisn).

And yet both Grudem and Dever also advocate that the elders be divided between ruling elders (lay elders) and teaching elder (ordained elder) in 1 Timothy 5:17. The Scriptures do not make this distinction. The “bishop” in 1 Timohty 3:2 is to be able to teach (1 Timothy 3:2) and rule (3:4) and so are the interchangable elders in 5:17 to rule and labor in the Word. The only distinction found in 5:17 is the difference between pastors who labor diligently in the Word of God and pastors who do not labor diligently. Paul in 5:17, also teaches remuneration to local church elders. In lay-elder rule the ruling elders are not remunerated.

John Hammett writes, “For a time, there was some debate among Baptists as to the validity of having ruling and teaching elders in the church, but the practice was never widespread, because it was seen as having a very slender and debatable biblical basis; it virtually disappeared after 1820″ (Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches: A Contemporary Ecclesiology, page 162).

The context of 1Timothy argues that there are only two offices in the local church. The two offices are the offices of pastor and deacons. In 1 Timothy 3, Paul uses the word “office” two times to describe the qualifications of the church’s two officers who are pastors in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and deacons in 3:8-13. There are two offices not three offices of ruling elders, teaching elders, and deacons.

The New Testament allows for a plurality of ordained elders or pastors with one of the pastors being the senior or lead pastor but not a plurality of lay-elders. The plurality of ordained pastors was possibly seen in Acts 14:23 and Acts 20:17. The fact that the church at Jerusalem had a plurality of elders (11:30) may be because the church met in house churches rather than just one central mega-church.

While the book of Acts stresses the plurality of elders, the Pastoral Epistles were written to individual pastors or apostolic helpers who performed pastoral duties. The singularity of a senior pastor is also seen in the qualification of the bishop (singular) in 1Timothy 3:1-7 and the qualifications of the deacons (plural) in 3:8-13. Paul addressed qualifications in Titus to a single bishop (Titus 1:7). There were “elders” in the city because  of “whole houses” (1:11) or possibly many house churches.

The seven letters where delivered to individual messengers [Gk angelos]. While messengers can refer to angels the word angelos is profusely used of human messengers (1 Samuel 16:19; 19:11, 14, 20; Job 1:14, 20; Job 1:14; Luke 9:521; James 2:15). If these letters were delivered to angels, who knew their address? The letters were sent “to the angel” of each of the seven churches. Church history attests that Polycarp was the bishop of Smyrna. Ignatius was the bishop of Antioch in A. D. 108. The warnings, reproofs, commendations, etc (Rev. 2:4, 5; 3:1, 15) would better befit the pastor of each church rather than to an angel (Dr. Hoyle Bowman’s notes A Baptist Distinctive Relating to Local Church Government and Leadership).

Older Entries