bobyoungresources.com

To be a leader in the church is to walk the tightrope between control and freedom. Jesus refers to himself as the Good Shepherd. Church leaders are shepherds. The shepherd metaphor says a great deal about church leadership. The shepherd leads the sheep by controlling them when they wander or when dangers threaten. But day in and day out, the shepherd leads the sheep by observing (overseeing) them and helping/letting them choose the green pastures and still waters. The shepherd does not force the sheep to eat and drink; he only provides the environment in which they survive and flourish. There is a tension that exists between knowing when to be firm, demanding and controlling, and when to be patient and distant and freeing. This tension can be described in various ways. It is often described in the contrast between leadership and management.

One goal of church leadership is that every member be engaged and involved. The New Testament describes the church as a body where every member has a specific activity or role. The church is edified when every member does its own work. This means that members must be prepared for their work of ministry and service. Leadership involves walking among the flock; leadership involves mentoring–demonstrating and encouraging involvement.

Obviously, some measure of compliance is essential in the church, but what is equally or even more important is members who are actively engaged in the work–members who feel ownership and are interested in whether the church advances or declines. Church leaders, LISTEN! People do not engage by being managed; they do not engage by being controlled.

The church members who are involved and engaged are those who feel personal purpose, fulfillment, and responsibility. Guiding, equipping, and training are important, but the members who are most involved are those who are acting under their own steam. (More accurately, they are active because of their personal relationship with Christ.) Effective church leaders realize that this requires a different model of leadership. Growing churches are generally filled with members who have a tremendous amount of autonomy over what they do. Growing churches are those whose members led by God’s spirit help determine the shape of the ministry in the local church. In growing churches, the members are given a lot of autonomy over what they do, how they do it, when they do it, and who they do it with. When the members of the body help define ministry on the basis of the opportunities they see, when the members are encouraged to work together to accomplish the tasks for which they share passion, and when they are freed to help work through the details, ownership is virtually automatic.

A missionary with many years of experience was asked why some churches in the U.S. and in the mission field fail to grow. The context of the question was a conversation in which it was observed that many religious groups are growing tremendously, both in the U.S. and in the mission field. Why do some churches grow and other churches not grow?
His response focused on methods of leadership. Controlling leaders stifle the church and keep it from reaching its potential through the active involvement and the work of every member. When everything has to go through the preacher or business meeting or elders, when church leaders are fearful or threatened by what the flock may be saying or doing or thinking, the church seldom grows.

Effective leaders provide examples of excellence. A person may occupy a position of leadership without being excellent, but that person will struggle to lead effectively and powerfully without a personal commitment to excellence.

A person of excellence is committed. Excellence cannot be scheduled for selected time periods of life. Persons committed to excellence begin early and stay late. Said another way, the things to which I am genuinely committed are the focus points of my life. My commitments are what I think about constantly. They are what I eat, breathe, and sleep. A church member said to a preacher with an outstanding knowledge of the Bible, “I would give my life to know the Bible the way you do.” To which he replied, “That is what I gave.” Because excellence requires intense commitment, one chooses to be excellent.

A person of excellence is constant. What we are at any given moment is a function of what we are at every moment. Excellence is not sporadic. I cannot be excellent today and not tomorrow. Excellence depends on the habits of our lives. The habits of our lives make us what we are down deep where no one else can see. Those who have limited knowledge of our lives may judge our efforts and our lives as excellent, but excellence in the Christian life comes from the commitments by which we constantly live our lives moment by moment.

A person of excellence is consistent and dependable. A leader cannot choose to lead or not to lead. Excellent leadership is not intermittent. I do not get a day off when I do not have to be a good example or when I can cast aside the qualities that characterize excellence. Likewise, excellence in leadership is not part-time.

A person of excellence is an example to others. Such a person goes above and beyond, does more than is expected, and provides a contrast between mediocrity and excellence.

A person of excellence understands, establishes, and lives by priorities. Excellence comes from wholehearted, 24/7 commitments to the priorities of life. In the case of the Christian leader who wishes to be excellent, the priorities of life are those that God places in the path.

Note: I am indebted to Frank Viola for helping me think through some of these summarizing principles. Some of the points are his, both in concept and in wording.

Following are some summary points to assist in establishing a biblical definition of Christian leadership. The Bible does not specifically use the words “leader” or “leadership,” but the concept of leaders and leadership is a biblical concept. The words “leader” and “leadership” are used at times in this summary, but in the biblical sense of those words. Read, think, study.

-1- Jesus Christ has all authority; only Jesus Christ is the head of the church. In the church, authority flows from Jesus Christ. Whatever leadership exists in the church depends on Jesus. Because every member of the body is guided by the head, every member of the church of Christ knows, is guided by, and is authorized to reveal Christ’s mind and will. Christ speaks and works through every member of his body; every member of the body has access to the mind of Christ. The will and mind of Christ is not the exclusive property of a few special members.
When Jesus’ apostles understood the kingdom in terms of authority and levels of importance, Jesus clearly said that it would not be so among his followers, that his kingdom would be different. The apostles were expecting an earthly kingdom and were thinking of the kingdom in earthly terms, but Jesus came to establish a spiritual kingdom. Jesus’ model of being the head and having authority was not like the model used in the world. Earthly understandings of authority, power, and control, even when used for good, are contrary to the nature of the spiritual kingdom, the church.
On the contrary, Jesus said that leadership in the spiritual kingdom comes through service and sacrifice. This description of the nature of the kingdom, and leadership and authority in the kingdom, changes everything. When we focus on following and imitating Jesus, serving Him and serving others, we naturally lead by our example, both in word and in action.

-2- That Jesus has all authority in the church does not imply an “office.” Jesus is the head of the church, but since the church is his body and is a living organism, the concept of office is not a functional description of his role. As head of the church, Jesus shares his fullness with his body as he gives gifts and empowers for ministry and service. The word pictures used in the New Testament to describe the relationship between Jesus and his body do not support the concept of leading the church from an “office” or “position.” The relationship is personal, shepherd/sheep, groom/bride, head/body, husband/wife, brothers.

-3- None of the words for “office” in the Greek language are used to describe a function or role in the church. Never in the New Testament is leadership in the church a matter of position or office. The use of “office” in translating 1 Tim. 3:1 is more based on church practice than the Greek words. The text uses a form of episkopos (bishop, superintendent) and literally says that if a man desires “superintendence” (to serve as or be a superintendent) he desires a good work. One can describe leadership as a work or service, ministry or task based on these words, but to think of an “office” is to read into the text based on already existing understandings or practices of church leadership.

-4- The New Testament never uses the term “leader” to describe those who care for, oversee, or counsel the church. In some translations, the word “leader” appears in a few texts (Heb. 13:17 and Rom 12:8). These are not good translations of the Greek. The words are better translated as guard, give care, or guide. They are verbs not nouns. The New Testament clearly identifies a group of men in each local congregation that are responsible for guiding, overseeing, and caring for the church. These are variously described as elders, bishops and pastors, all of which are descriptions of the same group. But, these are not the “leaders” in a local church. They simply minister in specific tasks that are different from the tasks of other members of the church.

-5- The words used to describe overseers (also called elders and shepherds or pastors in the New Testament) are an important part of the biblical organization of the church, but these ministries or functions are not offices or positions that have inherent authority or control over other believers. In some sense of the word, the overseers/elders/shepherds lead, but so do others—prophets, evangelists, teachers, exhorters, those who have gifts of mercy, helps, and every other function in the body of Christ. Christ has all authority, and every Christian has authority to speak according to the word of God. All Christians lead according to their specific gifts and ministries. For more on this concept, study the teaching of 1 Corinthians 12, Romans 12, Ephesians 4, and 1 Peter 4.
If the Bible does not speak about a matter, there is no spiritual authority to be exercised. The use of the word authority in non-biblical matters or decisions leads to faulty conclusions because of secular understandings. The Bible uses multiple words to describe the roles, responsibilities, and work of those who care for and provide spiritual counsel and wisdom for the church.

-6- Jesus Christ redefined leadership. He taught against the positional and titular view of religious leadership that was common in Judaism (Matt. 23:8-13; Luke 20:46-47). He denied the hierarchical view of leadership that was common among the Gentiles (Matt. 20:25-28; Mark 10:43-45; Luke 22:24-26). He said that it would be different among his followers. He taught service and sacrifice as the way to influence others.

-7- We should not be surprised that the New Testament does not emphasize leadership in the contemporary use of the concept. Rather, the New Testament emphasizes following Jesus and living as a servant of Christ and a servant to others. According to the New Testament, all are gifted, all are servants (ministers), all are priests, and all have ministry as members of the body. All are called to be examples of Jesus.

-8- Hebrews 13:17 does not teach obedience to leaders. “Obey them that are over you.” The Greek word for obey in this passage is not hupakuo, the usual word for obedience in the New Testament. It is peitho (middle/passive) meaning to yield to persuasion or to be persuaded. The author says, “Allow yourselves to be persuaded by those who are more mature in Christ than you are.” Further, the words “over” and “rule” in some translations of this text do not reflect the Greek. Elders are not rulers or lords; they are not over the flock, they are among it (1 Pet. 5:1; Acts 20:28).

-9- Therefore, the modern and post-modern concepts of leadership that focus on control and obedience are not helpful or applicable in the church. If Christians spend time focusing on following Jesus Christ and sharing whatever He has given them with others, i.e. functioning as a member of the body and serving others, rather than focusing on how to be a leader in the secular sense of the word, the Kingdom of God will advance much more rapidly.

-10- Many Christians and churches follow a worldly model of leadership rather than the New Testament description of leadership. The New Testament reveals the nature of the church. The New Testament tells us how the church should be understood and how it should function. The church is divinely ordained not humanly constructed; it is a spiritual organism not a secular organization. Understanding the nature of the church changes our understanding of leadership in the church.

Is it possible that the biblical model of Christian leadership could be better taught by focusing on how to follow Jesus Christ rather than focusing on how to be a leader?

One way to deal with the leadership dilemma is to quit using the words “lead, leader, leadership.” That was the suggestion of one brother in Latin America. Certainly that is one way to deal with the problem, but in my mind it is an insufficient solution. The church, called to be a contrast community in the world, must make clear that secular definitions and practices of leadership are very different from biblical descriptions. The problem is not the use of the word leadership. The problem is that our concept of leadership is more informed by the world than by the Bible. We must redefine Christian leadership in order to help the church be what God calls it to be, and in order to help the church begin to grow again.

Let me quote a brief excerpt from the previous article in this series:
“In the church described in the New Testament, all Christians were called to be leaders according to the gifts, ministries, and activities they had been given. Every Christian was called and empowered to be involved in the work of the church and to be an influence for Christ, to assist in the edification of the body and to grow into spiritual maturity. Different Christians were given different gifts, different ministries, different roles, and different responsibilities. Never did these become a matter of position or office.”

Ephesians 4 clearly describes the preparation and ministry of every Christian and the activity and importance of every member of the body. Every member is important. Every member is called to spiritual maturity. The results are that the church is self-edified and unified, and that each member grows into a “little Christ,” attaining a measure of the stature or Christ. Every Christian is called to be a leader in his own sphere of influence and ability.

It is difficult to read the New Testament and conclude that clergy and laity distinctions existed. All Christians are laos (the Greek word for people, thus the people of God), including elders and ministers. This word occurs three times in 1 Pet. 2:9-10, always referring to all of God’s people. It never refers to only a part of God’s people or to a portion of the Christian assembly. Equally, all Christians are kleros (the Greek word means a lot or inheritance). This word is applied to all Christians in 1 Pet. 5:3, where elders are instructed not to be “lords over God’s heritage.” Elders are given the care of the kleros (heritage), not dominion. Kleros> is never used in the New Testament to refer to a special group of Christians. All Christians are God’s people (laity, if you will) and God’s heritage (clergy, if you will).

Historically, numerous problems have arisen because of the distinction between clergy and laity.

• The distinction between clergy and laity is the first step away from the biblical model found in the New Testament. Some Christian groups have discarded the use of the terms clergy and laity but have retained the reality in a faulty model of church organization, maintaining distinctive “offices” and “positions,” or insisting on authority and control, rather than focusing on ministry and service.
• The distinction between clergy and laity confuses the distinction between the two covenants, between the Old Testament and the New Testament. In the Old Testament, God established the priesthood and gave regulations for the separation of the priests from the general population of Israel, but God does not intend for the New Testament church to have certain “holy men” who are the only ones qualified and responsible for leadership and ministry.
• The distinction between clergy and laity undermines New Testament authority, because a select group of Christians becomes the interpreters and controllers of Scripture.
• The distinction between clergy and laity keeps the church from being what God intends—a functioning body. The distinction limits the work of the body. It demeans the role of the majority of the members of the body and excludes them from certain parts of the work.
• The distinction between clergy and laity disconnects daily life from the spiritual life; it separates the inner world from the outer world. Some members of the body are more spiritually mature; others are not expected to reach spiritual maturity. Spiritual maturity and insight is only for a limited group. Ministry becomes the exclusive responsibility of a certain class of Christians.
• The distinction between clergy and laity confuses the nature of the differences between various ministries or responsibilities in the church. In the New Testament, the distinctions between ministries are functional not hierarchical.

How must we redefine biblical leadership? We must clearly set forth the nature of biblical or Christian leadership: focused directional influence that persuades others. This phrase says four things. (1) Biblical leadership is focused. It points to Jesus. (2) Biblical leadership is directional. It helps others know how to move forward; it mentors and empowers. (3) Biblical leadership is influence. It has an impact on the decisions and actions of others. (4) Biblical leadership is persuasive. It changes minds, so that eventually followship is not based on control but on changed thinking.

Consider these principles.

• We must recognize that leadership exists in the church.
• Biblical leadership is not exclusive. We must emphasize that every Christian is called to be a leader in the biblical sense of the word. All Christians lead in various ways and in different areas.
• Every Christian receives gifts, ministries, and activities that call and empower to be involved in the work of the church, to be an influence for Christ, to assist in the edification of the body, and to grow into spiritual maturity.
• Different Christians are given different gifts, different ministries, different roles, and different responsibilities. The differences are functional not hierarchical.
• Biblical leadership is not based on position or office.
• Biblical leadership does not follow worldly definitions of success. Biblical leadership is not successful based on the number of followers.
• Biblical leadership is based on service, not being served.
• Ministry is not exclusive but is the calling and responsibility of every Christian.
• Biblical leadership honors every member of the church. We must avoid demeaning some church members as less capable and less important.
• Biblical leadership involves both teaching and example.