My friend, Aaron and I have been slugging it out over at his blog, Regenerate. There was something about the term, “high caliber leaders,” that set me off. It has been an interesting discussion that I think you will want to check out.
O.K., I might be a little sensitive or over-reacting, but something just doesn’t seem quite right in the way I have seen leaders trained.
- What does truly biblical, Jesus-like leadership look like?
- What kind of leader will be required for the missional church of today… and tomorrow?
- What is the place of a pastor, one who “shepherds” the flock?
- How can one walk the tightrope of engaging a leadership gift and avoiding the pitfalls that so many pastors have fallen into of becoming codependent adrenaline junkies or over zealous promoters and protectors of the vision?
- How do you think church leaders should be trained?
ooohhhh, Glenn, sore spot for me. I tend to agree with what I think you’re saying.
I think that leadership engages a whole realm of gifts and callings … far too many to be packaged in one person or even a few people.
I also think that church leadership MUST look completely different from leadership in any other civic or business organization that we know of. Instead, it looks just the same, with a veneer of religious treacle spread thinly over the top of it. We cannot take the trappings of worldly power, transplant them into the church and wonder why things have so badly gone awry. And oh they have. This is why there are so very many badly hurting people now leaving the church in droves.
I think that church leadership training should be a mentor and apprenticing process. It should happen in small communities under the guidance of gray-haired men AND women. It should involve close relationships and a fairly intense and long process. It most assuredly should NOT involve university. Or at the least, that would be an undergraduate degree and then the rest would come afterwards. I’m thinking in terms of the noviate process that nuns and priests go through … but without the part where they reject the rest of the world. Does that make sense?
By: sonja on September 3, 2007
at 1:45 pm
Glenn,
Great questions. Jesus taught us how to know who to follow – and he did it very simply. Jesus did not point out the intellectual, nor the educated, nor the talented, nor even the gifted, nor the motivator, nor the visionary… Jesus pointed to the servant. He said, (paraphrasing) “Find a person who is willing to serve others by getting their hands dirty, then follow that person.” The question is not, “Who is our leader?” The question is, “Who are we following?” If we are following servants, then we are following those that Jesus pointed to. Of course, if we are following servants, then we will be serving as well.
For the most part, I don’t think Christ want to follow servants, because we don’t want to serve. Instead, we want to follow the intellectual, the educated, the talented, the gifted, the motivator, the visionary… anyone but the servant. We don’t want to get our hands dirty. We don’t want to get involved in people’s lives and have other people involved in our life. But, Jesus said to follow the servant.
-Alan
By: Alan Knox on September 3, 2007
at 2:01 pm
Glenn,
those are important questions and I think it boils down to issues of control. I posted 3 perspectives on pastoral leadership last night that may offer fresh images for the craft that do not seek to come above and control, but rather are servant to the greater truth of God in people and communities.
http://towardshope.typepad.com/towards_hope/2007/09/3-perspectives-.html
By: John Santic on September 3, 2007
at 8:38 pm
Sonja-
The connection between leadership and spiritual abuse is too often an unfortunate reality. So, too, is the way that pastors bomb out and burn out under their pressures. One of the keys is, as you mentioned, to allow more people into the leadership bubble. Unfortunately, I have found that to be a very hefty bubble in most churches. Too bad! As you said, “This is why there are so very many badly hurting people now leaving the church in droves.”
Your training ideas are interesting and bring out something that I have been saying for a long time, ministry is more about character and relationship, than knowledge.
Thanks!
By: Glenn on September 3, 2007
at 10:36 pm
Alan-
Wow! Jesus is so counter-intuitive! It sounds like you are saying that leaders are servants called to lead and development other servants. That doesn’t sound very sexy!
You bring up the messy interpersonal nature of ministry that it seems people and churches will go to great lengths to avoid. Yet, it is a real world with real people with real problems. As Nouwen said, we are wounded healers.
Profound!
“For the most part, I don’t think Christ want to follow servants, because we don’t want to serve. Instead, we want to follow the intellectual, the educated, the talented, the gifted, the motivator, the visionary… anyone but the servant. We don’t want to get our hands dirty. We don’t want to get involved in people’s lives and have other people involved in our life. But, Jesus said to follow the servant.”
By: Glenn on September 3, 2007
at 10:45 pm
John-
Your post brings to mind the limitations of role. I never heard anything of this in my training. I get this idea of working along side of God’s working in the lives of people and in the life of a community. God is at work and we are not God!
Thanks for an important contribution!
By: Glenn on September 3, 2007
at 10:52 pm
I like my experiences of mutual submission, where sometimes you lead and sometimes you follow – it’s about the recognition of the reality of our limits, honesty in our faults and openess to each other – of course since we’re crappy and self centred a lot of the time we just score points off each other and sulk when we don’t get our own way – but there you go, i have benefitted the most when people have taken risks on me and my immaturity
By: Paul on September 5, 2007
at 12:17 pm
Paul- Love, kindness, and the attitude of mutual submission sometimes buys us the opportunity for a little more truth, that could not be received not delivered outside the bounds a meaningful relationship.
By: Glenn on September 5, 2007
at 9:18 pm