If the church is a community at every level, from her shepherding leadership through her fully-engaged membership, then why do we build structures that destroy community, distort the influence of spiritual leadership, and diminish participation by the many for the voice of a few?
This is a hard post, and you must allow me some room to vent a bit. In my last few years I have had many questions and observations about the nature of the hierarchical, one-leader-at-the-top style of leadership that pervades Christendom. I have many questions, and I invite your input and critique.
Q: Why do we have “Senior” pastors, bishops and other individuals in whom we invest so much power and control, neglecting the communal imperatives of Scripture to appoint “elders” not “an elder” to shepherd the flock? And why do so many “lead” the elders and deacons and staff? It is not about the title, per se, but that too many SP’s are expected to be alone at the top. Is this the best approach?
Why do I hear so often from staff and committed volunteers, “Whatever the pastor wants, he gets, and what he does not want, we don’t do–even if it is the right thing.” Wow…is this the Church that humble, servant Jesus died to build?
The results of this model can be disastrous.
The damage, the bad decisions, the poor theology, the errant stewardship of tens of millions of dollars, the narrow teaching, the inadequate succession plans, and the cancerous nepotism are all so toxic to community. It seems like it is everywhere.
Why do we say, “At his church” or, “He’s built a great church” — really? Has “he” built a church? Why would we ever want that?
Is this part of the reason why our churches are filled with weak disciples, disengaged members, and lackluster servants who have lost heart?
Ephesians 4 says, “one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God…” but not one pastor. Hmmm. Instead it says he gave some –not one — to be pastors, apostles, prophets, etc. And it does not say, “and one of them is the leader of them all. He can hire and fire, and he should always get his way — it is all about him/her – his teaching, his vision, his values!” It sure seems that way based on the stories I hear.
This may sound harsh but if you could go behind the scenes of too many churches, and hear what many staff and key volunteers say about the hierarchical models they serve in, you might just be shocked at what goes on behind closed doors. Or maybe not.
The stories are riddled with power plays, anger dumps, favoritism (loyalty promotions some call them), lack of confrontation, belittling and berating of staff, treating elders and deacons as political action committees, and firing those who threaten their control (“God has called them elsewhere” is code sometimes for that.)
Hierarchy — not authority — is a deterrent to community in any size church. But I observe that the larger the church or organization the greater the number of layers. And thus more power is given to a few over so many. It can be scary — for the people AND the leader “at the top.”
Your thoughts? Am I off base? Really wrestling with what I hear and see, and what I believe the Bible teaches about leadership in community and for community, not lording it over a community.
Ministry & Non-Profit Services
Business Services
Leadership Development
Books & Resources
Pingback: » Flatten the Church Church Leadership
#1 by tim bergren on October 17, 2011 - 4:50 pm
Quote
I don’t think you’re off-base at all. How can the gifts that represent the fullness of Christ in Ephesians 4 exist in one person (With one exception—Jesus)? For the church to reach the potential that Jesus envisioned, ALL 5 of the apostolic gifting must be present and functioning.
#2 by Bob Santos on October 24, 2011 - 4:23 pm
Quote
It seems to me that this is an identity issue more than anything else. I don’t have a problem with a leader who has a good bit of authority if that leader is humbly investing in others to grow them into mature disciples of Christ. When authority becomes self-centered and egotistical; however, we end up building our own kingdoms rather than the kingdom of God. I’m not saying that structure is unimportant, but that first and foremost our mentality needs a total makeover.
#3 by Bill Donahue on October 27, 2011 - 7:30 am
Quote
Thanks Bob — I think you are right about the identity issue — authority is not a bad thing — but I would also contend that the humble leader shares authority and empowers others, a Jesus gave authority to his inner circle, even though they hardly represented the most gifted, prepared leaders! Appreciate the thoughts.
#4 by Bill Donahue on October 27, 2011 - 7:32 am
Quote
Thanks Tim – The sharing of the gifts means the sharing of the “offices” though I have never liked that term. It implies a static role versus a functioning capacity. Thanks for your comments and encouragement!
#5 by Bob Santos on October 27, 2011 - 10:13 am
Quote
Bill, I am in total agreement with your “contention.” I believe that God still calls and empowers apostles in today’s church. But more often than not, the representation I see of an apostle is a far cry from how Paul described his ministry. He paid an extreme price in order to lift up and empower others. For the most part we’ve reversed that order. Two thousand years of Christianity and the deadly leaven of pride continues to undermine the effectiveness of the church. How we need our Savior to thoroughly transform our hearts!
#6 by Pat Pope on October 29, 2011 - 8:08 am
Quote
You speak the truth, my friend. While I’m not against the senior pastor model, how that model gets fleshed out can be problematic. I recently left a church that up until 5 or 6 years ago was led by an authoritarian pastor for 27 years. It was his way or the highway and after I became an elder, I found out just how that had affected the congregation. After this pastor left the church with a great many of the people, those who were left and still serving had been greatly affected by his leadership and not all in positive ways. I found leaders who didn’t know how to lead, I found those resistant to new ways of doing things because they felt the way things had been done in the past was the only way to do things, etc., etc. ad nauseum. I was even slandered by a fellow elder when I didn’t do things as he thought I should. I can’t tell you the things and people I fought for because those “in control” couldn’t see it. Like their former pastor, it was their way or the highway. I chose the highway. All I can say now is, heaven help their new pastor.
#7 by Richard Heyduck on October 29, 2011 - 11:02 am
Quote
As a pastor in a very hierarchical denomination, with clear lines and expectations for top-down authority, I see the unhealthiness of the model. While some who inhabit that hierarchy are spiritually adept, wise and godly leaders, the general message is: We’re at the top, we’re over you, don’t think for yourself, just trust us.
#8 by Chris White on October 29, 2011 - 1:31 pm
Quote
Your writings sure resonate with my experience. I was appointed an elder when our church went to a multiple leaders format–stayed on when they decided to go back to a senior pastor format–and felt the effects of not being effective unless the senior pastor agreed with my proposals and actively and openly supported the. It was quite frustrating to have him agree with me and then do nothing to promote it. I left that congregation which I attended for almost 20 years, where my two daughters were raised, and went to a church where there were elders and where they empowered home church leaders to be churches–quite flattened out! If you are not aware of this community i strongly suggest you check it out–it is in the Columbus Ohio area and it is called Xenos. Xenos.org
Thanks for the post,
#9 by nathan on October 29, 2011 - 2:24 pm
Quote
But what does this actually look like in practice? Haven’t we seen that chaos and personality driven control rises from congregational models too? (The answer is an obvious “yes”.)
How do we move beyond theory/principles to an actual set of practices?
#10 by Steve on October 29, 2011 - 3:00 pm
Quote
I wish I could get this article into the hands of every “pastor” in America. Thanks.
#11 by EricMichaelSay on October 30, 2011 - 12:13 am
Quote
This is a great question Bill, and one that I don’t bring up with many that I meet anymore. Once I started asking these kinds of questions, I began to see the church as a Rubix cube. Like when you get all the parts of one side to line up, except the center piece, which always has to be the starting point.
Keep digging, and you’ll find more opportunities for reform.
#12 by Marty Mills on November 22, 2011 - 9:37 am
Quote
Growing up in church in rural southern Illinois, I grew up with the opposite governing system. There wasn’t any authority structure other than the entire church body discussing (arguing) and voting on everything from carpet selection to minister’s salary and vacation time. The Pastor had little authority and was kept in a nice neat box so the generational families in the church could keep their seats of power.
I have witnessed, not firsthand, what you described. I agree it’s just as flawed. However, I do feel very blessed to currently serve in an enviroment where our Senior Pastor is a servant leader and works hard to empower others and is accountable to our Elder team.
So for me, it’s a blessing and a joy to be in a place that has solid leadership structure. It’s not perfect and we disagree at times on preferences, but it’s so much better than the model I grew up with.
#13 by Bill Donahue on November 28, 2011 - 9:59 pm
Quote
Thanks Marty — it is really about the environment, not the titles. Sounds like it is working because or humble leadership. Great.
#14 by Bill Donahue on November 28, 2011 - 10:03 pm
Quote
I am not necessarily replacing the 1-top-dog-leader model with a congregational approach (where everyone including the ill-informed and immature has an equal vote) — I am trying to get something more communal — a leadership team where there are truly “equals” not one “head” above all the other core leaders. Call the elders or whatever, but this is the biblical intent.