In a desire to extend the Kingdom of God, has the church embraced a model of leading that is Biblically wrong? Could it be that the model of a “senior” pastor has more in common with corporate America than Biblical Christianity? In concentrating authority and responsibility for dynamic change through the life of one person, has the church today set up its “senior” pastor for failure?
Harold Sala, writing in an article entitled Are You Leading or Walking Away says,
“One of the problems of leadership is that it is often difficult for the leader to distinguish between leading a cause and being the cause. Sometimes a leader pours himself so thoroughly into the cause he represents, giving body, soul, and spirit, that his judgment and perspective become warped. The individual begins to think that he is the cause. When that happens, thinking grows fuzzy. Abuses take place that would have never happened in the early phases of leadership. The leader thinks that he or she deserves certain things: money, adulation or worship, and perhaps even sexual liberties that violate the very cause he or she represents.”
Leadership failures today are rampant in almost every section of society. The Church is, unfortunately, no different. But the environment that fans failure continues to breed church leaders who can stack the odds against themselves by believing being “senior pastor”is synonymous with “president.” Given time, an emotional situation (or a building campaign) bring allegations of wrongdoing and the winds of change begin to swirl. Depending on a variety of atmospheric conditions, thoughts of resignation promise to quiet the storm; admitting no wrongdoing, the senior pastor is replaced. A new day dawns with the hiring of another “senior pastor.” Unfortunatly, it may be a new day, but the season has not changed….
Someone once said that the best form of government is not a democracy, but a monarchy – the only problem being finding a worthy monarch. Christians find him in Christ, but until his kingdom comes, we’re stuck with mere mortals.
I’m reminded of King Saul – the cries of “give us a king,” God’s reply that “OK, but you’ll regret it” – perhaps we set our pastors on the throne we built for Saul?
Another angle to consider is this whole “cult of celebrity” dynamic that marks our society – really all of the history of mankind, when you think about it. I’ve heard of churches that passed over some of their own very able and popular associate pastors when it came time to fill the shoes of their longstanding “big name” pastor. Despite the fact that the AP’s knew the body they served, knew its dynamics, knew its needs and strengths, they just couldn’t draw the same numbers.
(I want to be careful to avoid politics in this forum, but perhaps our current president gets some unfair knocks because he’s not as slick as some other figures we’ve come to know?)
Maybe it’s a question with some obvious answers, but let’s see what comes back: why do we need (or want?) church leaders, be they pastors, elders, worship front-men, etc.? Casting aside all cynicism, and assuming everyone involved comes to the table with honest and good intentions, is there a mismatch among God’s plan for such servants, the expectations of the members of the body they serve, and the perceptions these servants have about their own roles?
Responsibilty. Someone is always responsible. All resposibility is funneled down to one man baring the weight of the entire church body.
Like Hugh mentioned above, have you (the non-church leader) really thought about the expectations of that body? You must have a Phd of Divinty, you must always say the right thing, the right way, and at the right time. You must me spotless in your appearence and demeanor. You must tell the people what they want to hear about the Gospel being sure never to offend them. Oh and you MUST expand the programs and membership. (Notice how none of those expectations have nothing to do with the Kingdom.)
With all that weight coming down to one man, it’s far too easy to place all responsibility on him. The church is not immune to our society’s obsession with finding someone to blame for our problems.
That’s why I like a plurality of leadership that is still responsible to the body. It helps eliminate the “good ole boy system” that absolute power elders tend to fall into while also giving the leadership multiple voices of accountability which helps elimate a mob mentality – an anonymous crowd against one demonized individual.
I think it’s really a form of “wordliness” in the church. It’s not “wordliness” in the sense of a neon-light wordliness – clearly seen from a distance. It’s more of a black-light type of wordliness – showing high visibility areas in order to be a “full-service” church at the expense of being a healthy church. Combine the expectations of the masses with a heart-felt desire to really meet the needs of people and you find many pastors trying to be witty, available, intriquing, organized, a visionary, and on and on, while never being able to be themself. I am very grateful to serve at Grace since we seek to expose thinking processes that would facilitate this type of behavior (hence this blog). However, I do mourn for those who have unwittingly allowed this description of a “great pastor” to wash over them and convince them that success lies at the end of the tunnel of perfect performance. The problem with perfect perfomances is that it ultimatly leads to either hypocrisy since we are not perfect, or becoming unavaliable – when people don’t know you they can’t critique you. In either situation ministry may seem to go on, but it really is simply activity dressed up in Christian garb.