Term Limits

One of the suggestions I have received (to deal with the problem of leadership gone awry) is to have "term Limits" on leadership positions. I've seen this done several ways: one, to have leaders serve for specified periods of time, another where at intervals, church leaders are "reaffirmed."

Though I am persuaded that a lot of business practices are good practices for the church (budgeting, candor, accountability etc.), "term limits" is neither a business practice, nor a healthy church practice. It's more political than anything else and that influence is not one we want to embrace.

The whole concept of term limits flies in the face of what church leadership is about. Church leadership is about leading a family. It involves relationships and time, and time building relationships and reputation. Because Church is an all volunteer organization, absolutely NO ONE is going to follow anybody just because they have been given a "position" -- nor should they be expected to do so. Leaders who expect folks to just "fall in" because the New Testament prescribes "submission" are going to be disappointed -- and rightly so.

It's one thing for a leader/leadership that (in the course of time, despite proven wisdom, a demonstrated mind for Christ and heart for his people, and despite many and close relationships) encounters a recalcitrant flock. It's another matter entirely for a leader/leadership virtually unknown by the flock to encounter opposition. In the first instance, the flock needs to think seriously about the direction it is taking. Judgment awaits. In the latter instance, the leadership needs to think about the attitude it is exhibiting. Judgment awaits them too.

Why would we want leaders to have term limits who have developed long and lasting relationships with those entrusted to their care? The new leaders will have no such relationships and the goodwill and respect built up over the years by the old leaders will be lost. The most important part of church leadership will be lost. We'll end up with . . . politicians, leaders more concerned with agendas than the welfare of the family.

So . . . how DO we deal with leaders who have lost touch with their charges? These texts are instructive:

Galatians 6:1 -- Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.

Matthew 18:15-16 -- "If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that `every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.'

In other words, when leadership goes awry, it is the responsibility of the "followship" to take leadership aside for consultation. The consultation should be private and personal. And if there are many aggrieved, they still should talk to them personally, one on one -- not as a group (which is where most folks want to start). The idea is to renew and rebuild, or build further, the relationships so vital to the healthy life of a church family.

The problems are not solved overnight. Family problems seldom are, and family problems are tough. At times you may think: 'What must the world think of us when we have these difficulties?' But, at this juncture, what the world thinks is immaterial. We are the family of God. It only matters what God thinks of his family. We must work through our problems to find His approval. When we divide and "begin again," the world sees us looking just like the world (divorcing, remarrying, bouncing from one family to another) and we perpetuate a cancer that will forever keep us from being seen by the world as the body of Christ.

Driving the Herd or Shepherding the Sheep?

[At the end of last week's column I said we would address the matter of whether it was ever appropriate for leaders to draw a line in the sand. Please allow me to delay that post a bit. I want to spend a little time addressing comments from last week's post.]

I agonized more than usual before posting last week's blog: "Please Leave Peacefully." Frankly, I found the story on which the post was based more than a little astounding and wondered if any Church leadership could really be so blind and insensitive.

Then came the email response. Others too have had the experience, so yes, the idea that Church Elders would make decisions that would deliberately alienate their flock (and not care) is not hypothetical, but real. One writer (not a preacher) responded that such had happened in his congregation and resulted in losing half their membership -- including all potential future Elders.

There are at least three basic issues in all this:

1) Elders may have a lack of understanding regarding the NATURE OF THEIR CALLING. It is the singular purpose of Elders (Pastors, Bishops) to care for the people God has entrusted to them by virtue of their appointment. Period. Nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing is to get in the way of this duty. Everything Elders get involved in can be delegated to others EXCEPT for looking after the welfare of a congregation's members. That makes everything else less important and anything that gets in the way of that ministry is nothing but a hindrance.

2) Elders may have a lack of understanding regarding HOW THEY SHOULD CARRY OUT THEIR MINISTRY. The board room is a poor place for shepherds unless they have gathered for prayer. Every Elder is responsible for knowing where their flock lives, what's going on in their lives, what their struggles are, and where their spiritual weaknesses lie. It's a tough job, beyond the abilities of any one man -- which is why there is always a plurality of Elders mentioned in the New Testament. Shepherding is done over dinner, and in personal visits in homes and hospitals where members can talk privately and confidently about their greatest dreams and most frightening fears. It is done on the telephone and with notes of encouragement via email and snail mail. It is done by attending the baseball/basketball/football games of our children and in the company of other adults where fellowship and bonding occurs. In short shepherding is done by being with people and sharing in their lives so they know you care about them. It is NOT done by driving them in the direction you think they ought to go. Shepherds lead. They don't drive. And the sheep know the shepherd's voice, and follow him with confidence, because they know their shepherd loves them and has only their best interest at heart -- not just because he's told them that, but because he's showed them that in his association with them.

3) Elders may have a poor sense of what their VISION for their church ought to be. Elders (and preachers too) often equate vision with church size, progressiveness, and community recognition. But the vision of Church leadership should focus on two things: bringing people to Christ and getting them to heaven. Are Bill, Bob, Sally and Susan Christians? Are Jamal, Jerry, Alice and Paula walking in the light of Christ or flirting with darkness? The vision is to get them to heaven. Anything, no matter how noble or desirable, that gets in the way of this vision is but a cataract and must be peeled away.

One of my correspondents hit the nail on the head: the problem in last week's scenario is that Church leadership lost touch with the very people they were supposed to be leading. The result was a lost flock.

Please Exit Peacefully

[Note: It has been characteristic in Churches of Christ that our worship music in assembly is always, only, in acappella style.

The reasoning behind this is, in a nutshell, as follows: The early church worshiped without instrumental music -- a known historical fact. The music worship of the church was exclusively acappella for the first thousand years of Christian history. Gradually, however, in an effort either to enhance the singing, substitute for the singing, or just make church music more popular, the Church universal has introduced instrumental music in the past millennium. It is a relatively recent innovation. Not everyone has accepted it. The Greek Orthodox church does not, nor do a few others, including the Church of Christ. Our goal has been to imitate the early Church in our worship, ministry, and fellowship. So . . . instrumental music has been out.

The goal of this posting however is not to argue the validity of this practice, but rather, to comment on leadership.]

Today at lunch I was told of a church where the Elders, on a Sunday morning, arose as one to make this announcement (I'm paraphrasing): "We have decided, in order to enhance our communion experience, that we will have instrumental music playing softly in the background during the Lord's Supper. We know that this will disappoint some of you, and upset others. All that we ask is, if you leave because of it, you leave peacefully."

I cannot imagine a business, in a highly competitive situation, saying to its customer base: We are going to radically change our product. We know you will not like it. We know some of you will stop being our customers. We wish you well, just don't say bad things about us."

When it comes to the Church, however, this may be one of those times when the business model doesn't fit us too well. The Church is first and foremost "family." We are the family of God. Nothing is more important than holding this family together. Those who divide it stand condemned even if their cause seems noble. A leadership willing to write off family members in order to pursue their own agenda is leading nowhere God's people need to go. What they are doing is perpetuating the cancers of self-interest and division. The next time some potentially divisive issue arises, will they say "adios" to more of their number? What they are really saying is: 'some people in this family are not important and we don't care if you come to the reunions or not.' Who would want to be a part of a family like that? How will such a church family ever really be successful in making disciples (what Jesus says is our task) when the very trait of being a disciple is that we love one another?

This takes us back to leaders focusing on the right goal. Elders, the highest level of earthly leadership in the Church, are charged with the welfare -- spiritual and physical -- of the people who comprise their church. That's it. Period. They cannot do that by kicking the sheep out of the fold, or making it difficult for them to stay. Where we go, as the Church, or as a congregation, we go together, or we don't go at all.

Like it or not, to save us all, we move at the pace of our slowest members. Until Jesus comes, the only one interested in culling the flock is Satan.

Having written all this, might there ever be a time to draw a line in the sand so to speak? That's next week.

Reading Scripture Aloud

In Jesus' day, scripture was not read silently and reading scripture occupied a central place in synagogue worship.

Since the worship of the Church was patterned after that of the synagogue, we should not be surprised that reading scripture aloud should occupy a prominent place in our assemblies. Admittedly, the importance of its place in practice ebbs and flows, but any church that doesn't have a spot for the reading of scripture should re-think the matter. Paul was not looking for "worship filler" when he told Timothy to "give attention to the public reading of scripture" (1 Timothy 4:13).

I mean by this also that scripture reading should not be purely perfunctory. I have heard scripture reading on more than one occasion when I had no idea what place the reading had for the assembly. And before the sermon, I have heard entirely too many passages that had nothing to do with the sermon (or perhaps I should say the sermon had nothing to do with it). If the reading of a text has no obvious meaning for the hearers, is it any surprise that, over the years, the hearers come to view the text as irrelevant for their lives?

Here are some suggestions for readers, and those who plan the reading.

1) Length of reading. When Jesus was asked to read in the synagogue, he chose a scant 2 verses from Isaiah 61 (Luke 4:18-19). I'm persuaded the synagogue had no idea where Jesus was going with that passage, but the simple reading of the text made a point. What point do you think people should get from your reading? Read enough to make the point. But it is possible that the length of the reading will obscure the point -- or be too complicated. I have heard -- again, more times than I can remember -- people read the entirety of Isaiah 53 before a communion service. The reading is simply too long to hold people's attention and any number of sections within the chapter can make a relevant point to the communion.

2) Explanation. First of all, be sure you understand the meaning of the reading. Once I asked a brother to read Galatians 3:24-25 before my sermon -- expecting him simply to read. The text says:
"Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law."

The reader began: "In this passage, Paul tells why we no longer need the Old Testament." He didn't understand the passage and I had to spend time not originally allocated to that sermon explaining why his statement was not true.

Second, if you are unsure your audience will get the meaning of the text -- relevance -- take a little time to explain. Be brief. If it takes you over 30 seconds, it's too long. In explaining Isaiah 61 in the synagogue, Jesus took six what turned out to be six verses. The power of his brief explanation is seen in the response of his audience: they tried to kill him! Lengthy explanations are called "sermons," and in today's assemblies, there's only time for one of those.

3) Practice. Far too many people fancy themselves public speakers. Every speech, for them, is spontaneous, in the moment -- and wholly unprepared. I have a pulpit in my home study, and each Sunday morning, I begin at that pulpit preaching that morning's sermon. I go through every sermon twice. Every intonation of my voice is practiced -- and that's just the delivery part. It doesn't count the preparation of the sermon itself. I've been doing this for over 35 years. If you think you can jot down a few notes and "wing it" successfully, you're fooling only yourself.

Reading aloud may be a gift for some, but it is mostly a craft that can be honed. If reading doesn't come easily to you, you'll need practice, practice, practice to get it right. Ask someone to help you with pronunciation if you find yourself stumbling over words. Try committing the passage to memory so the reading will flow from familiarity. You don't have to be reluctant to read aloud because your ability to read is poor. With enough practice, no one will ever know.

Ask someone to listen to you read -- someone who will be honest. Some readers have no trouble recognizing words, but their reading suffers because they emphasize the wrong words. Note the following text from Galatians 6 as an example. I heard it read a while back and the reader emphasized the words I have in all caps: BROTHERS, if someone IS caught in a SIN, you who are spiritual SHOULD restore him gently. But watch YOURSELF, or you also may BE tempted. ² Carry EACH other’s burdens, and IN this way you will fulfill THE law of Christ.

It was a horrible reading. Try this instead: Brothers, [pause] if someone is caught in a sin, [pause]you who are SPIRITUAL should restore him GENTLY. But WATCH yourself, or you ALSO may be tempted. ² Carry each other’s burdens, [pause] and in THIS way you will fulfill the law of Christ.

You may want to listen to a professional do the reading first so you will get an idea what the passage should sound like. Audio Bibles are wonderful tools to help. I sometimes listen to the sermons of popular preachers; not to get a sermon, but to hear it. Preachers are usually heard gladly not so much because of what they say, but because of how they say it. And I have learned from many of them.

Reading the word of God is important. It is His word, they are His thoughts. And you, for the moment, are His voice.

On Target With Church Business

I do not know Tony Morgan -- but I probably should. Our Youth Minister, Josh Byrd, put me on to Mr. Morgan's website this past week. His article was entitled: "What if Target operated like a Church?" The thoughts were so good I decided to share them with you this week, along with a few observations on my own.

Morgan wrote: If Target did business like the Church:

• Instead of having men’s and women’s clothing departments, they would be called clever names like Impact and Embrace that are completely meaningless to new shoppers.
• Each department in the store would have its own logo to go with their clever name. And, of course, all those logos would be different than the logo on the front of the store.
• The workers in each department would all have their own t-shirts and flyers to promote what’s available in their departments. The youth clothing department would, of course, have the best flyers.
• The store manager and his wife would be pictured on the front page of the website.
• You wouldn’t actually be able to buy anything from the website, but each department would have its own page explaining why they are such a great department and the the information would be several months out-of-date.
• If you are in the shoe department and have a question about flashlights, the shoe department employee has no idea how to help you because it doesn’t have anything to do with shoes.
• Shoppers would be able to start their own departments so that they can buy the items that they want to buy. Don’t worry…that means there will certainly be a clothing department for singles.
• Shoppers would also be able to appoint their own store manager and then serve on committees and boards to tell the store manager what to do.
• The store would only be open one day a week between 9:00 a.m. and noon and on the first Wednesday evening of every month.

Ouch!

Businesses know what their primary purpose is. Good businesses constantly evaluate their actions in view of their primary purpose. Superfluous actions that obscure their mission or inhibit fulfillment of their purpose are discarded.

But not always. Sometimes businesses hold on to outdated models due to tradition or political constraints, or due to self-imposed constraints. When that happens, the purpose suffers -- and you know what happens to those businesses.

The Church, and every congregation should be aware of their primary mission. Every program and ministry should be regularly evaluated on the basis of how they are helping to fulfill the mission.

More about that next week.

Cultivating Leaders

Last week, I wrote about the importance of leadership, and the need to cultivate it within the church. An Elder wrote and asked: “How do we do this?” "Elder training is typically 'on the job' and comes after selection and appointment. But that only exposes new elders to 'meetings' and 'budgets.' How do we cultivate leaders?’

[In the Church of Christ, our highest leaders are called “Elders” and must have specific qualifications – delineated by such texts as 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 to be appointed. But Elders are not the only leaders and what I am about to suggest will apply to all leadership situations in the Church.]

First, there must be PURPOSE. A current leader, or current leaders, must deliberately come to the conclusion they must plan for and cultivate leaders for the future.

Second, there must be UNDERSTANDING, an understanding of what that specific leaders work actually involves. A teacher in the 6th grade Bible school is a leader. She knows what her job is: to present the word of God. She knows what her parameters are: Not to teach the whole Bible, but to teach the section she’s been entrusted with. She must relate to her students, shepherding them, taking an interest in them and in their lives. She must prepare her lessons to make the Bible come alive and impress upon her students how important is its message.

There must be SELECTION. She must be on the lookout for someone else, who just might take the same interest in young people she does.

There must be MENTORING. She should, with her supervisor’s approval, ask that person to join her in the class. She should explain to the teaching candidate what she is trying to do. She should model her understanding and her method, being open to the ideas of her co-teacher, becoming partners and fast friends.

I well remember two of my 3rd grade Sunday School teachers, Sister Hussey and Sister Garmon (we called all our teachers “sister” back then). Sister Hussey was the leader. It was her class and she was serious as a heart attack about it. Sister Garmon was a dear lady who was her ‘helper,’ but later, sister Garmon became my 6th grade teacher. This is the way you raise up leaders.

You may well ask, what does that have to do with Elders?

Everything! It’s just as simple.

Current Elders need to have an understanding of what their job is. It is decidedly not sitting in meetings – though there’s a lot of that. It is first and foremost, watching out for people. Praying for people. Guiding people. Encouraging people. Teaching people. Current Elders should be on the watch for men who might qualify as Elders. That’s purpose. They should identify and select some of them, perhaps telling them: “I believe you can be an Elder one day. I wish you would make it one of your goals.” Why not then mentor them by asking them to pray with you for people in the church? If there are sensitive matters, one need not share everything or betray confidences, but surely there are plenty of other things to pray about and being specifically asked to do so lends an importance to the job. Take the candidate with you to visit members in the hospital. Share the duty of praying there. Take them as you just visit in the homes of members. Talk with them about the budgeting process and take time to explain the difficult decisions you make.

Some Elders will be good at this. Some won't. Those who can, should.

And what if you select someone who is a dud? Some people, despite the fact that they want a ministry and have all the “scriptural qualifications” are decidedly inept shepherds. Others get in the ministry only to discover they are ill-suited to shepherd people. Why not spot some candidates and walk them through it, giving them an understanding of the work as you do, and observing whether they can, and will, really do it?

I can hear your reply: “Yeah, yeah, you make it all sound so simple.”

It IS simple.

It’s just not easy.

Leadership never is.

Cultivating Leadership

Businesses know the importance of leadership, and every major corporation in America is in the business of leadership development. The most successful is the IBM corporation which spends $700 million a year specifically on leadership development. One day of every quarterly directors' meeting is devoted to a discussion of leadership development. (How many Elder meetings are devoted to this?) In a recent FORTUNE magazine article (December 7, 2009 -- p. 72), J. Randall MacDonald, Human Resources chief at IBM likened his business to a race that never ends. He spoke of the competition being "one-half of an inch" behind them. The only thing keeping them in the lead is their leadership.

Our competition, as a church, is not other churches. Our competition is Satan. And whether we are in front of him, neck-in-neck, or behind and losing ground has totally to do with leadership -- or a lack of it. And our "lack" of leadership has to do, most of all, with a lack of purposeful and intentional leadership development. I see it all the time. Churches that once were dynamic, growing and full of life, led by men of vision who could inspire others to see and do the seemingly impossible are now gasping for air, led by the collective consensus of whoever shows up for the monthly business meetings.

What happened?

The leaders died off (or moved away), and no one ever made provision for their replacements. Instead, we THOUGHT the Lord would provide -- and He didn't.

I do not mean to belittle the providential care of God. No one believes more strongly in it than me. But I believe that expecting God to provide leaders this way is unbiblical. God provided Israel a leader in Moses, and Moses led Israel for forty years. When Moses died, the mantle of leadership was passed to Joshua -- an assistant who had spent forty years at leader Moses' side. The result was that during the thirty years of Joshua's leadership, Israel served the Lord. The Elders who stood at Joshua's side led after Joshua died and Israel still served the Lord. But they failed to train leaders to take their place. The story of Judges which follows is the story of the Canaanization of Israel because she had no leader -- a fact mentioned specifically four times in the book. And those judges? Read the book. These are the kind of leaders you can expect when you wait on God to provide them at the last minute.

Every congregation must have leaders who know well what the work of the Church is really about. And by the way, if you see the work of the church as simply "preaching the gospel" or "serving the community," you have yet to grasp its true calling.

We must have leaders who know what is needed in their congregation to accomplish this work -- and it changes from community to community, which is why churches whose leaders adopt the latest and greatest fads because they've been successful elsewhere usually fail.

We must have leaders who will see that the work gets done. It doesn't mean that they have to do all the work themselves, only that they see the work is done.

We must have leaders who will inspire confidence in God among the people of God.

We must have leaders who will be responsible for anticipating the future, knowing where God’s people will need to be in the years to come, and charting the course to get there. That's called vision.

We must have leaders who will guide God’s people to that future and nurture them along the way.

We must have leaders who will model the life Christ calls us all to live so that we come to know it not just by hearing, but by seeing. Paul said: "Follow me, as I follow Christ."

Why would we ever think that God would want to entrust the Church he died for to a happenstance leadership?

He wouldn't.

A recent survey conducted at Lipscomb University asked ministers: "Based on your experience. what studies do you think would be most helpful to ministers?" It's a good question. As a church leader, where do you feel most inadequate? What would help you do your job better? Ask for it. You may have to slot it in the budget. You may feel guilty about asking for a place in the budget for your own development. Get over it. It will be money well spent. You may have to pay for it yourself. Do it. You serve by appointment of the Holy Spirit, and those entrusted to your care constitute the body of Christ for which Jesus died. No cost is too great.

Who will be the next leaders at your church? You should have them picked out. Know their names. Encourage them. Appoint them to tasks that will stretch them and get them ready for the task ahead. Through the years of preparation, some may drop out. Some you thought qualified God may remove from contention. But in the end, the right people will be in place for the right job -- because it was planned with intentionality and blessed by God. And don't forget to teach them to do for others what you have done for them.

Pass it on.