Comments on: A View From the Top

By: Josh

Josh — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:24:47 +0000

For the sake of not leaving a novel, I’ll say that a lot of churches are run like businesses for two reasons:

(1) Most churches meet in a building, which creates a financial burden for the church. Not to mention- salaries, programs, new property acquisition (for some), etc. Money needs to come in for these things. The more people, the more money. What better place to look for a model than the top corporations in our society.

(2) Pride. Plain and simple. Any CEO or person in a significant position of power has the constant temptation of feeling like they were solely responsible for making that company, project, church, etc. what it is today. No one in those positions are immune to that temptation…not even in the church. Pride leads to greed, which leads to manipulation.

Of course this is not all churches and pastors….just a general statement for possible reasons the church tends to operate like Wal-Mart.

By: Tyler

Tyler — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:23:23 +0000

I think you nailed something that many overlook. Most people WANT to be led. They don’t want any part of making key decisions, they want to have other people to do that for them. Overcoming this might be even more important than having a shared leadership structure.

By: Tyler

Tyler — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:21:56 +0000

Jeff-

Partially I agree with you. A lot of great things have come about because one person had a vision and had great people behind him or her. The problem becomes that when one person holds the power either people eventually become “yes men” or they leave. There are very few circumstances when this isn’t true.

By: Jan Owen

Jan Owen — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:05:44 +0000

well actually i said it encapsulates the spirit of shared leadership – it’s not a verse on leadership per se, but one that speaks to the attitude necessary for it to succeed. There is no option for shared leadership if we can’t submit to one another at some level. A humble heart is needed to share….

Also my comments about authoritarianism went back to Tyler’s original post/question asked – they were not personal to you in any way since I don’t know you.

Anyway, I know there are qualifications for leadership. I actually train church leaders and teach that to them and to the team i’ve led for 11 years. I just really do believe in the wisdom of leading with the accountability of a team. I did this for years as a worship pastor and it strengthened my team and ministry. And it protected me on many levels. In my marriage, my husband does this and it protects our family and gives additional wisdom that one person may lack.

I love leading in community and see many benefits. That’s all I was trying to say. So sorry if my words offended as that was never my intent.

By: eric

eric — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:32:45 +0000

Why are most churches run the same way as most large organizations and businesses?

because most people are afraid of being different in another area and losing the tight grip we all have on self preservation. It looks nice but it cant work because the ideology of church is different from buisnesses.

By: b/

b/ — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:33:55 +0000

I didn’t say anything about dictating or having authoritarian leadership. Those are assumptions. I don’t dictate my wife. But I lead because that’s what I’ve been called to do. The passage clearly demonstrates a legitimate distinction between who’s leading and who’s not leading. I’m also a “senior leader” but I also submit to my senior pastor. I lead people. He leads people and leads me. We are one. But he still leads and allows me to lead people. His level does not make him authoritarian, it makes him the lead pastor. It doesn’t mean that I can’t lead at a lower level or that we can’t be one in what we do. It just means that I’m not that guy.

And as far as the passage goes, I agree that its about living as believers, but you made the comparison that its about the spirit of leadership.

By: Jan Owen

Jan Owen — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:03:33 +0000

@b/ I don’t want to argue with you but the instruction to “Submit to one another” is a part of an address on how to live as believers. I understand there are qualifications for leadership, but I have seen more harm than good come from a church depending on one leader. And one of the biggest problems I’ve seen is the inability of that leader to listen to anyone else…..and as a senior staff member I got to deal with the very heavy fallout.

And even if you want to drag the marital relationship into the equation, God’s desire for husband and wife is not an authoritarian relationship, it is love and unity. I’ve been married 25 years – my husband doesn’t desire to dictate orders to me, but to BE ONE with me. So while organizations need someone to lead, the goal is not to wield authority but to promote unity.

By: Dave Ingland

Dave Ingland — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:00:06 +0000

In essence, most attractional churches resemble this: branding, marketing (disguised as outreach), big events that require large attendance, programs that must operate at a profit, board of directors that oversee the goings-on, middle managers (except now with the title associate pastor of , etc. With the church looking like this, why wouldn’t it make sense to run it as a business?

Unfortunately, our mentality in ministry is to follow this ministry because so much emphasis has been placed on having a vision and casting it clearly and often. With that vision comes selection. The selection that states unequivocally that the vision is for one person and that all others must submit to that vision in humility and humbleness and with a teachable spirit.

One of the mistakes I reflect upon a lot is feeling like I got the green light to move forward and swiftly with launching a church plant based on a team model, yet having no team members. I tried to instill teamwork within the group, only to find that they were looking to be subordinates under the authority of a solitary leader.

I really envision missional communities coming together where people of humility recognize that they bring certain attributes to fulfilling a vision and that God may send others with different attributes and call upon the group as a whole to collaborate and influence the church and its ministry. It shouldn’t be about one person controlling how and when God moves within the church. It only perpetuates the leadership style already in existence and the flaws of such a style are becoming apparent as the culture shifts away from the traditional corporate model of the attractional church and starts moving towards being relevant in love and grace to a world that wants to know Christ rather than a well-oiled machine.

By: Josh Roberts

Josh Roberts — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:41:57 +0000

Is it possible that we implement “practical” forms of leadership within the church because it what we and the people of our local congregations are familiar with (i.e. what they see in the corporate/business world)?

Could our definition of practical/pragmatic be shaped by our ministry goals? –just thoughts

By: b/

b/ — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:35:38 +0000

As far as Ephesians 5 goes, it says submit to one another out of reverence for Christ, but then Paul goes into some pretty clear division of leadership. He puts some heavy weight on those who are leaders, however. Nonetheless, a clear division.