Rethinking Christian Leadership

In the last post, we discussed how certain practices that evolved out of the church may be doing more harm than good. What may have been good ideas at the time have worked their way into becoming institutionalized sacrosanct practices. Such practices can obscure and marginalize Jesus Christ who would otherwise be manifested in the exchange of divine life.

In this final post on distractions within the church, I want to focus on one mentioned in the last post. We’ll juxtapose the traditional idea of church leadership against what authentic Christian leadership looks like. We’ll discuss how borrowing the world’s leadership paradigm can impede the church’s work in the advancement of the Kingdom.

What is Christian Leadership?

When we use the phrase Christian leadership, the first thing that pops into our minds is the professional clergy or ministerial staff of a church. Some might also include unpaid volunteer positions within the church (elders, deacons, teachers, etc.). Others may even include those with a legitimate gift for leadership, encouragement, or other closely-related ability. There are several different modes of leadership, from leading organizations to the interpersonal sway between peers. But all of it really comes down to having influence over others.

The critical point we need to emphasize is that the source of all Christian leadership is Jesus Christ. He leads His Body, the church (Matt. 16:18). He alone is our source of empowerment and direction. We receive His direction by His divine life. As we receive it, we exchange it among those within His Body and express it to our surrounding culture. Jesus Christ leads us by expressing His life through one another. Channeling the life of our King is done in a variety of ways that we’ll discuss in future posts, but the most common means is by exercising our spiritual gifts.

Spiritual gifts are abilities of supernatural origin that come by way of the indwelling Holy Spirit. Several are mentioned in Romans 12:6-8; 1 Corinthians 12:8-10; and in 1 Corinthians 12:28-30. Reading through these passages, you’ll notice that the lists don’t match up perfectly. For example, the gifts of prophecy and teaching are the only ones explicitly mentioned in both Romans and 1 Corinthians. This might suggest that these gifts were more prominent or identifiable than others. The lack of clear distinction between them could also suggest that they aren’t categorical. They may overlap or have broader application than how they’re described.

The point is that we shouldn’t get wrapped around the axle identifying the limits of our exact gifting before we get involved. Instead, try several things and note what you’re good at. Ask others what they see in you. Learning to life by divine life is a process of self-discovery. The things that seem effortless to you could very well be your gifting (because the Lord is the one doing His work through you).

Ephesians 4:11 also lists various roles identified among the members of the Body. They’re “leadership” roles since they all undeniably involve influence. The following are specifically mentioned:

Apostles (apostolos – ἀπόστολος). An apostle is a special messenger, envoy, delegate, or representative of Christ who has been sent out. They were often itinerant (traveling) church planters–missionaries that only stayed in one location long enough to equip the congregation before moving to the next place they were called.

Prophets (prophētas – προφήτας): A prophet is one who speaks forth, announces, or reveals a word of God’s truth. They speak words that carry weight about our hope and discern what is best for the Christian cause. This role is often associated with those who give encouragement by reminding others of our hope in Christ.

Evangelists (euaggelistés – εὐαγγελιστής): An evangelist is called of God to speak the good news of the Kingdom to the outside world. They are similar to apostles except that an evangelist focuses on sowing the seeds of the Kingdom rather than the more targeted work of watering the soil.

Pastors (poimén – ποιμήν): Literally a shepherd. From the Greek root word, pastors are those who are responsible to care for and ensure the well-being of a group of believers. The word “pastors” is only mentioned once in scripture and only in its plural form. This suggests that there wasn’t one, but a plurality of pastors within the Ephesian church. Scripture is not clear whether there was any distinction between this role and the role of elder, overseer, presbyter, or bishop in the earliest church. Some scholars have made the case that there could have been significant overlap in their roles or that the different words simply refer to several facets of the same role.

Teachers (didáskalos – διδάσκαλος): Those who undertake the work of teaching within a congregation. Unlike what we see today, the teaching that occurred was not focused on Bible facts and knowledge. Rather, it involved practical instruction in living by the indwelling life of Jesus Christ.

First, note how some roles are inward-facing and some are outward-facing. Pastors, teachers, and prophets focus on leading through the exchange of divine life within the Body. Apostles and evangelists focus on engaging culture and building the Kingdom outward from the Body. In either case an exchange of divine life occurs and the Kingdom is manifested.

Second, several translations of this verse clarify that these roles are the “gifts” of Christ, implying that they are spiritually acquired. The close parallel between the spiritual gifts of 1 Corinthians 12 and the roles of Ephesians 4 support this idea. As an aside, we know that such giftings could be cultivated with further training (Acts 19:9). However, there’s no scriptural evidence advocating training for a role in place of giftedness.

Third, while there is overlap between the different roles, this passage suggests that Christ intended them to be spread across several different people within the Body. A person may have more than one gift but no one person has all the gifts.

Lastly, when Paul says, “…God has placed in His church first of all…” (1 Cor. 12:28), he’s not implying a hierarchy among the different roles. He’s merely pointing out which roles are more critical for the specific activity of building the church. In the grand scope of the Kingdom’s mission, no role is “better”, “higher”, or “above” any other. But some are more critical to attaining certain objectives.

So from a careful examination of these passages, we could define Christian leadership as:

The process through which Jesus Christ, by His Spirit, influences the church and the surrounding culture through the members of His body.

This is vastly different from how we typically view Christian leadership.

What Christian Leadership Isn’t

Ever since the Fall, mankind has collaboratively accomplished incredible feats by managing organizations. These include governments, corporations, nonprofits, military forces, political factions, educational institutions, religious institutions, and countless others. Regardless of its function or ultimate aim, each organization is led through the positional authority of a human leader. This leader presides at the top of the organization and issues direction to those below in support of the organization’s goals.

This is how the world operates. But the Lord had always wanted to do something different with His people. Ultimately, His intention was never to install human leaders to direct His people by proxy or delegated authority. Instead, He had always intended to lead His people by His very own Life.

There were times when He acquiesced to a demand for human leadership. There were also times in the Old Testament that God empowered others to lead His people. But these methods are not part of the eternal purpose for His people.

When the elders of Israel demanded a King to lead them, the Lord acquiesced to their demands for human leadership despite His desire to lead them unmediated:

Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah and said to him, “Behold, you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint for us a king to judge us like all the nations.” But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” And Samuel prayed to the Lord. And the Lord said to Samuel, “Obey the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them.
1 Samuel 8:4-7 (ESV)

When the mother of the sons of Zebedee asked Jesus to give them positions of authority in His Kingdom, Jesus explained that ruling by human authority would have no place in the Kingdom:

Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave…
Matthew 20:25-27 (ESV)

Kingdom-centered leadership isn’t derived from positional authority of someone placed “in charge of” a church (or any group within it). Rather, it proceeds from the divine life of the Lord Himself through the various members of His Body by way of His gifting. Leading the church by the world’s method impedes the flow of divine life, forcing us to rely on appointed intermediaries who haven’t been given full awareness of the work the Lord calls each of us to do.

When the Church Failed to Abide

Let me be abundantly clear. Leadership in the church is important. But Jesus Christ is the direct source of all leadership in the church. His leadership is a gift that takes many forms through many people. The Lord distributes His leadership across the entire church for the express purpose of building His Kingdom.

But where did we ever get the idea of a designated professional that presides over and directs the activity of the church? Pagan Christianity, by author Frank Viola, offers several contributing factors.

Historically, the church adopted hierarchies and leadership structures to counter the threat of heresy. The thinking went that if the church could fortify orthodox doctrine while installing leaders who would champion and perpetuate those doctrines, it could avoid fracturing into a thousand false sects.

This idea originated with Ignatius of Antioch as early as the beginning of the second century. Below are several excerpts from letters he wrote regarding his thoughts on the importance and centrality of the bishop:

“Plainly therefore we ought to regard the bishop as the Lord Himself.”
“All of you follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father”.
“It is not lawful apart from the bishop either to baptize or to hold a love feast; but whatever he shall approve, this is well-pleasing also to God.”
“It is good to recognize God and the bishop. He that honors the bishop is honored of God.”
“Do nothing without the bishop.”
“Therefore as the Lord did nothing without the Father, being united with Him, either by Himself or by the Apostles, so neither do you anything without the bishop and the presbyters.”
“You should look on your bishop as a type of the Father”.

Around the same time, Clement of Rome and Tertullian were early church leaders who began making a distinction between clergy (those who do the ministry) and laity (those for whom ministry is done). The clergy came to be viewed as a professional religious appointment. The laity were those without that appointment. This was quite different from the early church’s view of having distinct roles and gifts but having the same status under Christ.

Both Clement and Cyprian (a pagan who converted to Christianity) advocated a resurgence of a specialized priesthood within Christianity modeled after the Old Testament system. Thus the Christian “priesthood” was born. This despite the fact that Christ is now our High Priest (Heb. 7:17) who works through a priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9).

Over the course of the next two centuries a hierarchical clerical system would be firmly established in the church. This system would become the precursor and model of Christian leadership common to all major branches of Christianity–from high church Roman Catholicism all the way down to today’s most hip and edgy non-denominational church.

Of course, it all started with a fear of heresy. Ironically, the plan to avoid it ended with thousands of present-day Christian denominations who don’t talk to one another and who may secretly think all others to be heretical at some level.

Rather than avoiding heresy by consolidating all direction under human authority, a better idea might have been for the church to maintain their spiritual fixation on the Lord. They could have instead decided to depend directly on the King for His empowerment, authority, and direction. This was what Jesus taught His disciples. This was the pattern that the earliest church adopted. It may not have saved the integrity of a growing institution, but it may have preserved a remnant of the church that was authentically occupied with their King.

A Self-Licking Ice Cream Cone

In my life, I’ve seen firsthand how the organizational leadership model hinders the church from functioning as designed. It isn’t that things won’t “get done”, but that it’s severely hindered from accomplishing the true work of the Kingdom. It doesn’t take a lot of imagination to understand why.

Within these churches are two mutually-destructive sets of expectations. The first is the expectation the church has for the priest/pastor. The church perceives the pastor’s main responsibility to be the preparation and orchestration of the various church services. While the pastor’s position is full-time, preparing for Sunday services alone doesn’t fill a full-time job. As a result, duties are added to the pastor’s position which, scripturally speaking, the members of the Body are gifted to do. So the pastor will maintain office hours, visit the sick and elderly, and provide counseling services to the membership when needed. Several of these things they have been pastorally trained to do but for which they may have no spiritual gift.

The second expectation is born out of something that I call the Irrevocable Law of Leadership. It’s a phenomenon I’ve often noticed—particularly in churches. The law states that once you give someone a leadership title and everyone recognizes their position as leader, others will tend to step down. Many will do nothing until they are instructed to do something. Any self-initiative they may have had is now gone. They feel obligated to check with the pastor before doing anything in the church. While some members will become involved if offered an opportunity, most opportunities offered merely support the Sunday morning performance. Tasks they’re given rarely provide an opportunity to exercise their spiritual gifts. Despite how much a recognized church leader may want every member to function, the psychology of the situation drives the membership toward despondency and perpetual neediness.

These two expectations work together to keep the pastor too busy “doing ministry” while otherwise gifted members remain immature and dependent recipients of the ministry product. As a result, many churches become a “self-licking ice cream cone” that seems to have no other purpose except to sustain itself. Very little authentic Kingdom work gets done.

Of course if you’ve grown up in a traditional church environment, it’s just the way things are. There’s no “better” to compare it to. But in my rare experiences of being led by Christ in an authentic exchange of divine life, I can tell you that there is simply no comparison.

Questions You (Probably) Want to Ask

Why are you hating on church? I grew up in a traditional church with a very loving congregation and a very compassionate and knowledgeable priest/pastor. I can’t imagine a better church experience than what I’ve had.

Please understand I’m not hating on your pastor or your church. I’ve grown up and spent most of my life in traditional churches and gained tremendously from those experiences. I’ve got a lot of friends who are professional church leaders and have a lot of respect for them. I consider them all my brothers in Christ. I’m merely pointing out how the Lord wants to lead His people and how traditional methods so often impede the proper functioning of the church.

The church is the Bride of Christ. She’s a beautiful woman! I just wish we could remove all of her excess “makeup” (i.e. rigid patterns and artificial traditions) so the world can see her true beauty!

But maybe dependence on the Holy Spirit was only meant for the earliest church until it was more firmly established. Isn’t it possible that the Lord intended to eventually direct the activity of the church through his pastors and priests?

If this was his plan from the beginning, it would seem to conflict with what we know of His eternal purpose. It would also conflict a lot of what Jesus said throughout his earthly ministry and the earliest patterns of the post-ascension church. We have the witness of the Western church which has tried this method for centuries and has historically suffered from leaders who were often mired in the distractions of politics, war, and corruption.

It was designed to operate with every member functioning according to their God-empowered gifts. If your pastor (or elder, small group leader, Sunday school teacher, etc.) is your only source of influence, then you’re only receiving a fraction of what the Lord has intended for you.

But aren’t there several passages in the Bible that describe how leaders are to “rule over” the church and direct its activities?

Frank Viola in his book Reimagining Church provides well-researched explanations for several of these passages. According to Viola, some may read scripture and conclude that it advocates authoritarian leadership and hierarchies within the church. But all too often our reading of scripture is tainted by our common understanding of words and the prevailing cultural paradigm. Sometimes we translate words that don’t parallel well from the Greek. He believes a lot of our understanding of church leadership comes from those types of misunderstanding.

For example, many believe that “pastor” or “evangelist” are official positions and titles rather than only roles within the church. They cite the word “office”, “ministry” and similar words used in certain translations of Acts 1:20; Romans 11:13; and 1 Timothy 3:1. Such words are poor translations of what was intended by the Greek word in its context. Better translations for this word would be function, service, or oversight.

Others have pointed out that elders are to “rule over” the church based on verses such as 1 Thessalonians 5:12 and Hebrews 13:7. The word “rule” in many of these verses is the word hegeomai which is more accurately translated as “guide” or “to go before”. Also the word “over” is taken from the Greek word proistemi, which carries the idea of “standing before”, “guarding”, or “providing for”. Neither authoritarian rule nor exclusive direction is implied in these verses.

Some translations of Hebrews 13:17 tell us to “obey” and “submit” to our church leaders. However, the Greek word peitho is used, which means “to persuade”. So a better translation would be to “allow yourself to be persuaded” by them. If “obedience” was intended, the better Greek word to use would have been hupakouo. To the degree that authentic Christian leadership implies any actual authority over someone, it’s vastly overshadowed by the works of help and guardianship.

Armed with a better understanding of these passages, it becomes clear that the role of a pastor/elder isn’t to rule or set direction, but to provide overwatch for the Body. They look inward to ensure an environment that allows the open exchange of divine life. They also look outward for “wolves at the gate” who seek to hurt those inside.

How would a church identify someone with the gifting for a pastoral role?

A Christian leader is not the result of academic training or ordination from a church governing body. Leadership is not a career choice for those who love God more than average. It’s not found in a title or an official position.

Leadership grows naturally out of a close-knit group that pursues Christ seriously directly under His headship. Over time, some in the group will naturally fill that roles based on their spiritual maturity, humility, and shepherd’s heart. Eventually the group will recognize them as “pastors”, even without a formal position, title, or “rite” of ordination. I’d suspect it works the same way with other spiritual gifts as well.

You make some good points, but what am I supposed to do about it? You’re describing a systemic problem with church. I’m only one person.

What I’ve described is the worst case as well as the ideal condition. Every church operates somewhere between these two extremes. But I believe the closer a church operates to the ideal, the more fruitful it will be for the Kingdom.

I’m not advocating “mutiny” in your church of any sort. We need to respect our leaders. That’s clear. I also wouldn’t expect those who lead your church to fully agree with what I’ve expressed in this post. This view of leadership has severely triggered countless traditional church advocates. (Just check some of the negative Amazon reviews of my sources.) But I also personally know pastors who have come to see the truth in it and radically changed how they approach ministry.

Regardless, I would suggest talking to your pastor and discussing ways where spiritual gifts of leadership could be recognized, endorsed, and more freely practiced. Smaller, more tightly knit venues, such as in small groups, Bible studies, or Sunday school classes would be good “crucibles” of practice. Unless your church has strict prohibitions against meeting outside of officially sanctioned events, I would even suggesting finding two or three others in your church who see the value in trying things differently. Just be confident that whenever Christ is given the freedom to lead His people, His Kingdom will be manifested.

Lastly, I would add that even if a church wanted to rid itself of its baggage and re-invent itself to operate under the patterns Jesus laid out, this is an extremely difficult thing to do in an established church. It would require extra-local help by others who are gifted in making that kind of transition.

You talk a lot about allowing the Lord to live “through us”. But this is so abstract. How do we do this practically?

Answering this question will be the central focus of this blog. We’ve spent a lot of time up to now setting the backdrop for that discussion. We’re well on our way to fully engaging it in future posts.

Since its release in the mid-90’s, the movie First Knight attained sort of a cult following over the years. It’s a modern re-telling of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table. But while the movie focused on Lancelot (played by a ‘dashing’ Richard Gere), to me the more compelling character was King Arthur played by Sean Connery.

If you watch really closely, you can see Jesus in that movie. Let me explain…

What made Connery’s character so interesting to me was his deep passion and commitment toward the idea of Camelot. First was the idea behind a round table. It had no head or foot. Everyone who sat there was equal to one another–even the King. The idea of a truly egalitarian council of knights with whom the King would share his authority was certainly an intriguing concept. Even more compelling was what was inscribed on the table:

IN SERVING EACH OTHER, WE BECOME FREE

Referring to the inscription, Arthur explains,

“That is the very heart of Camelot. Not these stones, timbers, towers, palaces… Burn them all and Camelot lives on. Because it lives in us. It’s a belief that we hold in our hearts.”

Why was it safe for a king to allow himself to be equal with his subjects? Simple. Because Camelot was not led as an organization. It was a culture infused by the very life and passion of its King.

This parallels everything I’ve described about authentic Christian leadership:

If the Kingdom of God is an organization, it’s a very ‘flat’ one. Jesus Christ is on top. Directly under Him is everyone else.

We walk in Christ’s freedom as we serve one another by our gifting. Everyone offers service. Everyone is served.

Burn these hierarchies, man-made traditions, and worldly methods. Let the King reign and His Kingdom will advance… because He lives in us.

If you’re interested in learning more about the true origins of many of today’s church practices of if you’re interested in rediscovering Jesus’s original plan for His church, I’d highly recommend these books:

Pagan Christianity by George Barna and Frank Viola

Reimagining Church by Frank Viola

After reading these books, if you’re interested in implementing a church led under the direct headship of Jesus Christ, I would recommend this book:

Finding Organic Church by Frank Viola

Image Credit: The Winchester Round Table hangs on the wall at the end of the Great Hall of Winchester Castle in the UK. The table is an intriguing (but decidedly fake) prop constructed in the 1200s that claims authenticity as the original Round Table of King Arthur’s Camelot. CC-SA 4.0 by Rs-nourse.

First Things