© All rights reserved by Roger Smalling. Permission is hereby granted to evangelical, trinitarian groups to duplicate and distribute copies for educational purposes, without transference of rights.

An hour and a half later, a Colonel came by who was an expert in runways and blared, "Who is the idiot who ordered this runway to be built in this direction!?" The Lieutenant almost said, "This sergeant here, he said he knew...etc." But his actual words were, "I did, Sir."

The Colonel got into the Lieutenant's face and asked, "Why did you order that?!" The Lieutenant replied, "No excuse, sir."

At this moment the sergeant approached, with his hand upraised as thought to speak. The Colonel apparently deduced what had happened and asked the Lieutenant, "You just came out of West Point, didn't you?" The Lieutenant said, "Yes Sir." The Colonel looked at the sergeant, then at the Lieutenant and said, "Well in that case, it was an honest mistake."

Later on the Colonel invited that Lieutenant to join his staff. This represented a substantial promotion.

This true story illustrates the central virtue in leadership: Integrity. In the cassette tape on Westpoint leadership training from which this true story was taken, the lecturer said if they can teach a cadet to be a man of complete integrity, they can make him into a leader regardless of temperament or natural qualifications. They are prepared to fail men with natural leadership ability if they cannot infuse absolute integrity into his character.

This concept is so associated with Westpoint that when the Colonel encountered an officer with absolute integrity, he assumed 'Westpoint.'

Is this the kind of integrity we find in the leadership of our churches? If people meet a man of integrity today do they automatically assume he is 'evangelical'?

God wants leaders to be men of integrity.

Now this is our boast: Our conscience testifies that we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially in our relations with you, in the holiness and sincerity that are from God. We have done so not according to worldly wisdom but according to God's grace. 13 For we do not write you anything you cannot read or understand. 2Cor. 1:12.

In this text, Paul declares he has no hidden agendas. He will not indulge in politicking nor does he plan to manipulate anyone. What you see is what you get. He means exactly what he says, nothing more. No need to examine the numerical value of the Greek letters to arrive at a hidden meaning.

The words used to translate 'holiness and sincerity' in the above verse show Paul means purity of motives and singlemindedness of purpose. Transparency of this sort is simply a question of integrity and takes time to develop.

Integrity is so closely related to humility, we might argue they are synonyms. It would take a better philosopher than I to make such distinctions. Let us agree they are indispensably linked.

Integrity is central to all leadership, religious or secular. Business analysts, such as Stephen Covey in his book, Seven Habits of Effective People, have recently 'discovered' the importance of character in business. This book has become a best seller.

Covey notes, however, a disturbing shift in attitudes toward character in leadership in western culture over the last 200 years. He classifies this shift as Character Ethic versus Personality Ethic. In the first 150 years of the history of the United States, philosophy of leadership emphasized the importance of traits like integrity, humility, fidelity, etc. Since World War Two, the emphasis has been on personality traits as the key to success rather than ethics, per se. He notes:

Success became more a function of personality, of public image, of attitudes and behaviors, skills and techniques... Other parts of the personality approach were clearly manipulative, even deceptive, encouraging people to use techniques to get other people to like them...

In his book Good to Great, researcher Jim Collins presents his analysis of companies which grew from good to great and stayed there. He found a quality in common among the leaders of these companies which had nothing to do with temperament:

We were surprised, shocked really, to discover the type of leadership required for turning a good company into a great one.... Self-effacing, quiet, reserved, even shy- these leaders are a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will.

Note the point: The key quality in common among leaders of companies who had moved from good to great was humility. He adds,

[These] leaders channel their ego needs away from themselves and into the larger goal of building a great company. It's not that [these] leaders have no ego or self-interest. Indeed, they are incredibly ambitious- but their ambition is first and foremost for the institution, not themselves.

Leadership of lasting value cannot exist without this virtue. Management, yes. Manipulation and control, yes...but not true leadership which buys the loyalty of others at the cost of pain to oneself. It is the integrity of Jesus.

This is the Christian philosophy of leadership. There is none other.

The Caiaphas Principle

Caiaphas was a man who sold his integrity for the price of peace. He was the high priest who presided over the trial of Jesus. In John 11:49-50 we read:

You know nothing at all! You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.

In Caiaphas' perspective, it was better to abandon his integrity by condemning an innocent man than risk wide-spread destruction by attracting the attention of their Roman overlords. Was he right?

Yes, in the short run. He successfully averted Roman intervention and national disaster. He must have considered himself profoundly wise.

The long run, however, was different. Eventually the Romans came and destroyed the nation anyway. He won in the short run but lost everything in the end, including his own honor.

Jesus, on the other hand, seemed to lose in the short run. He was humiliated, crucified and seemed to disappear. Who is King of Kings today and where is Caiaphas?

Suppose you have a man in church caught in deep sin. You know you must discipline him. He is a very popular person, however, with wealth and influence. If you discipline him, it may divide the church. You might lose your job as pastor. What do you do?

This is a classic test of integrity. If you stand your ground, you may lose in the short run. The church might indeed be divided. You could lose your job. But God will give you far more than you ever lost and you will have no regrets.

A Final Example

At a meeting of my Presbytery, the moderator asked for a report from the Missions Committee. The secretary of the committee rose and explained he did not have the report because he was unaware it would be required at the meeting.

Immediately the moderator began to reproach the secretary for his negligence. Toward the back of the assembly, one of the pastors, stood and said, "Sir, I am the chairman of the Missions Committee. If there is any mistake, I am the one to blame and you may address any reproaches to me."

The moderator asked him if he knew about the error. He replied, "No sir, but that is beside the point. I am the person in charge, and if there is any reproach to be made, you may address it to me." The moderator dropped the point and continued with other business.

I thought, "It is no wonder this pastor has a thousand people in his church." Like the proverbial lamp on a hill, such integrity cannot be hidden.

Conclusion

Integrity, which includes humility, is the foundation virtue of leadership. Without it, a 'leader' is no more than a manager at best and a manipulator and controller at worst. Even the worldly notice this.

From This Lesson We Learn:

Integrity, sometimes called humility, is essential to Christian leadership.

This virtue includes:

STUDY QUESTIONS FOR LESSON ONE

Explain the dilemma of the "Caiaphas Principle". Give an example from your own experience.

How could the example of the Westpoint Lieutenant be applied in a Christian context?

Homework: Read the first three chapters of Sanders' book and answer the questions connected with the first study.

We can imagine them plotting, "You know, Jesus can be a little tough on us sometimes. He's really gentle with women, though. Let's see if we can get Mama to talk to Him and maybe work out a good deal for ourselves."

This is politicking and manipulation, standard procedure in the world's leadership paradigm. Notice Jesus does not rebuke them for ambition, because ambition is a good thing if it is for God's glory. He admonishes against seeking their own honor.

Jesus also makes it clear He is not in charge of promotions in the personnel department. The Father is. (V.23) They were asking the wrong person.

From this, we see a hint of the first principle of Christian leadership in the New Testament: It is a gift from God.

Nevertheless, these sons of Zebedee had two good qualities, although seriously mis-directed:

Confidence: Unfortunately, it was confidence in themselves rather than in God. "We are able." They considered themselves eminently "able". The garden of Gethsemane taught them otherwise. They abandoned Jesus and fled.

This brings up the first key attitude Jesus taught them.

FIRST KEY ATTITUDE: Suffering

But Jesus answered and said, "You do not know what you ask. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?" They said to Him, "We are able." Matt. 20:22

Frequently people have high expectations of a leader. They may be looking to a Pastor to meet their needs rather than to Christ. When the Pastor fails to meet their personal expectations, they may consider him incompetent.

Some under his care may be insubmissive and will only submit when it is pressured into it. Sometimes the leader must hold the line on godly principles, risking the misunderstanding and criticism of others.

Occasionally church leaders must apply biblical discipline when it may be unpopular to do so. When dealing with a disciplinary case, the leaders often cannot reveal the problem to the congregation. Members with incomplete knowledge of the case may draw wrong conclusions about the leaders' decisions. They may imagine the leaders are too harsh or too lax in discipline. The leaders may find themselves suffering in silence. God has wisely arranged it so.

Titles and honors that accompany the office of leader are insufficient to compensate for the stress. Those who highly value titles or honors more than the service entailed, soon find themselves disappointed and disillusioned.

Similarly, in his book, Brothers, We Are Not Professionals, John Piper attacks the attitude of "professionalismin pastoral ministry which puts aside the embracing of suffering as requisite:

We pastors are being killed by the professionalizing of the pastoral ministry. The mentality of the professional is not...the mentality of the slave of Christ. Professionalism has nothing to do with the essence and heart of the Christian ministry... For there is no professional childkeness (MT.18:3); there is no professional tenderheartedness (Eph.4:32); there is no professional panting after God (Ps.42:1)

SECOND KEY ATTITUDE: Parity

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,' Matt. 20:25

Eventually, José moved to another city to work with a team. A missionary on the team called me and asked, "Roger, I'm having trouble getting along with José. I noticed you get along with him and work productively together. Can you give me some clues as to how to handle him?"

This was my answer: "Brother, in the first place, quit trying to 'handle' him. Treat him as a colleague. Call him up once in a while and ask his advice. Ask him to help you. Think of him as your equal because after all, he has the same ordination as you.

The missionary paused for about twenty seconds on the phone, thinking seriously. Then replied, "I don't think I can do that." To this I answered, "Then I cannot help you."

This missionary could not consider any national, even a medical doctor, his equal. He saw himself on the rung of a hierarchy with all nationals on a lower rank. Treating José as an equal would have contradicted his entire leadership mindset, inherited from his North American corporate business culture.

Ironically, I had used the term "equal" to avoid saying I thought José was the better man! (It never occurred to me to think of a medical doctor of any nationality as inferior.) The relationship between the two lasted less than a year before José went elsewhere.

Remember: If you treat a man as an equal, assuming he is wise, he will defer to you in areas he knows you are knowledgable.

Authoritarianism and hierarchialism support each other and it is hard to tell which is the driving force. Do authoritarian people create hierarchies? Dictatorial attitudes produce authoritarian attitudes?

Regardless, authoritarianism is a byproduct of arrogance. Authoritarian people often suppose their superior office proves they are inherently superior individuals. This is why they 'lord it over' others. They assume they have a natural right to do so.

Complex hierarchies are inevitable in the world. Armies are hierarchies, with their generals at the top, followed by colonels, majors, captains, sergeants, down to privates. Likewise with corporations. The CEO is at the top, followed by vice presidents, department managers, all the way down to stock boys in the basement.

Hierarchies are necessary in such domains. Jesus is not teaching authoritarian hierarchies are wrong. He is simply saying, "Not so with you."
The phrase, "Not so with you", is literally in Greek, "It shall not be so among you." Jesus was speaking in Aramaic, a dialect of Hebrew. In that language, future tenses are used as imperatives. Jesus was probably saying, "I forbid you to put into office people with authoritarian attitudes and temperaments."

This excludes some "natural" leaders from Christian offices. Christian organizations often ignore this principle. Along comes a man with natural leadership traits. Sure, he is a bit arrogant. He likes to control. Maybe he's a bit overbearing at times, but so what? He has 'leadership'. So he gets authority in the organization. Result: Wounded people. Good people lost who refuse to be the brunt of his arrogance.

Just because a man has leadership ability does not mean he should be a leader in a Christian organization. If he tends toward authoritarian and controlling attitudes, he is the last person to be qualified. In their ranks, he must never be allowed to rise above the last one. Controllers must be controlled.

This may be what Jesus meant when he said, "whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant." Some scholars have interpreted this phrase to mean, 'servant leadership is the way to get promoted in the Kingdom of God.' This interpretation may be valid. Considering the context, however, it seems more likely a prohibition against appointing people with authoritarian attitudes.

The point: Neither natural leadership ability nor experience in business or the military, nor profiles on a psychological test, are final indications a man should be a candidate for Christian leadership. If he holds autocratic attitudes, thinks hierarchically or tends to use or abuse people, he is disqualified as a candidate, regardless of other considerations.

THIRD KEY ATTITUDE: Service

...just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and to give his life a ransom for many. Mt. 20:28

The goal of a Christian leader is to make his followers the best they can be. In fact, if he can train someone to replace him, this is the best leadership of all.

Servant leadership is essential in the Kingdom of God because of the end product. In the business world, people are a resource to produce material goods. People give time and energy to produce something for public consumption, such as automobiles, pencils or whatever.

God's Kingdom uses material resources to produce sanctified people. The world considers this a non-issue. After all, sanctification is difficult to define, something only God can measure. Sanctified people is what the ministry is all about.

Notice the title of this lesson is, "The Christian Philosophy of Leadership", not "A Christian philosophy..." This is deliberate. Christ taught one philosophy of leadership. He did not say, "Try my suggestions and if you don't like them, invent your own paradigm."

Conclusion

Christian leadership involves a set of attitudes different from worldly systems. Embracing the inevitable suffering, whether psychological or physical, helps a leader put his own motives into perspective. Serving others to help them reach their full potential and treating fellow ministers as equals is more than the mere duties of an office. It is a way of life.

From This Lesson We Learn:

There exists only one philosophy of leadership in the Bible, the one taught by Christ.

Embracing suffering and service, along with an attitude of parity toward your fellow ministers are essential attitudes forming Christ's philosophy of leadership.

Ambition is good, as long as the ambition is to see God glorified.

Confidence is good as long as it is based on confidence in God.

God the Father alone is in charge of promotions in His Kingdom. Neither politicking nor 'influence' are means for obtaining them.

Jesus forbids his disciples to appoint to offices people with authoritarian attitudes.

Neither leadership temperaments, psychological profiles nor experience in worldly hierarchies qualify a person for leadership in God's Kingdom.

What are the three fundamental attitudes Christ requires of those who wish to lead in God's Kingdom?

Homework: Read chapters 4-7 of Sanders' book and answer the questions connected with the second study.

Large corporations are also structured hierarchies, with high-paid CEO's, vice presidents and department managers, down to the stock boys. Again, authority is always from the top down with no accountability at the top. Lower ranks usually take the blame for the errors of the management. Officers of hierarchies do not represent the will of their subordinates.

Biblical government is the opposite and fundamentally simple. Officers serve the people in a representative system. When it comes to the relationship of 'officers' to one another, such as in a Presbytery, every member has equal voice and vote. There are no ranks, just differences in functions. If there is blame, it accrues to the group as a whole.

The difference between the two is comparable to a ladder versus a round table. The entire structure is different because the goals and purposes are dissimilar.

When Christian organizations attempt to mimic the world's structures, the central principles Christ taught tend to be strangled. People become lost in a maze of bureaucracy as a monolithic organizational machine feeds itself rather than the people, focusing on its own existence as though it had intrinsic value.

During 35 years of ministry, principally in missions, I have observed many Christian organizations. Comparing these observations with other experienced ministers confirms the effects of hierarchialism in a Christian context.

A missionary from another denomination came to me in a state of emotional distress. A few of the national pastors had told him in private they were considering of withdrawing their churches from the denomination because of the incompetence of the mission field leader. He explained if he reported this to the field leader, it was likely the leader would accuse him of slander and being the cause of the problem. This leader was good friends of the higher mission officials. I gave the missionary a suggestion as to how to deal with it and the matter was eventually resolved.

By modeling the world's structures, Christians may forget to consider consideration a central aspect of biblical theology...the corrupt nature of man. In structuring a Christian organization the principle issue is not efficiency but sanctification.

Dictatorship is the most efficient form of government known to man. That is why dictators are hard to defeat. Dictators dehumanize people, depriving them of the free expression necessary to reflect God's image. It is the straight line between two points but casualties are strewn along its wake. Hitler's Germany is a glaring example in the political realm.

In the religious domain, we saw a reformation in Europe fought over the dictatorial authority of Catholicism. Church government, besides doctrine of salvation, was a big issue.

To discern the morality of a leadership structure, one should ask what it stimulates...the Adamic nature or the new nature in Christ.

The "Peter Principle": Mediocrity and Incompetence

In his classic book, "The Peter Principle", sociologist John Peters describes how each member of a hierarchy tends to rise to his level of incompetence. As a person performs well at one level, he may be promoted to the next, until he attains a position beyond his abilities. He will remain at this position generating problems for himself and others. Meanwhile, many gifted people abandon ship. With time, incompetence of this sort multiplies until the organization as a whole becomes mediocre.

Good Christian leaders, functioning within an hierarchial system, try to mitigate these negative effects. (See Appendix B) These efforts are laudable, though often futile. Human nature, including among Christians, is susceptible to the temptations generated by hierarchial systems.

Hierarchies Tend To Stimulate The Worst In Fallen Human Nature

This includes Christian hierarchies. Some of these aspects are:

A. Arrogance

The Apostle James notes, For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice."James 3:16. The term evil practice translates phaulon pragma, literally 'foul business.' The modern phrase, 'dirty politicking' expresses it well.

Imagine a man carrying a load up a ladder. If the man on the top drops his load, where does it go? On the man beneath, who dumps it on the man below him. The guy on the bottom gets the full load. In a hierarchy, the load is the blame.

A hierarchy, like any organism, becomes more focused on perpetuating its own existence than to what it was created to produce. People who 'rock the boat' will be thrown out of that boat. It does not matter if they were among the few doing the rowing.

B. Create an anonymity committee. This may consist of two or three people who can receive complaints about problems without revealing the sources. If there are enough complaints about a particular leader, this can be brought to the attention of upper level management before the leader is able to do serious damage. The reason this requires moral courage is because the leader in question might be you.

Tip: Do NOT insult the intelligence of your subordinates by announcing an 'open door policy' unless they can hold you accountable for what you say or do to them inside the door.

C. Memos to subordinates about proposed policies asking for their feedback, gives people the feeling of participation in the decision process.

Any device that allows you to be vulnerable to your subordinates and accountable for your actions will gain respect and credibility. Ironically, once you have respect and credibility, those devices will likely become unnecessary.

Are You Joining a Christian Organization?

A good way to discern if the organization is authoritarian is to ask them, "In what way can you be made to stand accountable for the way you treat subordinates?" Or, "If an employee becomes the victim of an administrative abuse, what recources does he have for redress of grievances?" If you get no clear answer, look for another organization.

Summary

Authoritarian hierarchialism is unbiblical for Christian organizations or churches. It stimulates latent tendencies in our fallen nature. Christian leaders need to be aware of these tendencies and do what they can to minimize them. This may require an uncommon moral courage and commitment to the fundamental principle of absolute integrity in making ourselves vulnerable and accountable to those we lead.

From this lesson we learn:

Authoritarian hierarchialism is a worldly form of organizational structure, antithetical to the leadership principles Christ embodied.
Authoritarian hierarchialism stimulates the worst in human nature, leading to arrogance, selfish ambition, politicking, blame shifting and more.
Christian leaders involved in such structures can mitigate the damage if they have the courage to do so, by instituting administrative devices to make themselves vulnerable and accountable to those they lead.

I have known leaders who actually believed the above. I have observed two points in common among them: First, all were under forty years old. Second, all of them made fools of themselves.

Perhaps the age of forty is a coincidence. Perhaps not. I would never disqualify a man merely because he is under the age of forty. Possibly, this number of years gives a man time to discover his own weaknesses, get a few lumps on his head and learn the humility which comes from a more accurate self-knowledge.

The term 'elder' in Scripture derived its meaning from the maturity normally associated with years of experience. Regardless of a man's age, we expect him to possess the wisdom, maturity and humility of an 'elder.'

The point: promotion to leadership is a gift of God's grace. No one ever fully deserved it. The Apostle Paul said,

1Cor. 15:10. "But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them ‹ yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me."

Did Paul, therefore, deserve to be an Apostle? No. It was the grace of God alone who called and qualified him. There is no function in the Kingdom of God we are big enough for without his grace. [19]
The Gift of Leadership

The Bible indicates Christian leadership is a gift of the Spirit.

Rom. 12:6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given us... (8)...if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; ...

Although the spiritual gift of leadership may accompany a natural gift, God is not dependant on natural human talents. He calls some to it despite reluctance on their part. Moses was an example of this. His first reaction was to make excuses for rejecting the call. (Ex.3:11-12)

The Phenomenon of Spiritual Authority

Defining spiritual authority is like pinning down the meaning of "anointing." We may not know what it is, but we sure know what it isn't!

Spiritual authority is the testimony of God about the authenticity of a leader, along with the conviction that one ought to esteem to his ministry.

This is what was taking place when the Father spoke to the disciples about Jesus,

This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him. Luke 9:35 [20]

THAT is spiritual authority. It is an anointing for leadership. It is neither the product of leadership techniques nor appointments to offices nor a personality trait. It is the product of a divine anointing which transcends all these.

Sanders brings out adeptly the paradox that although spiritual authority is of grace, it is nevertheless costly to obtain. It takes service and suffering, along with personal discipline and a private devotional life only you and God know about.

Now, let's take a look at some of the functions of a Christian leader.

The Leader's Function

Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. Acts 20:28

This verse is perhaps the richest description of the Christian leader's responsibility in the entire Bible. Note these particulars:

The leader's first spiritual concern must be for himself. This sounds surprising but it is true. "Keep watch over yourselves" means the leader is to attend to his own spiritual welfare first. He must carefully maintain a solid and consistent devotional life. A chief trap of Satan is to get us so busy we neglect prayer and fellowship with God through the Word. Many a leader has fallen because he has gotten so busy in the ministry, he has neglected his own soul and left himself an easy target for the enemy.

The calling is from God. Though we qualify to be ordained in Christian organizations, in the final analysis, it is the Spirit who makes us "overseers."

Be shepherds" translates the greek verb POIMAINO. This verb means "to lead, with the implication of providing for ‹ 'to guide and to help, to guide and take care of.' It also means, "to rule, with the implication of direct personal involvement.[21]

Notice the term definitely includes authority. A Christian leader is not there merely to make suggestions. He has authority from God to be directly involved in the personal lives of the sheep. He feeds the sheep by providing them the Word of God.

"Bought with his own blood." Paul adds this to emphasize the supreme value and importance of spiritual leadership. No occupation or function in the world could possibly be more important because nothing else could cost a higher price than the blood of Christ.

It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12 to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up Eph.4:11-12

Who does the work of the ministry according to the text above? God's people. The church members. Everyone in the church should have a job. The leader's role is to be a supervisor. That's what 'bishop' means. He is 'overseer' or 'supervisor.' (Gk. 'Episkopos' Epi means 'upon' and 'skopos' means 'look.' It refers to one who watches over the activities of another.)

Suppose you were looking for a construction crew to build your house. You go to a construction site where you have heard a crew is working. There, you notice a group of workers standing around in a circle, shovels in hand, with a supervisor in the middle. The supervisor is digging laboriously. All the workers are applauding and saying, "Go, boss! Keep up the good work. You're doing a fine job!"

What would you think of a crew like that? Would you want them to build your house?

Unfortunately, many churches function this way. The church sits and applauds while the pastor does all the preaching, teaching, visitation, counseling and correcting. They praise his efforts and it never enters their heads they should be doing any of those things.

No wonder pastors suffer such a high percentage of heart attacks.

A man once asked me what I thought was the ideal pastor. I answered, "The ideal pastor is one who could enter the church on a Sunday morning, sit in the back row the entire service and do absolutely nothing." The man looked at me puzzled until I explained how such an ideal pastor would have trained others in the church to do everything he can do. Someone would lead the service. Another would do the announcements. Another would preach, etc.

A classic trap for the fledgling leader is to focus on the weakest members rather than the strongest. After all, they seem the most needy. The discerning leader spends his time preparing the strong to help the weak. The big danger for the novice leader is assuming his job is to heal all the wounded, sooth all the hurt feelings, and support the weak. (This is like trying to feed all the poor, which Jesus said is impossible. It never ends.)

Such a trap duplicates a fundamental teaching error sometimes committed in the public schools, [22] lowering your standards to accommodate the weakest student. The result is poor education.

If a leader has the wisdom to invest in potential people, rather than problem people, he will discover he is training those who can minister to the problem people.

Years ago in Ecuador, I was doing a church plant in a suburb of Quito. Each church has its own personality, just like individuals do. This church had the personality of a lazy plow horse. If we stopped exhorting, it would just stop and go to sleep.

One Sunday, I was preaching a serious exhortatory sermon when I realized most of the congregation was looking out the side door. I stopped, leaned over to see what they were looking at, and noticed a cat playing with a ball.

I was shocked. They were more interested in a cat than in the warnings in God's word toward them. Then I noticed four members taking notes. For their sake, I finished the sermon.

At home that afternoon, I determined to prepare no more sermons for the congregation. All my sermons would be for those four people only. It turned out this was the wisest decision I could have made. One of those four was a young man who later started his own church with 150 members.

Prepare your messages for those who take you seriously. Prepare the strong to help with the weak.

The Leader's Principal Product

And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others. 2Ti. 2:2

Some pastors seem reluctant to prepare other men in their congregation for leadership. Having known many pastors, I suspect some fear others may rise to take their place and they would be out of a job. Rather than take the risk, they prefer the congregation as a whole remain mediocre.

Evangelist Leighton Ford notes how some strong leaders fail to develop the leadership under them, with long-term disastrous results:

Perhaps some of the first-generation leaders saw the second generation leaders as unwelcome competitors and did not set out to develop them. An indian proverb says, "Nothing grows under a Banyan tree." often the shadow of these strong leaders was so large that the little seedlings were not nurtured under them. " [23]

Observation and experience shows God always promotes to greater ministry leaders who prepare others to take their place.

Summary

The call to leadership comes from God by grace. No one ever deserves it. The leader is first committed to people rather than a program. His strategy is to prepare others to do the ministry including training others to lead.

From This Lesson We Learn:

God's choice of leaders is based on His grace, not on any special wisdom a candidate possesses.

The leader's function is to shepherd the people of God.

The leader's strategy is to train the people to do the work of the ministry.

The leader's principal product is other leaders.

To answer these questions, we must take a look at three leadership styles often found in Christian circles: Pioneers, a Manager and Janitors. This list is not exhaustive, others exist. Some individuals may be a mixture.

Pioneers have a vision for something new. He is the trail-blazer, taking the risks to go where nobody has gone before or do something in a new place. He has enthusiasm, drive and creativity. He is impervious to criticism and impatient with the petty people who play it safer.

Though pioneers are great for getting things going, they usually make poor administrators. This is because they have little patience for the minutia necessary in administration. They also tend to lose interest in projects once they are started, preferring to go on to something else.

Managers follow in the footsteps of a pioneer, carrying forward the vision the pioneer has established. He puts order into the vision. Though he also owns the vision, he may be dissatisfied with the implementation. He sees more clearly the means to accomplish the goals.

Janitors are conservative types who want to institutionalize the vision to maintain results are they are. In a church setting, these people tend to lack vision for anything new. We call them "Janitors" because their primary concern is to see everything is kept clean and safe. If the congregation is morally clean, with sound doctrine and committed to the status quo, they are content.

They spend time dealing with disciplinary cases, discontent people or people with deep problems. Leadership development is not their priority. They perceive themselves as spiritual leaders because they have success dealing with these types of problems. It is questionable if they may be called leaders at all.

They tend to resist new projects because they themselves have no compelling goals. Their focus is keeping everyone happy so that they stay in the church. If spiritual janitors are allowed primary leadership in the church, it is highly unlikely the church will grow numerically.

WHAT IS a "VISION"?

"Vision" Is An Attainable Dream.

It involves two aspects:

Both must exist to qualify as "vision." A plan without a dream lacks the momentum to attract the necessary leaders to make it work. A dream without a plan is merely visionary and never gets off the ground.

The Protestant Reformation was the result of the vision of several men like Luther, Calvin and Knox. It was a goal of immense value, costing many lives over three generations. The religious freedom and prosperity many countries enjoy today is the direct result of that vision.

In the political domain, the Latin American revolution under Simon Bolivar was the result of a vision. Bolivar dreamed of the liberation of an entire continent. It was costly and required a life-time investment of resources, a continent was worth it.

A vision need not be as ambitious as the above examples. Every successful church or Christian organization was started by a person with the vision to see it happen.

A Vision Without A Plan Is Merely Visionary

Listening to a visionary may be entertaining but so are movies.

Eloquence does not equal vision, either. Certain articulate and intelligent people discourse eloquently about what needs to be done. They seem more adept at analyzing the deficiencies of others than creating workable plans. Though they appear knowledgeable and confident, one never quite grasps exactly what they are saying. It is like catching smoke. (Politicians are often like that.) These are visionaries at best and leaders, not at all...wind-bags to be ignored.

A Dream and a Plan Is Not Quite Enough

Some may have a dream and a plan and still not be leaders. A third element must enter in...the personal drive and commitment to implement it. Without this, all they will only be trying to persuade others to do the work.

A dream and a plan without 'drive' is like a sports car with a driver who won't turn on the key.
Elements of a Sensible Vision

A.Simplicity. You must be able to explain your vision in a few seconds. Otherwise, it is too complex. People need to understand it to support it. Your promotional literature should project the vision in the first line or two.

1. Others have a strong psychological need to affirm their own self worth. Beware of motives.

A leader is partly characterized by having the initial vision. A vision is an attainable and valuable dream which comes from God.

From This Lesson We Learn:

Some leaders are pioneers, others are managers and others maintenance people.

A vision is an attainable dream of great lasting value, difficult to accomplish and requiring great expenditure in resources.

A vision must be accompanied with a plan or it is simply visionary, leading nowhere.

The vision must be simple enough for people to understand and get on board with it.

The vision comes normally through a personal walk with God like any other calling.

A genuine vision must advance God's Kingdom for His glory, not merely our own personal satisfaction.

What would be a key characteristic of a visionary?

How does a believer receive from God a 'vision' for his life and ministry?

Homework: Read chapters 15-18 of Sanders' book and answer the questions connected with the fifth study.

Planning Out the Vision

Suppose your vision is to establish the largest and most influential Christian school in the city. How would you go about creating a plan for it?

The success of your vision depends in large part on your ability to communicate it to potential participants and supporters. This in turn depends on your own ability to think through intermediate steps toward the goal and get a realistic grasp of the resources necessary.

It helps to write in a brief paragraph what is your vision. Make it simple. Afterwards, write out your intermediate goals and how you expect to attain them.

To convince mature Christians of the validity of your vision, your plan needs to incorporate certain ministerial elements, often found in missionary principles.

Elements of a Good Plan

You need to clarify in your plan:

A. How It Will Eventually Be Reproducible By the Participants.