Tagged: church leadership

SERIES: Identify, Assess, Equip Church Elders – Post 3: Pursuing a Candidate for Elder

OK, so you’ve done a decent job of identifying some candidates for serving as church Elder (see the previous post).   What do you do once you identify men who might be a good fit?

You should approach them, in specific but vague terms.

I know… to quote Ricky Ricardo, “You got a lot of ‘splaining” to do Lucy!”  Here’s what I mean:

SPECIFIC about what you are asking the candidate to consider…
VAGUE about what the final outcome will be…

HERE’S HOW I GO ABOUT IT:

  1. Get together with the man one-on-one, in a casual environment.
  2. Tell him you’ve noticed his heart for the Lord, his interest in the spiritual well-being of others, the spiritual fruit in his home, etc. (whatever you truly HAVE noticed)
  3. Tell him you’d like his feedback or reaction to an idea you had…
  4. HERE COMES THE SPECIFIC BUT VAGUE PART: Tell him that if he is at all interested, you would like to begin a process of exploration (a key word) together.  What you’d be exploring is the biblical role of Elder, and whether or not he has interest, gifting, or fit for serving in that role.  (The reason I say it this way is because I in NO WAY want to make the mistake of communicating that I think he should be or will be an Elder.  It’s waaaay too early for either of you to be thinking along those lines.  There is a TON of learning AND assessment that needs to take place before you begin thinking along those lines.  You ONLY want to challenge him to consider the possibility and be open to exploring the idea more.  That way both he and you will be able to know whether your idea is a good idea or a bad idea.)
  5. If he’s open… you move on… to the initial step of the exploration you’ve already mentioned.  You could do this initial step during the same conversation if he’s truly open and interested, or at a later.  In this initial step, you’d describe the process you’d like to use to do a thorough exploration of the possibility.  Include time-frames, topics of study, and tools involved as you tell him what you have in mind.  This way, he is clear on the commitment he will be making to make a thorough exploration of the subject to with you.  FOR EXAMPLE: In the process I’ve developed (found in my “Elder Training Handbook” link at the end of this post), I take a year or more to do that thorough exploration, for some very specific and important reasons (to be explained in the next post).  Your candidate needs to know all of this t up front, and be willing to commit to it.

If your experience is anything like mine, most guys of the caliber you’ve identified will at least be interested in finding out more.  But not all will be willing to make the time investment (the year or more I mentioned) in finding out if they are a good fit for the role.

That’s O.K.  In fact, it’s good for you to know… as it may be indicating that the man’s life situation, pace of life, or spiritual condition are not truly ready for the Elder role – which will be even more demanding.  If you find that to be the case with some of the men you have identified… graciously let them go.  Both of you (not to mention the church and their families) are probably better off for the time being if they don’t pursue the exploration.

If he’s game to do the longer exploration, move ahead with your thorough exploration.  BUT, make sure that you are NOT, in any way or at any time, guilty of communicating any sense of certainty about what the conclusions of your exploration together will be.  You are exploring exactly because you don’t know whether he’s a good fit for the role.  Neither does he.  Both of you need to be clear on that.

OTHER POSTS IN THIS SERIES: Post 1, Post 2

I’ve recently published my first book – “The Elder Training Handbook” that covers all of these blog posts and much more, in greater detail.  If you’d like to get a copy for yourself, go to the FREE tab at the top of this blog.  There you’ll find options for the free E-book download of the ETH, as well as an option to buy a hard-copy and have it shipped to you.

SERIES: Identify, Assess, Equip Church Elders – Post 2: Identifying Potential Elders

As a Pastor or existing Elder Team seeks to find a man who may be a viable candidate for the role of Elder (yes, I’m complementarian in my views on this subject), what sort of things should they be looking for or considering in order to evaluate whether they should even approach him about the subject?  Here’s my take on it…

  1. Know the biblical qualifications for an Elder.  Study them.  Make sure you understand them.  You must clearly know what you are looking for before you will ever know if you’ve found it.
  2. Commit to those qualifications as the God-given requirements for your search.  Don’t allow yourself to look at business savvy, smarts, or education as qualifications for Elders.  Don’t even let yourself be satisfied with “he’s got a good heart.”  You need men who are exemplary in their Christian walk, which is what the biblical qualifications are overall – an example of a Christian man.  Your church family will only rise in maturity to the level of its leadership.  Set the bar high, as Paul does.
  3. Remember that these qualifications indicate direction, not perfection.  Nobody is perfect in every one of these characteristics, but every man considered for the role of Elder must be heading in that direction consistently and with passion.  Watch for the grace of God, evident in the growth patterns of his life.
  4. Look for men who are already serving joyfully in the church.  Men who already understand the selfless nature of the Christian life are well on their way to the Elder mindset you are looking for.  Look for men who are already making disciples, on the front end (through evangelism) and/or on the back (through mentoring or discipleship).
  5. Look for men who are doing a good job leading at home.  Paul makes much of this.  A man who is the “real deal” spiritually will be able to effectively transmit that passion to his own family first.  His first disciples (his family) are the barometer for whether he’s capable of making additional disciples.
  6. Look for men who have a heart/desire for the role.  You may have to get to know men a bit more deeply to find this out, but it’s worth your time.  Men who talk about Christ, men who talk about the importance of the church, men who talk about the purity, reputation, and health of the body, men who talk about the need Christians have for maturity and growth – those are the men you are looking for.  They may even come right out and express, “I would like to investigate becoming an Elder of this church family.”  That’s not arrogance or selfish ambition necessarily – it could be evidence of a God-given call.

OTHER POSTS IN THIS SERIES: Post 1, Post 3

I’ve recently published my first book – “The Elder Training Handbook” that covers all of this blog post and much more, in greater detail.  If you’d like to find a copy for yourself, go to the FREE tab at the top of this blog.  There you’ll find options for the free E-book download of the ETH, as well as an option to buy a hard-copy and have it shipped to you.

SERIES: Identify, Assess, Equip Church Elders – Post 1: My Journey

I grew up Baptist – the kind of Baptist that had “Deacons” instead of Elders.  From what I remember, they were a board of men who served alongside the Pastor, but not with much decision-making power, and certainly no spiritual oversight or shepherding responsibilities.  From what I recall, the Deacons took care of the finances and the Pastor did all the shepherding.  And the congregation voted – on EVERYTHING!  It felt like a spiritual democracy of sorts.

As I became an adult and began studying for ministry, I became aware of different models of church government.  You could say it was an awakening of sorts.  I realized that what I had grown up with was not necessarily the best, or the most Biblical model.  Over the years, I’ve had my understanding tweaked on countless occasions, and have come to see that the New Testament does give pretty clear guidance, at least regarding what the Apostles expected/intended to be the “norm” in the new covenant church.

Once I moved into positions of primary leadership in the church, I began to face the difficulties of implementing that guidance.  Every existing church has its own set of traditions regarding leadership, well examined or not.  Often, men are serving as Elders who never should have been placed in that position in the first place.  Evaluation is needed and adjustments may need to be made.  A delicate task, to say the least!

Brand new churches (of which I’ve been a part of two) have to start from scratch.  That’s a better situation in some regards (no traditions to overcome), but harder in others (not a lot of “qualified” candidates for serving as Elders).  Then you face the harsh reality of having to figure out HOW to go about the process.  You must identify good candidates, assess their qualifications and readiness, and equip them for the role.  What I’ve found is that if you take those three tasks seriously, you have a job of epic proportions on you hands!

This series of posts is about that process… It will include principles and tips to help church leaders go about the very necessary task of identifying, assessing, and equipping candidates for the role of Elder.

I’ve recently published my first book - “The Elder Training Handbook” that covers all of these blog posts in much more detail.  If you’d like to find a copy for yourself, go to the FREE tab at the top of this blog.  There you’ll find options for the free E-book download of the ETH, as well as an option to buy a hard-copy and have it shipped to you.

About Pastoral Ordination…

I know that there have been many of you who have been praying for me and for my ability to answer well and rightly in my upcoming ordination interview (Jan. 28 – 9 to noon) with our denomination (www.efca.org).

First, I want to say a very hearty THANK YOU for your concern and prayers – AND ask you to keep praying!!  It is important to me that I represent what the Lord has done in my life and ministry WELL – and your prayers are SO appreciated!

It’s also important to me that those I am serving alongside (other leaders in the denomination) have no reason at all to feel hesitant about my ability to lead wisely and well as “one of them.”  So, I want to do well in my ordination exam.

Regardless of how you feel about “denominations” (I could make pro and con arguments about them myself…) I feel very good about this entire process of ordination… for a two reasons that I feel are very important!

  1. The church (the Bride of Christ) DESERVES good leaders.  By “good” I mean leaders who know their stuff Biblically, practically, and are personally of good character themselves.  If ordination can confirm a man in this, or deny him leadership because of a discovered failing or need in his life – then SO BE IT!  That is at least a partial protection for the church from bad leadership!
  2. Too often in my experience churches/denominations have not been THOROUGH ENOUGH about this sort of thing.  People with outstanding or obvious leadership abilities are often rushed into leadership when the more important issue of character is not taken into a high enough consideration.  It’s typically character that wrecks a pastor, not knowledge, skills, or education.

So… I’m glad to go through the process and praying the Lord will reveal much along the way… now, back to preparation!

Women in Church Leadership – an afterthought

I thought I was finished with this series of posts until a point of clarification came to my mind.  It’s a bit more practical and “how to” in my thinking than the rest.  I hope this will help many of you to see how I apply the things I’ve already covered in this series.

My wife, Mindi, has been God’s greatest gift to me, after the person of Christ.  I don’t say that lightly or for any reason except for the simple fact that it is obviously true from my perspective.  Her home-life as a child was much more consistently Christ-centered than mine.  Her ability to communicate and be considerate of what is going on inside of poeple is much more finely tuned than mine.  She has been taught, from a very early age, to consistently be asking, “What does GOD think (about whatever she is facing)?”  Those and many other qualities and skills that she possesses have benefited me in countless ways and have blessed many people besides me throughout our ministry life together (if you are one of those people, I’d encourage you to post a comment saying how she has been used of God to bless your life – so those who don’t know either of us can get a feel for the kind of person she is – and to know that I’m not making this up!).

As a Pastor and Elder in a local church for the past how-many-ever years, I’ve learned that her partnership with me is invaluable.  She has discernment about people (the sheep I am called to shepherd) that is typically right-on, and that I would have missed on my own.  I have learned that much of that relational insight comes as a direct result of her being a woman.  There’s TREMENDOUS value in that – that I MUST recognize and humbly receive.  As a Pastor I talk with her about almost every situation with which I am faced (unless it’s in regard to a confidence I’ve agreed to keep).  I listen to her perspective, as a woman and as my wife and partner, and I often adjust or altogether change my intended actions based on her input – because I glean greater wisdom than I had on my own.

I’ve come to trust her relationship with the Lord, her ability to discern right from wrong, and her intuition about people.  I think that’s a HUGE (did I say HUGE) part of what a husband/wife partnership in marriage is all about!  That’s how we are MEANT to function together.  She’s neither a liability as a woman nor a simple “bonus” to enrich my life!  She’s an integral part of the ministry we do TOGETHER!  It’s OUR ministry under God’s authority and calling, not just mine.  Even though I’m the one in the leadership role within the church, she’s as much a part of it as I am – she’s part of God’s provision for HIS WORK to be accomplished in this scenario in which we’ve been placed (remember the old quote by Hudson Taylor, “God’s work done in God’s way will never lack God’s provision”?  She’s part of that provision for this work of ministry to be done!  Isn’t that obvious?).

I believe that any man who is in a church leadership role (Pastor, Elder, etc.) who DOES NOT include his wife in the ministry responsibilities that God has called THEM to do together is very short-sighted and perhaps risking great damage to the flock he is called to shepherd.  And if he is unwilling to benefit from his wife’s wisdom as a woman because he believes that theologically it is “not her place” (or some other such idea), he’s very sorely mistaken in the way he understands not only church leadership, but also the very foundational structure, meaning, and purpose of marriage!

I said all that to say this…

In reading my previous posts on this subject you might get the feeling that I simply tolerate women, or try to be nice to them but still think they are “less capable” than men.  You might think that I give women “lesser” tasks to placate or pacify them so as not to cause too much of a stir in the church.  None of that could be further from the truth.  In our church there are women (very competent women I might add) in VERY VITAL roles within our church community (finance committee, worship leadership, eventually as Deaconesses – when we get them established, etc.).  And all of that is in ADDITION to the irreplaceable role my wife plays in my leadership and oversight of the church as its pastor.  NONE of this denegrates the Biblical truths that I’ve already discussed, nor does it diminish the role of men.  I believe they are effective applications of what both marriage and the church are INTENDED TO BE!

Comments are still welcome…

Summary – Women in Church Leadership (Part 8)

I promised a quick (yeah right) summary of what I’ve covered in this series of posts on Women in Church Leadership.  Before I do, I want to reiterate something very important.

 I did not write this series of posts to slam anyone, condemn anyone, or oppress anyone.  I simply believe that the Bible speaks very clearly on this issue – and we are to follow what the Bible says.  When we do not, damage is inflicted on people and on the church as a whole.

THE SUMMARY

Part 1 – My Story
I covered my background as it relates to this issue – so you can see a bit more of where I’m coming from on this.  I honestly believe that I have no agenda other than to clearly communicate what the Bible teaches.

Part 2 – The Head of  Woman is Man?
I covered the often confusing passage of 1 Corinthians 11:3-16 in an attempt to clarify what is meant by man being the “head” of woman. 

  1. I concluded that the peripheral issue of “headcoverings” is cultural.
  2. I also concluded that the issue of “headship” in the home is tied to the order of creation, NOT a cultural situation unique to Paul or Corinth.
  3. While obviously offensive to some in our modern-world, I believe that these distinctions are not to be “greater-than / less-than” issues between men and women, but rather an issue of ROLES within the church.
  4. I also noticed that within this very letter Paul admits that it IS appropriate for women to be verbal in the setting of the gathered church – I discussed that more in the following post.

Part 3 – Women should be silent in the church?
This issue appears from the context to have been a cultural issue, unique to Paul’s day and specifically, the church in Corinth.

Part 4 – Do women have the “right” to lead in the church?
In this post I addressed the common argument made by those who support women in church leadership – which is, “The fact that we are ‘co-heirs’ and both ’in  Christ’ negates any distinction at all between men and women.”  I tried to show that the use of such verses to make that point is to take the scriptures in question out of context, applying them to something to which the writers did not intend them to be applied.

Part 5 – The husband of one wife
This post addressed the qualifications of elders (church leaders) as Paul lists them in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1.  Instead of making the word “husband” the issue, I went rather to the meaning of the phrase “husband of one wife” and showed that the intent was that the reader understand that the elder needs to be sexually pure, morally upright.  With this in mind, I pointed out that such a requirement would be equally important for both men and women leaders, yet Paul does not give any such warning or requirement for women.  It is my conclusion that he never intended women to be considered for such positions.

Part 6 – I do not allow a woman to…
The passage addressed in this post was 1 Timothy 2:11-15.  It is where Paul states that he does not allow a woman to “teach or have authority over a man.”  While advocates of women in church leadership claim that this was an instruction given to Timothy because of particular issues going on in his church, two issues seem primary to me in responding to that claim - first of all the specific language Paul uses is “I do not allow.”  He does not say “Timothy, here’s what YOU should do…” or anything similar.  His language is broad and all-inclusive.  Secondly, Paul’s main reason for giving this prohibition is tied to the created order in some way, not a cultural situation.  I continued to address that issue in the final post…

Part 7 – Why was Eve created second? 
Returning to the creation account in Genesis 2, I took the time to look at the specific language used to describe the origin of man and woman.  God seems to make a very particular point of making us understand that Adam was created first and that he was alone.  I believe He did so to point out the “why” of Eve’s creation, an act done some time AFTER Adam had already existed.  The two reasons God gives is that Eve was to be Adam’s companion and his helper.  Her ROLE was to be of help to the man in the role God had appointed for him.

CONCLUSION

A thought that comes to mind, and one that I know is very difficult for those opposed to “male only” leadership (within the church) to accept is this.  One can honestly hold a very high view of women – a view of spiritual equality in Christ and a belief that they are indeed “co-heirs” with men – and yet not believe they are permitted to serve as leaders within the church.  I personally believe that both the scriptures and experience show that women are equally capable with men and equally intellegent, spiritually attuned, etc.  But we must be careful to understand that those are not the types of issues that should be considered when deciding who is allowed to serve in the leadership of the church.  What matters primarily is what God has said are the proper roles for men and women.  While attempts have been made to use the scriptures to “prove” that women are indeed allowed to be church leaders – from both good and false motives, I’m sure – I have yet to be convinced that such interpretations are valid.  To me, there are too many interpretive backflips that have to be done in order to make that case, or in other instances, there is simply a willingness to avoid the words of scripture altogether in favor of what “seems” right to our modern culture.

I hold that scripture must be the only and final authority – and as I’ve said time and again in this series of posts – we have to let it say what it says. and honor God by accepting it and applying it as best we can.

The Husband of One Wife? – (Women in Church Leadership – Part 5)

When considering whether or not women are Biblically allowed to be in positions of leadership within the church, we have to make sure we are being honest with the Biblical text.  I admit freely that many people, on both sides of this issue, have played “fast and loose” with the text (only God knows their true motives in doing so) in seeming attempts to explain its meaning according to their own viewpoint.  I guess that’s human nature – but we have to TRY VERY HARD to stay true to what the Bible actually means, not try to re-read it to mean what we desire it to mean.  As we look at the qualifications for elders that Paul lists, I challenge all of you to honestly consider the “intention” of Paul’s words, not just the verbiage he uses.

But before we do, let me reiterate as I have in previous posts on this subject - my only goal is to understand what the scriptures SAY and MEAN regarding this issue, for only when we understand it can we apply it properly.  I have no bias against women and want to allow every person (male or female, child or adult) every liberty that scripture allows. 

When Paul gives qualifications by which to choose church leaders (elders) he makes one statement that is often used to point out that only men can be in the primary leadership of the church.  He makes this statement in both lists, 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1.  Here’s the statement…

…the husband of but one wife…

Many times the only thing that is appealed to in order to “prove” that men only are to be elders is that it says “husband.”  While that is somewhat convincing, that kind of logic carried throughout the passage would demand that we read “manages his children and household well” as an insistence that he be married (have a houshold) and have children.   I don’t believe that the context makes that sort of insistence necessary at all.

What seems more appropriate is to understand the MEANING behind the phrase in question.  Clearly, the main point of this phrase is not the gender of the leader in question, but whether or not the potential leader is morally pure.  THAT is his point!  The elder should be committed to their family, faithful to their spouse, unwavering in their fidelity.  For an elder who is not married, we can reasonably imply from the MEANING of this phrase, that they too should be morally pure in their singleness.  When and if they become married, then they too must be faithful to their new spouse.  In a day such as ours, few have a problem understanding why such a criteria is needful.  

With that being said, a very interesting point arises… and again, I implore you to honestly consider the ramifications of it.  I think I can best lead you to understand what I’m getting at by asking a “what if” question…

IF women ARE allowed to be in church leadership, wouldn’t this issue of sexual purity and/or marital fidelity be just as important for them as it would be for men?  Absolutely!  Sexual scandal among church leaders is terrible and damaging – it taints Christian witness in the world and rips up the church internally.  In ALL cases it should be guarded against.

Knowing this, you would naturally expect Paul to make an equally clear point of admonishing the women candidates for elder in this same area of concern.  That’s the problem, he doesn’t.  He says that the men should be “husband of one wife” but says absolutely nothing about this area of sexual purity and marital fidelity as it relates to women.  Again, IF women are allowed to be in church leadership, why are THEY not specifically instructed to be the “wife of one husband,” or something similar?

Some have argued, almost inconceivably in my opinion, that this phrase “husband of one wife” implies the same moral uprightness for men AND women – without actually saying “women” anywhere in the context.  What????!!!????  Do words mean nothing?  Can we legitimately take the wording of the scriptures so lightly that we will imply a completely opposite meaning to a word with as specific a meaning as “husband?”  Surely, one can’t be a husband unless they are a man…can they?  And one can’t have “but one wife” unless they are a man (of course, the way our culture is going that may change, tragically).

Do you see my point?  This admonition regarding sexual purity and marital fidelity is aimed specifically and prejudicially toward men.  Paul only had men in mind, or he would have undoubtedly included a similar phrase aimed toward women.  With such high stakes involved (the moral and righteous reputation of the bride of Christ) how could Paul have been so negligent as to not include a similar admonition toward women about this area of sexual purity – IF he had women in mind as well?  The only logical conclusion that I can see is that his comments are specifically and solely oriented toward men in these qualifications because he specifically and solely meant for men to be the only ones considered for the position of elder.

Comments are once again welcome…