Leadership

Leadership Succession From Within

Soon-Hock Lim Leave a comment

This blog posting is a follow-up to the previous one I wrote, and I am calling it: Leadership Succession from Within. I wrote this article some 10 years ago for Georgetown Baptist Church’s 50th Anniversary magazine (2006). I have made some minor edits to make it more appropriate for the blog. I believe it is worth a read and  careful thought.

Succession Planning

Many churches start well, but when the pioneers or the pastors move on—the church starts to falter. This may last for years, until it is able to engage another capable pastor. The momentum, however, that had been built up during the previous pastor’s tenure is all but lost, and the new pastor has to practically start from ground zero.

To their credit, the leaders of Georgetown Baptist Church did well to keep the church going when the previous pastor left for Petaling Jaya: ably organizing themselves to provide pastoral care for the whole church and then still had the time, energy and vision to plant a new church in another part of the city.

It was not until December 1993, almost four years later, that I became GBC’s next pastor. Imagine how much more the church would have developed if there had not been such a gap—if there had been another pastor who immediately took over. Not just any pastor, but a pastor who had been groomed from within the church. Engaging someone from outside would mean time for the new pastor and the church to get to know and trust each other. Inevitably, I had to start almost from the ground. As a result the church hardly saw any numerical growth in the first four years of my tenure.

Before I left I was determined that this would not happen again; that there would be a pastor groomed up from within GBC and waiting in the wings to take over…. In such a situation there might still be hiccups, but certainly much less. This is because the succeeding pastor already understands the philosophy of ministry and vision of the church, he has worked with the church leadership, the members know him and have “taken to him”. Not that he will simply carry on doing everything that the previous pastor has done. Any good pastor will definitely introduce change, but he will have the advantage of building on the blocks—blocks that he has helped to develop in the first place.

Leaders must never fear raising up other leaders; even if it means that some of them will outshine us! That was what I aimed for. My goal was to pass the church into the hands of better men and women.

Paul was a great apostle—some say, the greatest. But in my mind Barnabas was the greater man. He recruited Paul because he saw Paul’s potential. He mentored Paul and wasn’t afraid that Paul might overtake him. Eventually when Paul did, he wasn’t concerned for his own face. My hope is to be a Barnabas to some Pauls.

Success is not about growing a great church. “Success” is about having a “successor” to take the church even further.

Leadership Succession

Soon-Hock Lim Leave a comment

In recent weeks I attended two very significant events. The first was the celebration of the life and ministry of Pr. Dr. Daniel Ho, who at the age of 65 stepped down as the Senior Pastor of Damansara Utama Methodist Church. The second was the celebration of Georgetown Baptist Church’s  60th Anniversary and dedication of their new building with a seating capacity for 1,200 people.

Close-up on the Hand of a Male Athlete Passing a Relay Baton to Another Athlete, With a Dramatic Sky in the Background

Daniel Ho’s readiness to step down as the SP of DUMC, a church he co-founded and led for more than 30 years, and which has grown into a mega church, is a testimony to his humility and leadership philosophy. Too many pastors (including lay leaders/elders) don’t know how to let go. And that is one of the reasons for the stagnation or even decline among some churches.

However, Daniel Ho had worked hard on the development of the leadership for the next and even later generations. He had been grooming his young lieutenants for a long time, and over the last couple of years he had taken deliberate steps to transit the leadership of DUMC to the designated successor, Chris Kam.

It’s the stories of Moses and Joshua, Elijah and Elisha, Paul and Timothy played out in our contemporary church scene.

I cannot claim to have been as intentional as the Biblical examples or Daniel Ho, but I did my bit at GBC. After 13 years as the SP I felt I was no longer the right person to take the church to the next level. GBC needed someone fresh, more able and with greater energy. I believed that Ng Kok Aun was God’s man. In fact it was by my encouragement that he had stepped into the full-time ministry eight years earlier. And during that time as we served together he had proven himself faithful and able.

At the point of transition, Kok Aun may not have been fully ready to assume the role of GBC’s SP (my fault due to lack of foresight), but 10 years later it is evident that he is God’s man for this season. The church has grown; it is healthy, strong and united. And one of the evidences for this is the new church building.

I strongly believe that there is a huge need for intentional leadership succession in the church today. Pastors and church leaders need to identify and intentionally raise up their successors. Secondly, a pastor or church leader must not overstay his time, especially if he is the main leader of the church. When he is no longer the man to lead the church he should be ready to admit it and step out. If a pastor is not prepared to do the latter he will not do the former. This calls for humility and honesty, as a pastor listens for the leading of the Lord during the different seasons of his life and ministry. It may be time to go and for his successor to take over.

We must think long term, we must think into the next and later generations; for without succession there can no long term success into the future generations.

Read next about “Leadership Succession from Within”.

Pastors and Elders

Soon-Hock Lim 6 Comments

Recently I was asked to share my thoughts on the role of the pastor in the church. Among other things, I explained that in the New Testament the local church had only two kinds of leaders: Elders and Deacons. And pastors fall into the category of elders.

PastorThe New Testament is very clear that “Pastor”, “Elder” and “Overseer” refer to the same person, occupying the same position and playing the same role. These terms are translated from three different Greek words, used interchangeably. For example, 1 Peter 5:1-2 reads, “To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder…. Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, serving as overseers….” In Acts 20:17 Luke writes,  “From Miletus, Paul sent to Ephesus for the elders of the church.” Then, in v28 Paul exhorts these elders to, “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God….” (italics mine). I don’t think it can be any plainer than that.

Why three different words? Simply because each term tells us something more about this very important office in the church. “Elder” underscores the maturity of the person. “Overseer” explains the person’s leadership role. “Pastor” identifies the person’s pastoral function.

Obviously, this conclusion has serious implications on church polity as it is practiced today, and including our understanding of the role of the Pastor. If the Bible teaches that Pastors and Elders are one and the same, we can’t, therefore, have Pastors in a separate category from the Elders of the church. The Pastor in a single-staff church, or the Lead Pastor in a multi-staff church, must have equal standing, authority and leadership with the other Elders. It clearly contradicts the New Testament when a person who is designated as a Pastor, carrying out the pastoral function, but does not have the leadership authority of an Elder.

If there is no intention for such a person to be part of the Eldership then it is best that he is not called “Pastor” (or “Lead/Senior/Main Pastor”). It will only lead to a  lot of misunderstanding and great frustration. It is best to designate such a person as a “Ministry Staff”, or by his job title such as the “Cell Group Director”.

Furthermore, in some multi-staff churches an attempt is made to differentiate between Pastors who have the same standing with the Elders and those who do not. The former is given the designation “Pastor-Elder”. To say the least, that is an oxymoron. Something that we have conjured up to solve a problem we had created in the first place.

To add to the confusion, some churches have “lay pastors”. They are “lay” in the sense that they are not paid staff. They are given the designation “Pastor” in that they carry out pastoral ministry. However, they are not Elders of the church. The point is not that no one other than Pastors or Elders may carry out pastoral ministry. Certainly, every believer and especially the more mature ones should provide pastoral care for other members of the Body. But it does not mean that they are to be designated as Pastors. If a person is to be designated as a Pastor, then he is also an Elder.

It is gravely unfortunate that the term “Pastor” in use in many evangelical churches today is primarily about the person’s pastoral function rather than his designation. This anomaly, however, has never been the intended teaching of the New Testament.

All these problems have arisen simply because of the unbiblical differentiation we have made between “Pastor” and “Elder”. It is time that we get it right. It is time that we return to the New Testament teaching about who we call “Pastors” and their role, and also about the leadership structure of the church.

Leadership Dichotomy

Soon-Hock Lim Leave a comment

One of the issues that cropped up at a meeting with a group of marketplace Christian leaders was about leadership style (for a lack of a better word). We noticed that corporate leaders, including Christian ones, provide strong leadership and expect everyone to follow through on agreed or accepted policies and objectives. However, when these same Christian leaders are in a so-called Christian context, like a church or a Christian organization, suddenly their views on leadership style changes.

leadership

For example, in the marketplace we expect a certain level of competency and commitment from those who work under our leadership. If they don’t do what is expected of them, despite all the help and encouragement afforded to them, we will eventually have to take some drastic steps. If they can’t do the job as required—they will be moved. If they won’t (say, because of an attitude problem)—they will be removed.

In the church, and even Christian organisations, however, leaders are expected to tolerate shoddy work and poor attitude (even bad attitude)—because, we reason, it is the Christian thing to do. Furthermore, the same people who exercise strong leadership in their place of work, will tell the pastor and elders that it is wrong for them to exercise strong leadership in the church.

There is something clearly amiss here. We have been deluded to accept a dichotomy between what we term, the “secular “and the “spiritual”. But as one preacher said, “Nothing is secular. Everything is spiritual, except sin.” There should not be a contradiction between the kind of leadership you exercise in your office and that in the church.

You can’t say, it is alright to dismiss someone who is not performing in his job, but it is not Christian to remove someone who is not carrying out his ministry responsibility seriously. If it is not Christian to do the latter, neither is it Christian to do the former. The place does not determine whether it is Christian or not. It is our attitude and the process that we take that determine that. Our leadership should be Christian regardless of where we exercise it; whether in the marketplace or the church. What we cannot do in the church, we cannot do in our office. What you believe you can do in your office, you should agree that it can also be done in the church. And to keep us on the road of good and godly leadership we have the best-selling guide of all—the Bible.

This blog post is not a discussion on leadership principles; to determine what’s right or wrong, good or bad leadership. The point I am making here is that we are not to dichotomise leadership in the marketplace and in the church. Leadership is to be the same in both arenas—Christian and Biblical.