Leadership

Transfer Growth

Soon-Hock Lim 6 Comments

Changing Church

There is possibly a church in your town that is growing exponentially, but not without some negative impact on the other churches around it. They have lost members to this church. Inevitably it has been accused of sheep-stealing, growing through transfers rather than conversions (though this is usually an unfounded perception from people who have not gone to the church themselves), or teaching some kind of sugar-coated watered down Christianity which appeals to the less mature.

What is your attitude towards transfer growth?

When People Leave My Church

I do not believe that being critical of the success of another church is in the best interest of the Kingdom, nor ours. Instead of accusing others it is better to take a hard look at ourselves. If I were the pastor who is losing members to another church, the first thing I would do is to ask, “Why is my church losing people to the other church? There must be something (or many things) that the other church is doing right that makes people—including members from my church—want to go to there. What can I learn from the other church that will help my church do better—so that not more members will leave my church; instead more people will come because they find it to be a great church to be a part of?”

Screaming at another church for “sheep-stealing” is not going to help anyone—the least of all myself. But learning how to do church better would be a great blessing to my church. And if all the churches in my city did likewise and continued to grow in spiritual vibrancy and effectiveness it will certainly lead to the advancement of the Kingdom. For the sake of the Kingdom, this has got to be our attitude.

When People Come to My Church

On the other hand, if I were the pastor of the church that is drawing people from other churches I would be very careful to tell my members not to invite them. For the simple reason: we don’t want to grow through transfers but conversions. We don’t want to just grow the church; we want to grow the Kingdom. And the latter can only happen through conversions.

However, if people from other churches came on their own accord, it would not be right for the pastor to tell them not to come. People have a right to choose which church they want to be a part of, or to change their involvement from one church to another. Furthermore, they may have very good reasons for leaving their church, and it will not do them any good if they are then told they are not welcomed here. The opportunity to bless and help someone in need may be lost—and very possibly we may even lose the person to his problems or to the world.

It’s Better to Have a Positive Attitude

I  believe it is important that we view transfer growth more positively and with greater grace. Let us learn from growing churches, even if some of their growth is due to transfers. On the other hand, let us not be guilty of soliciting members from other churches. But if they choose to come, welcome them and take responsibility to shepherd them for the Kingdom.

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.