The dark side of leadership

Insightful article on the dark side of leadership which we ignore at our peril.

Best practices for training overseas

Many are engaged in training nationals overseas, something that is a high value in a world where a good theological education is out of the reach of most church leaders. How it is done, however, can make a significant difference in its long term impact. 


In many cases, national pastors from the majority world will attend any training that comes their way. Because that training is often paid for or subsidized and they are hungry for information. The end result, however, is often a grocery list of seminars and training that has no coherence to it and has far less value than we might think it does. And since we train and leave we do not know how effective our time was.


Here are some best practices to consider when involved in overseas training.


1. Before you go, take a class in contextualization so that you understand how to train in a culture that is not your own. Without an understanding of cross-cultural training we often train people to do things our way which is not appropriate in their culture and simply describes a western church model which is not appropriate to them.


2. Think Biblical principles, not specific programs or strategy. Principles are timeless and cross cultures, strategies and programs often do not. Most of us are equipped to teach principles for ministry but we are not equipped to know how they apply those principles in their context.


3. Don't simply teach, create dialogue. The majority world is used to simply taking in whatever is taught to them - it is the school model they grew up in. What we need to do is to help people think, evaluate, plan and apply for their context. This only comes in dialogue.


4. Rather than one off training sessions, consider a plan to train specific groups over a period of years so that you build into a group with intentionality and can see the progress they make. Allow them to make the plan with your input.


5. Always spend a good period of time in group exercises where they are thinking through the application of your teaching to their context together. For instance, if the topic is that of making disciples, have them think about an intentional process that works in their context.


6. Find out what their concerns are. We often have an agenda for what we want to teach but don't ask the group about their concerns and challenges. We are there to serve them so it is important that we understand the issues that are critical for them. 


7. Have someone with you from the local culture who can coach you on where you are communicating well and where you are losing them. 


8. Watch your illustrations, metaphors and examples. Many do not translate into another culture and will not help.


9. Ensure that everything you teach is transferable to others. If it is to complex for your students to pass on it has limited effectiveness even in the group you are teaching.


10. Keep it simple. Complexity is confusing. Simplify complexity so that you communicate what is truly important.

Helping people learn: Don't tell, ask

Questions are powerful tools in helping others grow. And often underutilized. We are prone to tell others something rather than ask them something. In telling them something we give them valuable information. In asking them questions so that they come to a conclusion themselves we help them to think for themselves, the skill that will help them make good decisions themselves.


We used to do this with our kids at the dinner table. The questions would result in free flow discussions on many topics and both our sons are today deeply inquisitive of life and good thinkers. Sometimes they turned the table on us and asked why we had certain rules, making us think about the why behind the what.


I was talking to a young leader recently about question asking and he made the comment that no one has taught him how to use that skill. I encouraged him that everyone can learn the skill with practice. I also told him that one had to be OK with a bit of silence after asking a question. Be patient and eventually the other party will answer.


Questions are particularly important in helping others understand their own wiring, motivations, strengths and weaknesses. We may not even have the option of telling them these things but through questions and dialogue we can help them uncover their own makeup.


One reason that more leaders do not ask more questions and default to telling is that questions and dialogue take time. Telling is fast and easy. However, while telling is more efficient in the short run is is less effective in the long run since telling rarely helps the other party actually grow. It gives them information but does not build the skill of critical analysis - necessary for growth.


I just finished a week of dialogue with some bright leaders from around the world. Many shared the power of the week because it was based on questions and group dialogue rather than information imparting which they were used to. Several said they would be using the same method with those they oversaw or mentored.


Questions rather than telling also sends a powerful message that you care about the other party. You are implicitly saying to them that you value their perspective, that they have something to contribute to the question at hand and that it is worth exploring the issue together rather than you as the supervisor or leader simply telling them the answer. Telling communicates that you have the answer. Dialogue indicates that we can come up with the answer. There is a big difference.

Unleashing our lay people and overcoming the dysfunction of professional ministry

I believe that one of the five dysfunctions of the church is that of professional ministry where we hire specialists to do the work of ministry rather than to equip others to do ministry. This professionalism is even more interesting in that the movement I am a part of (the EFCA) and sister denominations came out of lay led movements in the eighteen hundreds.


The free church movement came out of an environment in Europe where the state church (non free churches) had become liberal, were not preaching the Gospel and where parishioners were not encouraged to study scripture themselves. Because they were not being fed in church, many started to meet in homes to pray, worship and study scripture resulting in the pietistic movement which brought revival to a number of countries in Europe and with that revival the planting of non-state run churches (free churches) which then spilled over to the United States. It was Europeans out of the free church movement who planted the same kind of churches here in the eighteen and nineteen hundreds.


Fundamental to this movement was the belief that lay people who had not had formal theological education were qualified to teach, preach and lead the church. One did not have to be a "theologian" in the professional sense of the word or have had formal theological education. In fact, many of these lay leaders and pastors had a greater understanding of scripture and the Christian life than their "educated" counterparts. 


Today, however, it is very rare and often difficult for those in the EFCA and fellow free church movements to become ordained without a formal theological degree. The unwritten understanding is that you need to have a Bible school or seminary degree in order to pastor. And the ordination process is designed to enforce this.


As the leader of the EFCA international mission, ReachGlobal, I work in an environment that is much closer to the roots of our movement where it is informally trained leaders who lead and pastor churches internationally. Most of the world cannot afford the luxury of a formal theological education given the poverty of the majority world. That, however, does not keep them from growing churches that are often healthier from a Gospel perspective than many churches in the west with their formally educated clergy. 


I am not anti theological education. I have one of the best and it has informed all my work. What I do object to is the professionalization of ministry that requires a theological degree to be in full or part time ministry or to be ordained in many of our movements. Many large churches in the west are rejecting that paradigm, training their own leaders and releasing them to preach, teach and lead in their settings. 


In basically ruling out ordination for those not professionally trained we perpetuate the clergy/lay distinction and send the message that to really be effective in ministry one must have a theological education (read degree). It is a good thing this was not true in the early church. Or in the majority world. 


Rather than discourage lay people from leading, teaching and preaching we ought to encourage it. It would raise the level of biblical understanding in our churches and release new ministry personnel who are either part time (bi-vocational) or full time. And why would we not encourage these very people who are gifted to plant and pastor churches themselves regardless of whether they have a formal degree or not?


Further, why ordain only people who can give the definition of obscure theological terms rather than ordain those who know the bible, can explain it well and teach it diligently? Knowing what superlapsarianism and infralapsarianism means is far less important than simply knowing good biblical theology that comes from a knowledge of the bible and can be applied to everyday life. We ought to know the biblical terms. Why should one need to know the litany of theological terms dreamed up by two thousand years of theologians in order to be effective in ministry? Or for that matter, Greek and Hebrew in order to preach well? I have a hard time believing that those would be the standards that Jesus would have for those in ministry!


Why cannot we open real ministry up to those who are trained both formally and informally and encourage both to get into ministry either full or part time? The church might actually see significant growth in the United States if we again allowed it to be a movement of lay people, not just those who are professionally trained and can get through an ordination process that is designed to weed out those who are not. I wonder how many lay people were given gifts by Jesus to lead, teach and preach that we do not unleash in meaningful ways because they are lay and not professional clergy?

Theologians in the pews

OK, I don't like the lay/clergy distinction but recognize it is there. However, there is a long history within the evangelical tradition of theologians in the pews, not simply in the pulpit. In fact, it was the theologians in the pews who left the state church in Europe and formed "free churches" when the theologians in the pulpits no longer held to the truth of the Scriptures. This illustrates the importance of ordinary men and women who are also biblically literate. We cannot simply outsource the role of theologian to those with the requisite degrees. We need people who think deeply on the things of Scripture and their application to life and the church.

Perhaps the Bereans of the New Testament best illustrated this tradition as they carefully studied the scriptures. Today, every tool available to pastors is also available to the rest of us - even tools to study the original languages (without having to learn them and most pastors forget what they learned of those quickly and use those tools as well). 

There are many believers who are content with a simple knowledge of God and Scripture. But the health of the church requires that there are also those who go deep, drinking regularly at the well of truth and are able to teach and translate that truth to the lives of everyday people. It is a laudable goal, especially if that learning first goes into the lives of the learner. 

When I was a child it was not unusual to have such people fill the pulpit from time to time. Today that is rare but there are more people who can teach and preach than we often acknowledge. It makes a statement when someone without a seminary or Bible school degree gives the message. It illustrates to others that Biblical truth is accessible to all rather than some. 

It is often those "lay theologians" who challenge the church in missional directions. They are less enamored with "scripture light" that characterizes much of today's preaching. That is why effective Bible teachers in the local church are so loved. Many want to delve more fully than Sunday mornings lend themselves to. 

If you are a lay theologian, a theologian in the pew, I salute you. You are deeply needed by the body. Keep it up and help all of us both love the Word more deeply and apply it more effectively. If you are a pastor, what are you doing to encourage, use and build into the skills of your theologians in the pew?