Spiritual maturity and its responsibility. For those 50 years old and older

Congregations can be messy places. They are a constant challenge of relational issues, diverse points of view, differences in the "way we should do things" and the list goes on. Things can get messy! Oh, and there is that issue of change and people who mess with the way things were or should be. 

I have been around the church for a long time now, some 58 years and my observation would be that some of the most difficult people in the church are those like me who have been around a long time. We have opinions. We may have influence from our long tenure and, well, as we age, we can become less tolerant of change and get cranky about it.

Before I say what I really want to say, I would add this caveat. What irritates me personally is not change or the way we do things but young pastors who think that those who are over 50 are irrelevant to their plans, dreams and future of the church. And who because of this ignore them or marginalize them. I have seen it happen all too often and it is plain wrong. It is also stupid (did I just say that?). These are the folks who for the most part pay the bills and who have been faithful through the years. The church is not about the young, it is about all people which some people would be surprised includes those over fifty.

Having said that, those of us who are older and who have been in the faith for a long time have a special responsibility. We need to model relationships, behavior, responses to change that are Godly, loving, conciliatory, and mature. It is true we may not like everything we see but it is also true that we need to live up to the maturity to which we have (hopefully) come. 

I am sad when I see cranky seniors (I am technically one so I think I can say this) who seek to keep the church from moving forward because it violates the way things have been done in the past. I see them on church boards and they cause conflict and often bring more disunity than unity. Differences of opinion are not the issue but the way they are expressed and the way people are treated can be. Those of us who have a history in the faith ought to be the best at loving, accepting, graciousness and peace making. 

I have watched former denominational officials threaten to sue church boards because they didn't agree with their direction (it had nothing to do with theology). Former pastors who were divisive when the church didn't look any more like the church they were used to. Threats by folks to withhold funding when things did not go their way and just plain bad attitudes. It is sad and it does not reflect the character of mature believers. And this in the church, the Bride of Jesus! Sometimes it has taken the "blessed subtraction" of a home going to bring peace to a congregation.

As a young senior, I don't want to be a barrier to the church moving forward as I age (hopefully with grace). There are far more important things than the things that often divide congregations and as a believer of many years I (and many reading this) have a special responsibility to model the very best behavior of Jesus - for the sake of His church. 

(Posted from High Point, NC)

The tragic killing of Christians at an Afghanistan hospital

The tragic killing of Christians at an Afghanistan hospital a few days ago demonstrates the love and power of the Gospel in the face of danger and hatred. Why would Christ followers go and serve those who are not like them and why would they do so in such a dangerous setting where their very presence was an invitation to danger? Why would they serve a people who have many among them that would like to kill them?

These men knew something. The Gospel, the Good News of Jesus is of such great value that it is worth our lives. As the news of these killings reverberates across our globe how can one not ask "Why such hatred of Jesus?" and "Why such love of Christ followers?" From the earliest days of the church, God's people have gone into harms way to demonstrate the love of Jesus - compelled by the love they have experienced. They have started schools, cared for the sick, established hospitals and taken in "the least of these." Often in the face of persecution, hardship and danger.

Every time those sharing God's love are targets of hatred, the chasm between God's amazing love and man's amazing lostness is highlighted. What the gunman did not realize is that no weapon can win against God's love lived out by His people. It is for this reason that we have the ancient saying that "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church." Our Savior is the only one who can take absolute tragedy and redeem it for His sovereign purposes. Nothing happens in our world, good or bad, that does not first pass by the hand of God and which He does not use to build His church.

Against the hatred that prompted this act, is the response of the wife of one of the lost. ""Our family and friends have suffered a great loss and our hearts are aching,"Jan Schuitema told reporters in front of the couple's Kenwood home Thursday afternoon.  "While our hearts are aching for our loss, we're also aching for the loss of the other families as well as the multiple losses, that the Afghan people have experienced." See the article in the Chicago Tribune.

In spite of this terrible act, God's people will continue to go to Afghanistan and every place where He is not known. His love compels us. Once we have truly experienced His Grace, how could we not share that most awesome of news. These servants of God join a long procession of those who have given their lives for the Gospel, a crowd that grows until the coming of Christ. Compelled by His love!

(Posted from Oakdale, MN)

Taking responsibility for our own spiritual lives

One of the unintended consequences of the amazing array of programs and worship options available to us today in the west is that it is easy for people to assume that all of their spiritual needs will be met by a good church. And, some churches seem to promise this to be the case. And then they wonder why people eventually become dissatisfied with their offerings.

It is a false assumption and a false promise. We can never outsource the responsibility for our spiritual lives to any church, no matter how wonderful. No church will satisfy the thirsting of our souls - only Jesus can. No church will meet all of our spiritual needs - only Jesus can. Ultimately we must take responsibility for our spiritual lives and make the investment in living daily with Jesus. 

In our church we find a community of pilgrims with whom we share the journey of faith. How people negotiate the issues of life without a faith family I don't know. It is God's plan for us. But, it is not a substitute for our own need to grow daily with Jesus. Many complaints about the church are pointed in the wrong direction. The church was never meant to meet all of our spiritual needs. Only Jesus can.

Healthy ministries keep people oriented toward Jesus. They encourage us to live in His presence, stay in His Word and live out the Gospel in every relationship and circumstance of our lives. No one can do that for us. He is the source of our joy, our satisfaction and the object of our worship and lives. 

If we are pastors, we ought not promise what the church cannot deliver. And all of us ought to make the investment in our relationship with Jesus. 

(Posted from Oakdale, MN)

Why passive leadership is so disempowering to staff

Actually the term "passive leadership" is an oxymoron since it is not leadership at all. It is someone who is in a leadership position but who does not lead his/her staff. It is deeply disempowering to staff for a number of reasons.

First, non-leadership leaves staff in a quandary. They often lead a team and a ministry. How do they contribute to the whole when there is not overall missional direction? They are forced by virtue of the passive leader to determine what that direction should be and you end up with multiple directions as different staff members fill the void of leadership in their own way.

Second, none of us want to waste our lives. Good staff see the potential around them and deeply desire to make a difference. The opportunity they see and the lack of missional direction create great frustration over opportunity wasted. The end result is cynicism toward the non leading leader and often the loss of good staff who are looking for meaningful direction.

Third, just because a leader is passive does not mean that they don't have opinions and this is one of the most frustrating aspects of passive leadership. Because passive leaders don't set the directional agenda their staff end up doing so. But, passive leaders often don't like what they see so they step in and either change or challenge the hard work that has been done. Thus staff are in a double bind. They are not given the information up front as to the direction and they face the prospect of being disempowered on the back end after they have done their work. It is truly a no win proposition.

Fourth, passive leaders are often threatened by those who step in to fill the void and good staff will try to do just that as organizations need and want directional focus. This creates tension between the passive leader and his/her staff and it is not the staff's doing but the natural result of a passive leader who is not leading. The passive leader wants to be in charge even though they don't know how to steer a healthy team in a healthy direction. Thus they live with an inner conflict that spills over into the team in unhealthy ways.

The bottom line is that no matter how good someone is in some area of work, if they cannot lead they should never be put in a leadership role. Passive leadership is not only bad leadership but it is deeply disempowering to everyone around the passive leader.

(Posted from Oakdale, MN)

Spiritual discernment in ministry leadership

Individuals who have the gift of spiritual discernment are needed components in any ministry leadership team or board. Spiritual discernment is the ability to identify aberrations in theology or character issues in those who propagate those aberrations, who use theology for their own agendas or who are engaged in church power plays.

In First and Second Timothy, Paul tells Timothy to stay away from individuals who promote theological controversies. In 2 Corinthians (10-11) he takes the congregation to task for following so called super apostles who were using position and theology to rally people to their followership. Wherever there are people there will be those who use leadership or theology for their own agendas and it takes people of discernment to call it for what it is. 

Paul called it for what it was: "For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an agent of light. Is it not surprising, then if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve (2 Corinthians 11:13-15)." 

What is interesting is that there were many in the church in Corinth who did not discern the issues Paul is talking about. Obviously the spiritual cloak these individuals wrapped themselves in was effective in hiding their true motives.

The reason discernment is so critical is that when one is using Scriptures to make their case, there is enough truth that it takes discernment to identify its misuse. For instance, when a leader is always talking about money and the need for the congregation to give more and is using Scripture to try to force or manipulate individuals to give, you have moved from inviting people to be generous to "spiritual coercion." While it sounds Scriptural its application has become more about manipulation than the Holy Spirit's leading. 

As one who works with troubled churches what often fascinates me is that members of the congregation are often more discerning than the leadership of the church. When Scripture is being misused for the personal agenda of the pastor for instance, prescient  individuals often quietly leave while elected leaders remain unaware of the issues. And it is not necessarily pastors but others, especially who have the ability to teach and who have theological agendas who can promote controversies in the congregation that if discerned early can be dealt with.

Spiritual discernment also comes into play when there are people with power agendas in the congregation. We are often naive in the name of grace to name power games for what they are. As a congregational consultant they seem blatant to me but leaders have been reluctant to entertain the notion that a nice guy (or gal) might have poor motives and personal agendas for the church. Those with spiritual discernment usually read those situations for what they are. The fact the boards are often clueless tells me that we have too few with this ability in church leadership.

The early warning system of any church should be found in its leadership rather than the congregation at large. But that presupposes that there are individuals in leadership who are deeply spiritually discerning. And listened to! Can you point individuals in leadership of your church who have the gift of spiritual discernment?

(Posted from Oakdale, MN)

We play our role and then yield the stage

At 58 I am acutely aware that there is a finish line to my professional life lurking in the next decade or so. Not my influence as that can continue long after my final paycheck but our jobs don't last forever. We play our role and then yield the stage.

At least that is the way it should be. My predecessor yielded the stage to me with grace. Not only did he not meddle with me but he chose to support me even as I made significant changes to the organization. I had so much trust in his character that I invited him to a new part time role that allowed him to do what he loved to do.

Yielding the stage is a hard thing to do. Our ego is often wrapped up in our work. We have put strategies and philosophies in place that we believe in and don't want others to mess with them. We hired staff who we will be leaving behind and who will be giving allegiance to a new leader. And, it is hard to reconcile that our time is now over at least in the official sense. If one has had a job they loved and seen some success I doubt this is ever easy.

While not easy it is a test of our maturity and character. Maturity to understand that there are seasons and they come to a close so that new seasons can begin. Character to leave in a way that blesses the ministry rather than hurting it in any way. How many pastors, for instance, hang on long after they should and elders must literally pry their fingers from the ministry so that they can move on. Or board members whose time has come. And ministry founders who need to allow the ministry to go to a new level that they cannot lead but cannot yield their control.

Humble leaders understand the concept of seasons and that it is not about them but about the mission of the organization. The moment I lose my passion for the job I have is the moment that I need to hand it over to another even if that comes before the end of my professional career. It is true for all of us.

Think about this issue long before you need to implement its principles. The day comes for all of us to yield the stage, often faster than we expected or wished but come it does. How we handle the end of our careers is just as important as how we stewarded our role along the way.

(Posted from Atlanta)

Who is responsible for the well being of the staff of a church?

In most cases, the responsibility for the staff of a church falls ultimately on the senior pastor, whether or not he directly supervises them. But here is an irony. While senior pastors usually want staff reporting up through them (makes sense from an organizational point of view) those same pastors don't always take the time to care for their staff (an abrogation of their responsibility). Some ignore them altogether while others go through the motions of leading and caring in a superficial way. Fortunately some take the responsibility seriously and develop cultures that are life giving.

Here though is an irony. While churches talk about transformational ministry many staff cultures are far from transformational: being instead marginally healthy or even toxic. Often this stems from a senior pastor's focus on the congregation at the expense of his staff. Untransformational staff cultures cannot contribute to a transformed congregation so this is a great disconnect for the ministry.

Where this is the case there are at least four possible explanations in play.

One: The senior leader is so self absorbed that they don't see the necessity of building into their staff who actually make their own success possible. This form of narcissistic behavior is damaging in the long run to the trust and strength of the staff team.

Two: The senior leader is ill equipped to supervise, not having the training to supervise well. In this case, if the leadership of the church cares about staff health (and most do) why not get your senior leader management/supervisory training as they are ultimately responsible for the well being of their staff.

Three: The senior leader has not learned that his greatest leverage point is a strong team that is aligned and focused on the same things. This only happens when the leader has taken the time to make this a reality. 

Four: The senior leader just is not interested and therefor thinks they don't need to pay staff much attention. After all they are professionals, let them do what they do and fare for themselves. Caring for your staff, building mutual trust, being on the same page, contributing to their growth and success is not only the job of a leader but a responsibility of a leader. One should not lead if they are not willing to take the time to build and nurture a team.

None of these possible explanations are good excuses for not nurturing, growing and supporting the pastoral and support staff of a church. There are things we do because we like to do them and other things that come with the territory. If we are not going to care for staff then we need to empower someone else to do so but the issue cannot be ignored. 

I believe strongly that boards should hold their senior leader directly responsible for the health and happiness of the staff. It is one of the most basic requirements of leadership. How the senior leader chooses to organize for the health of staff is their business. But it is ultimately their responsibility and they should be held accountable for the result. 

(Posted from Santiago, Chile)