Leadership in the Local Church: Discerning Practical Value and Developing Theological Foundations

 

How should we lead the church?

In this Pneuma Review conversation, Pastor-scholar Tony Richie discusses what having good leadership means for a local church

 

Introduction

“We’re a good church, but we need a good leader!” The preceding sentence expressed the sentiment of the good people of the John Sevier Church of God in Knoxville, Tennessee, during our interview for the pastorate (December 1997). These words also resonated with my own experience a few years prior when had I entered the Doctor of Ministry program at Asbury Theological Seminary. My Bachelor of Arts degree had been in Philosophy-Religion, with a minor in Biblical Languages, and I had earned a Master of Divinity degree from the premier seminary of my denomination. As I surveyed the various emphases offered by Asbury, I realized that my training in theology, language, hermeneutics, homiletics, and counseling had not practically prepared me specifically for the role of pastoral leadership; nevertheless, as a pastor I was consistently called upon to function not only as a preacher or a counselor but as the leader of my congregation. Accordingly, contrary to my previous approach to education and yet with a deep sense of divine direction, I chose the leadership track for my studies at Asbury.

My experiences at John Sevier and Asbury have been echoed in my overall pastoral experience. I have been in the ministry for nearly thirty years, more than twenty-seven of which have been spent serving as a pastor. I have enjoyed relatively successful ministry in each pastorate, yet I have not infrequently felt an absence of confidence concerning my leadership duties and abilities. Slowly, I have come to suspect that the missing sense of certainty may be due, at least in part, to a failure to understand and apply a specific, sound theology of leadership for the pastoral setting, especially in my own ministry context as a Pentecostal Christian and churchman.¹

Therefore, the subsequent discussion will look first at understanding the practical value of leadership for effective pastoral ministry in the local church. Then, it will look at the theological foundations for an energetic theology of pastoral leadership ministry. Throughout, although drawing on an array of resources and assuming a variety of relevant applications, the emphasis is on a distinctly Pentecostal approach to pastoral leadership in the local church setting.

 

Discerning Practical Value

The almost incomparable worth of morally and practically competent leadership and the tragedy of evil or inept leadership is a consistent and recurring theme in Scripture. Further, an important element of the leadership challenge includes carefully defining leadership in local church settings.

Incomparable Worth of Competent Leadership

Throughout the biblical record the issue of leadership is noticeably prominent. Very early on the problem of corrupt leadership is latent. Hartley notes that Nimrod was the first empire builder.² An enigma to scholars, he appears to have been regarded in almost godlike terms.³ He was apparently a powerful leader. Nimrod’s rule was centered in the region of Shinar (Gen. 10:8-12). The account of the height of human arrogance and divine displeasure over the tower of Babel is set in Shinar, later known as Babylon (11:1-9). That this “famous city symbolizes commerce, human achievement, and the pursuit of pleasure” appears clear.⁴ The attitude of heaven toward haughty human leadership is underscored in the divine dispersion and division of the human race. Throughout the Scriptures Babylon is often encoded as the enemy of God and of God’s people (e.g., Rev. 17-18).

In complete contrast to the pride and pomp of Nimrod and Babylon stands the piety of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. A comparison of the patriarchal narrative of Scripture with ancient historical evidence strongly suggests the patriarchs lived in a dimorphic society consisting of pastoral nomads and village dwellers, probably early in the second millennium BC. The family units of the patriarchs were basically “autonomous tribal chiefdoms”.⁵ In the culture of the ancient Near East, “the patriarchs themselves were chiefs of seminomadic clans”.⁶ The patriarchs exercised definite leadership influence within the realm of their usually somewhat large family unit and its accompanying assortment of servants, friends, visitors, and, to some extent, neighboring peoples. For instance, Joseph’s timely leadership position and ability is of key import to Israel’s physical and national survival and divine destiny as the people of the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 37, 39-50).

 

Exaggerating the monumental leadership role of Moses among his people, the Israelites, is perhaps nearly impossible.

Moses dominates the Penteteuchal narratives from the second chapter of Exodus to the last chapter of Deuteronomy. Throughout the Old Testament he is portrayed as the founder of Israel’s religion, promulgator of the law, organizer of the tribes in work and worship, and their charismatic leader through the deliverance, covenant at Sinai, and wilderness wanderings, until Israel was poised to enter the promised land.⁷

Moses’ leadership is all the more marvelous in light of his initial rejection as a leader and a judge and his own reservations concerning his ability to lead the Lord’s people (Exod. 2:14; 3:11). Bruckner suggests that Moses exemplifies “Gifted human leadership” as “crucial to God’s work in the world”.⁸ In any case, Moses demonstrates the decisive difference leadership makes in God’s redemptive program.

The life of Joshua teems with leadership themes. Harris suggests one of the main messages of the book of Joshua is leadership. It teaches that “courageous and committed leaders win battles” and that “believers receive rest from enemies and security when they fight for God and his chosen leader”.⁹ In Joshua “God is the Savior who gives Canaan to the tribes” and Joshua is “God’s chosen agent who leads the tribes to victory”.¹⁰ The book of Joshua tells how God develops and defines leadership. In the call of Joshua, the Lord describes his schematic for successful leadership (1:1-9). Although Joshua makes mistakes, is sometimes manipulated, and may not always model the ideals of leadership, his success “teaches that leaders ultimately can succeed with guidance from God and respect from their subordinates”.¹¹

The priests of Israel were to lead them in the worship of Yahweh. The Israelites were continually “confronted by Canaanite cultic practices,” making it essential for them “to learn the proper ways to worship Yahweh”.¹² Yahweh is holy and must be worshipped as holy. The biblical concept of holiness is derived from qadosh, meaning “set apart.” Originally signifying that God is separate or transcendent, it came to apply as well to that which was set apart for religious purposes and, therefore, holy or sacred. Because God is set apart from sin and sinful humanity, holiness also signifies moral excellence.¹³ The cultic rites and sacrifices presided over by the priests dealt with the dilemma of sinful people approaching a holy God. In a very real sense, the primary responsibility of the priests was to lead the people into the presence of God by way of worship.

During the time of the judges, observes Mary Evans, “leadership was intermittent, often local, and dependent on the character and gifting of those called by God to lead his people”.¹⁴ Israel had no centralized government during this period and no “national” leader. When the perennial problem of oppression would become too harsh, the people would call on God, and he would raise up deliverers or saviors from this or that tribe or province (Judg. 6:12; 11:8-11). The English word translated “judge” is from a Hebrew stem (spt) that might more correctly be translated “leader” or “deliverer.” The leadership provided by the judges was charismatic and nondynastic.¹⁵ Hildebrandt observes that, characteristically, these deliverers were charismatic figures endowed with supernatural power, or “extraordinary qualities and gifts,” enabling them to act as divine agents delivering the people of God in crises.¹⁶

“The prophet was not simply another religious leader in Hebrew history, but one into whom God’s Spirit and God’s word had entered and taken possession” (Ezek. 37:1, 4).¹⁷ The two primary Hebrew words for “prophet” were ro’eh and nabi’. Ro’eh, translated “seer” in English, signifies both an ability to see into the spiritual realm and to foresee future events. The title suggests one who sees from the perspective of God himself. Nabi’ is the main Hebrew word for “prophet” and signifies speaking under inspiration from God. A prophet was a spokesperson for God who “poured out words under the impelling power of God’s Spirit”.¹⁸ Men and women who acted as God’s spokespersons in such situations clearly were instruments of divine guidance and spiritual leadership.

Mary Evans observes that politics had become a major concern by the time the monarchy began to develop in ancient Israel. She notes that prior to Samuel’s ministry “leadership was intermittent, often local, and dependent on the character and gifting of those called by God to lead his people”.¹⁹ By the time of Solomon, things had drastically changed. “Leadership, although still acknowledged as being appointed according to God’s choice, had become more institutional than charismatic, with the leader’s authority stemming as much from the office he held as from his own character and gifting”.²⁰ She suggests power is an integrating perspective for interpreting 1 and 2 Samuel’s account of the origins of the monarchy in Israel. The concept of power is a major motif in the writings. The rise of the monarchy is set in the context of the search for adequate leadership, the question of the rightness or wrongness of the monarchy, the issue of succession, the way leaders cope with or respond to power, and perhaps most importantly, the relationship between God’s sovereignty and human power.²¹

 

The title of “Rabbi,” along with the similar “Rabboni,” was somewhat mistakenly applied to Jesus (Matt. 26:25, 49; Mark 9:5:10:51; 11:21; 14:45; John 1:38, 49; 3:2, 26; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8). In a way its use was a misunderstanding of his messianic identity, but it was perhaps properly used, according to the custom of the time, as a title of respect for him as a preacher and teacher. Jesus forbade its use among his disciples (Matt. 23:7, 8). Etymologically, it is derived from rab, primarily denoting a master in contrast to a slave. Though the term is not found in the Old Testament, its origins are often traced to the scribal ministry of Ezra.

Considered by some as the second founder (after Moses) of the Jewish nation, Ezra was responsible for the extensive codification of the laws, including those governing temple worship and the scriptural canon. He also contributed greatly to the eventual replacement of priests by rabbis.²²

As a spiritual leader in post-exilic Israel, Ezra was the initiator of the tradition in which the leader of God’s people was essentially an expert interpreter of the Mosaic Law. He became the model or ideal of leadership under and by the law. The influence of Ezra himself was immense and beneficial (Ezra 1-10). Even the subsequent administrative leadership of Nehemiah, a layman, was an extension of the movement begun in Ezra (Neh. 1-12). Ezra was a true reformer who restructured the spirituality of the survivors of the exile according to the Mosaic Law. He exemplifies the spiritual leader who submits himself or herself to the sovereignty of the Lord as expressed in the written Word of God.

At this point the pertinence of examining the leadership ministry of Jesus Christ is perhaps clear. He is unquestionably the major model for all ministries. Sanders refers to “The Master’s Master Principle” when describing the primary leadership precept and practice of Jesus.²³ Jesus’ view of leadership was nothing short of revolutionary in its stress on servanthood (Mark 10:42-44). The kingdom of Christ is a community of mutual service. The sovereignty of God and the suffering of his servants are involved in spiritual leadership (Mark 10:38, 40).²⁴ Christ’s example of leadership portrays several principles for leaders today. His dependence indicates Christ relied on the Father. Jesus sought his approval by doing that which pleased him. Jesus’ leadership was modest in the sense that he did not force himself or his will on anyone. He exhibited genuine empathy toward hurting people, and he always exercised the optimism of faith and trust. Significantly, Jesus’ leadership and ministry were conducted in the power of the anointing of the Holy Spirit.²⁵

The practical value of leadership also surfaces in the ministry gifts of Christ to the Church and their function as described in Ephesians 4:1-16. These are termed “apostolic” not only because “apostle” heads the list but also because these leadership ministries clearly share in the charismatic nature common to apostolic ministry. The offices of the ministry gifts refer to gifted spiritual leaders given to the Church by Christ, specifically apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (4:11). Christ gave these ministry gifts to the church for preparing God’s people for works of service (4:12) and for the spiritual growth of the body of Christ (4:13-16). Furthermore,

In this passage Paul calls believers to be true to their destiny and calling as the body of Christ. By definition the body is a unity and entails oneness (4:2-6). But the church also has multiplicity and diversity as an integral part of its unity; ‘to each one’ Christ has apportioned grace and gifts as parts of the whole (4:7). Furthermore, he has given leadership gifts to help the church grow together and move forward toward true spiritual maturity and the church’s measure of the fullness of Christ (4:8-16).²⁶

We may also describe leadership offices of church ministry such as bishop, elder, and deacon. These involve obvious ongoing occurrence at the local level of church ministry and in the historic ecclesial tradition. The primary passages for consideration are Acts 6:1-6; 1 Timothy 3:1-16; 5:17-20; Titus 1:5-9; and, 1 Peter 5:1-4. For example, in Acts 6:1-6 the early Church experienced a threat to its unity and sense of community when the widows of Grecian Christians were neglected in the benevolence ministry of the local church, which consisted principally of Palestinian Christians. The oversight was due to the apostles’ definitive need to focus on prayer and the ministry of the Word. Seven men were selected by the congregation and confirmed by the apostles to take care of such practical ministry. Though the word deacon (diakonos) is not used, diakonein is from the same root, and thus these are usually described as the first deacons.²⁷ Significantly, these men were required to be full of the Holy Spirit and of wisdom. The contrast of the deaconate and apostolic ministries concerning the central functions of prayer and the ministry of the Word would indicate that the deaconate was essentially a lay leadership office. At least two of the original deacons, however, Stephen and Philip, were also extremely effective preachers and teachers (Acts 6:7-8:40). Stephen became the first martyr, and Philip was also an evangelist (Acts 21:8). As Deborah Gill points out, 1Timothy and Titus indicate the fluidity of early Church leadership functions is in focus.²⁸ However, clearly the deaconate was a practical, charismatic ministry including leadership and characterized by signs and wonders and the power of the Holy Spirit.²⁹

Pastoral theology and practice in Pentecostal institutions tend to focus on issues such as preaching, worship, and counseling. In my own experience and journey as a pastor within the Church of God (Cleveland, TN), pastoral leadership issues often have been minimized or neglected. The absence of guidance in the critical area of pastoral leadership can be crippling. I suspect many other pastors bumble along without clear conceptual underpinning for their leadership duties. Some borrow ill-fitting material from other denominations. Still others compromise the uniqueness of pastoral leadership by baptizing secular sources. Often pastors simply accept whatever the latest leadership guru is currently espousing. None of these options satisfy pastors hungry to provide more complete care for their flocks; nor do they satisfy congregations longing for leadership from their pastors. They certainly do not satisfy a world watching for real leadership from both pastors and churches.³⁰ Pastors are consistently called upon to exercise leadership at the local level of ministry; therefore, at the very least, a foundation of general principles for pastoral leadership needs to be identified as a base upon which to build.

 

Defining a Refined Leadership Focus

The preceding certainly suggests that leadership—practical as well as moral and spiritual—is highly prized in the biblical tradition. However, in Pentecostal institutions the focus of formal ministerial training is usually on doctrine, history, and polity. In recent years more of an emphasis on pastoral counseling and care of souls has also developed, but most specific practical pastoral skills, including leadership skills, have usually been formed through a rather informal tradition of mentoring. Mentoring, as Conn observes, has clear biblical precedents and certainly can be exceedingly effective.³¹ However, mentoring tends to be uneven and irregular, relying altogether too much on vast variations or fluctuations of style and skill in the individual participants.³² Additionally, even when leadership is sufficiently valued pressing it into a secular paradigm or shaping it according to a secular mold tends to be a common trend. Therefore, carefully defining the focus of pastoral leadership or other forms of local church leadership becomes paramount.

“Leadership” in general is often variously defined. John Maxwell defines leadership simply as the ability to influence others.³³ George Barna admits leadership is an art defying precise definition. He accepts a workable definition of leadership as “mobilizing others toward a goal shared by the leader and followers”.³⁴ A more specific description of pastoral leadership by Jay Adams, suggesting “guidance by example,” may be the underlying principle.³⁵ Robert Dale says, “Pastoral leadership is an action-oriented, interpersonal influencing process practiced in a congregational setting”.³⁶

In a different vein, Paul Walker defines the overall role of pastor in terms of leadership. “The pastor is defined as a minister placed in the position of the leader of a group of believers in the role of one who sincerely cares [original emphasis]”.³⁷ Somewhat similarly Thomas Oden, utilizing “shepherding as pivotal analogy,” asks us to “picture the shepherd patiently moving ahead, but not too far ahead, of the sheep—calming and at times entertaining them with music, gently guiding them beside still waters”.³⁸ He carefully defines pastoral leadership and authority in terms of service.³⁹

All of the above definitions are meritorious. No doubt leadership involves influencing others and means mobilizing people toward shared goals. Certainly pastors, even more than other leaders, guide by godly example. Also, the pastoral role intrinsically involves leadership, and the shepherding model of pastor-leader has undeniable biblical and historical precedents. Finally, good pastoral leadership involves action and influence in a congregation.

Maxwell’s view of leadership as influence, however, is not specific enough for application to pastoral leadership. Nor does his definition seem to have been designed as such. Maxwell’s definition of leadership strikes a note as a secular understanding of leadership—at least in the sense of not being purposefully pastoral or even specifically spiritual. The same might be said of Barna’s definition of leadership, and surprisingly Barna, with his previous work on the importance of vision in leadership, adopts a definition of leadership which seems to assume visionary goals already in place before leadership begins.⁴⁰ While Adams’ definition is indeed intentionally and practically pastoral, it may be too specific in that at times pastoral leadership encompasses more than members merely following the pastor’s example. This study calls for a simpler, more straightforward summary than Dale’s technical-sounding definition. Both Walker and Oden are less concerned with actually defining pastoral leadership than in defining the overall pastoral role as intrinsically inclusive of leadership.

For our purposes, a definition of leadership is needed that is clear and concise and preeminently pastoral in its perspective. It should be both biblical and practical. Accordingly, I will work throughout this project with an understanding of pastoral leadership as “guiding a congregation for God.” Latent within this definition is my understanding that God in his wisdom uses a pastor to help his or her congregation move towards the goal of becoming and doing all God intends. Although not without room for improvement, this definition is pointedly pastoral, describing the pastor’s leadership role as a particular type of ministry activity as well as the specific context within which it is carried out and identifying the one to whom the pastor is ultimately responsible and accountable in performance of the ministry of leadership. It also, as shall be shown, builds on a biblical-theological interpretation of the leadership task in a pastoral setting.

Barna asserts that when “millions of Americans turn to churches for spiritual, emotional, and material help … what they receive is largely dependent on the leadership pastors exert within their churches”.⁴¹ Amidst the challenges of an increasingly complex culture “the quality of pastoral leadership is one of the most significant indicators of the current health and potential influence of the Church in America”.⁴² Pastors are consistently called upon to exercise leadership at the local level of ministry. At the very least, a foundation of general principles for pastoral leadership needs to be identified. The aim of the following, therefore, is to ascertain and describe those principles that leaders and pastors within Pentecostalism may find helpful in building effective pastoral leadership.

 

Developing Theological Foundations

The roles of leaders and responsibilities of leadership in the Church, particularly in the local church, are ultimately determined by the unique character of that ministry setting. Further, understanding not only visible leadership structures but the more subtle underpinnings of leadership as ministry is essential for effective leadership in local church settings.

Unique Character of Church Leadership Context

Developing a paradigm for pastoral leadership that is true to its origins and original intentions must be accomplished within the parameters of a biblical theology of the ministry and its primary context, the church.⁴³ Sound ecclesiology insists pastoral ministry is inseparable from the Church in either its universal essence or its local expression. The leadership ministry of pastor should not be disassociated from its ecclesiological roots and pressed into the image of secular systems of leadership from areas such as business, entertainment, government, military, or sports—a common error.⁴⁴ Although such a secular makeover may rarely be attempted overtly, that is nonetheless the result when non-biblical or theologically suspect systems of leadership are covertly superimposed upon the ministry of pastoral leadership.⁴⁵ While much may be mutually applicable, the reciprocity should never be allowed to extinguish that which distinguishes pastoral ministry and leadership from all secular professions or pursuits. Guiding a congregation for God is a unique enterprise.

The Church is not a building or a denomination but the ekklesia, those called out of this world as an assembly of believers who belong to Jesus.⁴⁶ The officers, ministers, and leaders of the Church necessarily function within the context of the Church.⁴⁷ The ministry gifts such as apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, teacher, elder, deacon, etc., work in performance and furtherance of the ecclesial mission of preaching and teaching, making disciples, fostering a spiritual fellowship, inspiring worship, and evangelizing, as well as helping advance the maturity of individual believers, nurturing families, and helping those in need.⁴⁸ Pastor specifically describes “the spiritual leader of the local church”.⁴⁹

The Church is a community of faith that existed in embryo as the people of God in the Old Testament but entered into a new and fuller stage of development in the New Testament through Christ and by the Holy Spirit. Though many metaphors for the disciples of Jesus are employed in Scripture, a trinitarian understanding of ecclesiology may see the Church as specifically the Church of God, the body of Christ, and the temple of the Holy Spirit. The Church exists through the creative call and originating action of God, enjoys a special living bond and relationship with Christ, and experiences the indwelling presence and power of the Holy Spirit.⁵⁰ Structure and order are part of the reality that is Church, but “a pronounced characteristic of the church’s nature is that it is a community or fellowship in Christ [original emphasis]”.⁵¹ The Church may be described as a community that is redeemed, holy, both universal and local, and apostolic. It is also a sending, witnessing, worshipping, and pilgrim community of faith.⁵²

“The ministry and mission of the church are closely related to one another. By its ministry the church carries out its mission”.⁵³ The mission of the Church is given to it by God, and the ministry is given by God to the Church to carry out that mission. Basic to biblical ministry is the idea of servanthood arising from the example of Jesus (Mark 10:42-45; Acts 10:38). The ministry is called by God and empowered by the Holy Spirit. The entire body of Christ is called to serve in ministry though some are gifted “with appropriate spiritual gifts for distinctive ministries of leadership (Eph. 4:11, 12)”.⁵⁴ These ministry gifts include apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers. The pastor has the responsibility of caring for and overseeing the local congregation. In addition, the pastor leads the church in the task of evangelism and carrying out the Great Commission in the constraining power of love.⁵⁵

Pentecostal ecclesiology believes that “the one church of Christ is composed of all who are regenerate in Jesus through repentance and faith”.⁵⁶ The Church is not primarily institutional but spiritual; it is much more than any particular denomination or organization. Classical Pentecostal theology of the Church is apocalyptic and restorationist. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit is “empowerment for effective evangelism of the entire world before the end”.⁵⁷ Christ’s coming is imminent, and he is preparing his Church for that event and providing them with equipment for winning the lost of the world before the Day of the Lord. The Spirit’s outpouring also effects the restoration of authentic New Testament Christianity. God intervened in the Protestant Reformation to restore the doctrine of justification by faith, to restore the work of sanctification in the Wesleyan movement, and, in the Pentecostal movement, to restore divine power through the baptism in the Holy Spirit and the full range of spiritual gifts.⁵⁸ The Church that had been steadily falling from its pristine place in the New Testament and the early patristic period is being divinely restored to its original experience of pardon, purity, and power.

An amazing unity amidst diversity is an attribute of Pentecostal churches. In a vast array of Pentecostal denominations, organizations, and groups, a unity of the Spirit-baptized based on the working of the Holy Spirit in each believer is perceived as the sovereign work of God. “This spiritual unity was [is] thus seen as personal rather than as institutional”.⁵⁹ Every local church is “considered to be the physical manifestation of the Universal Church in that community”.⁶⁰

Indeed, “the most distinctive Pentecostal contribution to ecclesiology might be made in the understanding of the local church”.⁶¹ Two major ideas come to the fore. First, spiritual gifts are seen as an intrinsic element in the life and equipment of every local church. As Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic traditions see baptism and Eucharist as constitutive of the Church, so some Pentecostals tend to see charismatic endowments of the Holy Spirit as forming and shaping the Church. Where spiritual gifts are truly operative, the presence of God is being made manifest in the midst of the people of God (1 Cor. 14:25).⁶² Every local assembly can expect to experience the gifts of the Spirit.⁶³

 

The second major idea contributed by Pentecostals to ecclesiology has come from reflection on missionary experience. Initially, many Pentecostal groups experienced phenomenal growth through the Holy Spirit’s endowment of every member. Some missionary labors resulted in numerical expansion but not subsequent equipping of every believer; consequently, reflections on missionary purpose have led to a greater focus on the nature of the Church. Initial conversion to Christ is to be followed by “consciously building the church”, and consciously building the Church includes advising and assisting all members to be filled with the Holy Spirit in power.⁶⁴ Far from being an esoteric experience for individual mystic enjoyment, the baptism in the Holy Spirit and accompanying spiritual gifts are graciously granted to believers by God as a divine enablement for service.⁶⁵ Duffield and Van Cleave agree:

The chief purpose of the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is that the believer might have power for Christian service. It may well be that the greatest promise given to the Christian is that given by Jesus to His disciples just prior to His Ascension: “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:8). This power for special service is the distinctive result of having been filled with the Spirit.⁶⁶

Hocken succinctly summarizes the uniqueness of Pentecostal ecclesiology.

Considering the inherited patterns of Christian worship indicates the distinctiveness of Pentecostal-charismatic understanding of the church. Whereas the preecumenical Catholic pattern presented a hierarchically ordained priest acting in persona Christi offering the eucharistic sacrifice at the altar for the people, and the Protestant pattern presented an educated preacher expounding the Word of God from the pulpit, the Pentecostal pattern is of the Upper Room, an entire congregation filled with the Holy Spirit, giving praise to Almighty God.⁶⁷

For the Pentecostal pastor, the image of the Upper Room biblically and theologically informs and continually transforms contemporary currents of theory and practice concerning pastoral ministry and leadership.

 

Understanding the Underpinnings of Leadership Ministry

Important to note is that leadership is ministry and that ministry is theological.⁶⁸ Pentecostal theology of ministry is essential for effectively leading a Pentecostal congregation. Our doctrine and practice places “a distinctive emphasis on the Holy Spirit’s involvement in all aspects of leadership within the body of Christ”.⁶⁹ This emphasis is, however, fully compatible with human instruments and abilities in leadership. Since the Day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit is the administrator of the affairs of the Church (John 14:12; 1 Cor. 12:5-11). The Holy Spirit is the leader controlling all subordinate offices, which are to be occupied by Spirit-filled individuals (Acts 6:3-5). The Spirit is able to direct the selection and function of the Church’s ministerial leadership (Acts 13:1-3). Even church councils should function under his guidance (Acts 15:28). Dependence by Church leaders on the leadership of the Holy Spirit is in keeping with examples of Christ and the apostles (Acts 1:2; 15:28).

Human leaders are “chosen of God and presented as gifts to the body of Christ”.⁷⁰ The Holy Spirit exerts major influence in the placing of leadership in the body of Christ (Acts 20:28). The ascension gift of Christ was the baptism of the Holy Spirit (dorea). He also gives ministry and leadership gifts such as apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, and teacher to the Church (Eph. 4:11). God endows believers with spiritual gifts distinct from natural talents or abilities for the purpose of serving one another in the Spirit of Christ (1 Cor. 12:8-10; Rom. 12:6-9). New Testament role models of leadership demonstrate an experiential acceptance and practical application of leadership by the Spirit (Acts 10:9-23; 16:9). Ray Hughes observes that “Pentecostals view this as the only proper attitude for church leaders. The Holy Spirit is always in charge, and we are servants ready to do his will”.⁷¹

True leaders of the Church should perceive themselves as “shepherds of God’s flock” (1 Pet. 5:2), not masters but servants in the Spirit of Christ (Matt. 20:27). Spiritual leaders are ambassadors of Christ (2 Cor. 5:20) acting only on his authority (John 14:13; 15:16). The gestalt of Pentecostal leadership involves a divine-human relationship and partnership played out in the theater of everyday decisions and actions.

For the Pentecostal, therefore leadership is first of all a calling, that which is and shall always remain under the sovereignty of God. Leadership is diverse and individually distinct, consisting of all those varied natural human talents with which God endows men and women, and worked out through the same providence in terms of circumstances and daily happenings. Yet it is more.

 

Pentecostal leadership is predicated on human submissiveness to the Holy Spirit, a man or woman’s willingness to listen and to be obedient to the promptings of the Spirit within. Leaders who thus yield themselves in obedience to the Holy Spirit are further aided by special gifts of the Spirit, gifts that supernaturally counteract the devices of Satan and open doors and bring spiritual victories beyond mere human efforts. Herein the church can and does triumph, remaining under the lordship of Christ and being submissive to his Spirit.⁷²

A Pentecostal theology of pastoral leadership is set within the parameters of a Pentecostal perspective of pastoral ministry in general. The underlying meaning and Old Testament background of pastoral terminology, the New Testament model of pastor, the development of pastoral understanding during the patristic age, and the Protestant heritage of pastoral ministry all influence Pentecostal perceptions of a pastor. The biblical role of the pastor, the importance of character in his or her personal life, and an acceptance of the relevance of the pastor’s place in the modern world also inform a Pentecostal perspective of pastoral ministry.⁷³

As is commonly known, the word “pastor” (Greek poimen) is from the same word as “shepherd” and is based on the biblical culture and economy of ancient Israel in the Old and New Testaments. I have been to Israel and watched modern shepherds interacting with their flocks. The shepherding analogy paints a powerful picture for modern pastors. Significantly, the Lord promises to give his people pastors according to his own heart who will care for them properly (Jer. 3:15). Divine judgment is pronounced on unfaithful or inept pastors (23:1-2). Psalm 23 even depicts the Lord himself as a shepherd leading and feeding his flock of people. Clearly “the model of the shepherd and the sheep is integral to the Old Testament understanding of spiritual leadership among the people of God”.⁷⁴

In the New Testament pastoral leadership seems to have been initially charismatic and itinerant. Apostles, prophets, and evangelists carried the gospel to the known nations of their world, while bishops (overseers or supervisors), elders (presbyters), and deacons (servers) carried out their ministries primarily in a local church. Since Ephesians 4:11 lists apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (or perhaps pastor-teachers), but not bishops, elders, or deacons, some overlap appears to have existed between the latter offices and that of pastor. The “first ministers to live with the people and exercise a continuing local ministry were the pastor-teachers”.⁷⁵ Apparently the role of the pastor in the New Testament was primarily the leadership of the local church and that would have included spiritual direction, preaching and teaching, prayer and intercession, administering the sacraments, the care of souls, etc.

The pristine pattern of ministry seems to have been slowly forgotten until by the third century its charismatic nature had been replaced by hierarchic developments.⁷⁶ The earlier one looks into the patristic age, the more likely one is to find stronger resemblance to New Testament patterns of ministry. Conversely, as the patristic age gives way to institutionalism, a form of ministry largely foreign to biblical Christianity appears and becomes preeminent. An episcopal hierarchy of popes, archbishops, bishops, priests, sees, dioceses, and parishes was developed and extended throughout Christendom. The Protestant Reformation brought about the development of new forms of pastoral authority. In addition to the episcopal system, the presbyterian (with authority vested in the eldership) and congregational (with authority vested in the local church) systems were added. All three basic systems seem to have been present in some form in the New Testament. Biblical systems of ministry and church government, however, seem to have been simpler and void of many of the features of some of the elaborate structures later erected.

 

Clear and concise directions for the role and character of the pastor may be found in the Pauline Epistles. First Timothy 3:1-7 instructs pastors to lead lives of integrity and self-control in all aspects of life, at home, in the church, and in the community. The major role of the pastor was the care and feeding of the sheep, principally through preaching and teaching. An itinerant apostle, prophet, or evangelist could not do this regularly. “It was a duty that naturally inhered in one who lived with the sheep as a local shepherd”.⁷⁷ Pastors were also to protect the sheep from “wolves,” those that would exploit them in some way or bring in heretical doctrines. The pastor was to guard the flock against false teachers (2 Tim. 4:1-5).

Pentecostal pastors perceive themselves in much the same role as pastors in biblical times. They are the primary preachers and teachers to their flocks. They are the chief administrators of their congregations, overseeing all ministries. They are the chief evangelists in the normal ministry of their churches (2 Tim. 2:5). They are the main counselors to those in distress.⁷⁸ Times may have changed since the inception of pastoral ministry, but people’s needs and their need of a pastor remain relevant today.

A satisfactory or sufficiently sound paradigm for pastoral leadership begins with a Pentecostal consideration of the unique character of the Church as the context of pastoral ministry. It also includes an examination of the biblical, historical, theological, experiential, and practical underpinnings of Christian leadership and pastoral service in the practice of Pentecostal ministry. Three theological themes intersect in and inform pastoral leadership: the nature of the Church, the nature of leadership in the Church, and the nature of pastoral leadership in the Church. An adequate understanding of the Church, Christian leadership, and pastoral ministry are essential for an articulate discussion or adequate practice of pastoral leadership.

 

Conclusion

As of this writing, in early 2010, I have been serving as pastor at John Sevier for twelve years (now renamed New Harvest). Recently, in a service acknowledging another anniversary of our tenure, the longest this congregation (or this pastor) has ever experienced, one of our congregational elders addressed the congregation on Sunday morning. Among other things, he said, “We have a good pastor. He’s our leader. And our pastor is a strong leader.” Of course, that very elder was also present that first interview back in 1997. I was honored and humbled at the affirmative applause following his statements. However, I well know that whatever element of truth may reside in his remarks is not accidental. I’ve made it a point to work at being a better leader, a stronger leader, in the local church I’m privileged to serve as pastor; and, God is gracious.

Whatever our particular gifts from God for spiritual service may be, whether preaching or teaching, counseling, administrating, fundraising, and so on and so on, to be a successful pastor one must be a strong leader. Becoming a strong leader is probably an intentional process for most of us. We have to work at it. Understanding the practical features of leadership in the local church context and applying the theological foundations for leadership in the local church context are two essential steps that have been helpful for me.

On the practical side, we must be completely convinced of the almost inestimable value of good, strong leadership for our vision of the future for our local church. Of course, we should be well aware of its needs and desires, it potential and its problems, and what leadership in that specific context will require for spiritual health and growth. On the theological side, we must know well the realities and verities of our faith and practice so that they may guide us into appropriate leadership performance and guard us from that which may be either compromising or impotent. Good theology is not merely intellectually interesting for academics; when applied, it works on the level of local churches too. Finally, as Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians we must assure that not only our doctrine but also our behavior exhibits full faithfulness to the Holy Spirit and God’s Word as we proclaim Christ and embody the gospel to the world through the ministry of our local churches. That includes leadership!

 

PR

 

Notes

¹ Parts of this study are condensed and adapted from selected portions of my D Min dissertation, “Perceptions of Pastoral Leadership Principles and Practices within the Church of God (Cleveland, TN),” at Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, KY (2002).

² John E. Hartley, New International Biblical Commentary: Genesis (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000), 118.

³ Ibid: 121.

⁴ Ibid: 124.

⁵ William Sanford La Sor, David Allan Hubbard, and Frederic William Bush, Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 105.

 

⁶ Ibid: 107.

⁷ Ibid: 132.

⁸ James K. Bruckner, New International Biblical Commentary: Exodus (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 2008), 43. This is because Yahweh chose not to act alone. Rather, God “maintained” and strengthened” Moses’ leadership role in the eyes of the people. “The people needed a human leader who was present to lead.” In spite of this, they would still challenge his leadership later. See Bruckner, 134. Cf. Ex 14:19-31 and Num 16.

⁹ J. Gordon Harris, Cheryl A. Brown, and Michael S. Moore, New International Commentary: Joshua, Judges, Ruth, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000), 3.

¹⁰ Ibid: 4.

¹¹ Ibid: 11.

¹² La Sor, OT Survey, 149.

¹³ Ibid: 152.

¹⁴ Mary J. Evans, New International Biblical Commentary: 1 and 2 Samuel (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000), 4.

¹⁵ Harris, NIC, 123.

¹⁶ Wilf Hildebrandt “From Chaos to the City of God: The Spirit and the Fulfillment of the Biblical Mission.” Twenty-Third Annual Meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies (Guadalajara, Mexico. 11-13 Nov 1993), 14-15.

¹⁷ Donald C. Stamps and J. Wesley Adams, eds., The Full Life Study Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 986.

¹⁸ Ibid: 986.

¹⁹ Evans, NIBC, 4.

²⁰ Ibid: 5.

²¹ Ibid: 9.

²² “Ezra,” Encarta Reference Encyclopedia (20 Feb 2001).

²³ J. Oswald Sanders, Spiritual Leadership (Chicago: Moody, 1967, 1980), 23-30.

²⁴ Ibid: 25-26.

²⁵ Ibid: 27-30.

²⁶ Stamps and Adams, FLSB, 1057.

²⁷ Arrington, “Acts,” 535-692 (564-65), French L. Arrington and Roger Stronstad, eds. Full Life Bible Commentary to the New Testament: An International Commentary for Spirit-Filled Christians (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990).

²⁸ Deborah Menken Gill “1 Timothy,” Arrington and Stronstad, 1219-58 (1234, 1240) and “Titus,” Arrington and Stronstad, 1275-83 (1276).

²⁹ Arrington, in Arrington and Stronstad, “Acts” 566-78.

³⁰ See George Barna, Second Coming of the Church, (Nashville: Word-Thomas Nelson, 1998), 29.

³¹ Charles W. Conn, Like a Mighty Army: A History of the Church of God, 2nd ed. (Cleveland, TN: Pathway, 1996): 468-70.

³² Lamar Vest, “A New Look at Leadership,” Profiles: A Monthly Magazine for Church of God Ministers (Sept. 2000: 1+), 3.

³³ John C. Maxwell, Developing the Leader within You (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1993), 1-2; see Sanders, Spiritual Leadership, 31.

³⁴ George Barna, ed. Leaders on Leadership (Ventura, CA: Regal, 1997), 20-23.

³⁵ Jay E. Adams, Shepherding God’s Flock: Pastoral Leadership (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975), 6-9.

³⁶ Robert D. Dale, Leading Edge: Leadership Strategies from the New Testament, (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996), 22.

³⁷ Paul L. Walker, The Ministry of Church and Pastor (Cleveland, TN: Pathway, 1965), 78.

³⁸ Thomas C. Oden, Pastoral Theology: Essentials of Ministry (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1983), 52.

³⁹ Ibid: 53-54.

⁴⁰ E.g., The Power of Vision (Ventura, CA: Regal, 1992).

⁴¹ Barna, Second Coming, 29.

⁴² Ibid: 29.

⁴³ “The church’s relational identity and communal purpose also shapes the church’s activity, including its approach to leadership, worship and outreach”, Brad Harper and Paul Louis Metzger, Exploring Ecclesiology: An Evangelical and Ecumenical Introduction (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2009), 20. Also, our trinitarian theology, especially whether we perceive the Trinity in egalitarian or hierarchical terms, greatly affects our leadership structures, 184. However, the present essay is not concerned with structures so much as with leadership roles within whatever structures a church leader may find him/herself serving.

⁴⁴ Frank Damazio, The Making of a Leader (Portland, OR: City Bible, 1988), 2.

⁴⁵ Lamar Vest, Spiritual Balance: Reclaiming the Promise (Cleveland, TN: Pathway, 1994), 106-107.

⁴⁶ Guy P. Duffield and N. M. Van Cleave, Foundations of Pentecostal Theology (Los Angeles: L.I.F.E. Bible College, 1987), 420.

⁴⁷ Ibid: 423-30.

⁴⁸ Ibid: 430-35.

⁴⁹ Ibid: 427.

⁵⁰ French Arrington, Christian Doctrine: A Pentecostal Perspective 3 vols. (Cleveland, TN: Pathway, 1992-1994): 3:165-75.

⁵¹ Ibid: 177.

⁵² Ibid: 177-85.

⁵³ Ibid: 187.

⁵⁴ Ibid: 191.

⁵⁵ Ibid: 189-99.

⁵⁶ Peter D. Hocken, “Church, Theology of,” Stanley M. Burgess, Gary B. McGee, and Patrick H. Alexander, eds. Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements (Grand Rapids: Regency-Zondervan, 1988), 211-18 (211).

⁵⁷ Ibid: 212.

⁵⁸ Ibid: 212.

⁵⁹ Ibid: 213.

⁶⁰ Duffield and Van Cleave, Foundations, 422.

⁶¹ Hocken, “Church,” 213.

⁶² Tony Richie, “The Manifestation of the Spirit as a Continuation of the Theophanic Tradition,” Twenty-Third Annual Meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies (Guadalajara, Mexico: 11-13 Nov. 1993).

⁶³ Hocken, “Church,” 214.

⁶⁴ Ibid: 214.

⁶⁵ Arrington, Christian Doctrine, 3:70-75.

⁶⁶ Duffield and Van Cleave, Foundations, 308.

⁶⁷ Hocken, “Church,” 217.

⁶⁸ Peter W. Marty, “Shaping Communities: Pastoral Leadership and Congregational Formation,” 306-28, For Life Abundant: Practical Theology, Theological Education, and Christian Ministry, eds. Dorothy C. Bass and Craig Dykstra (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), suggests pastoral leadership is often the decisive difference in the communal life of a church, 321, adding that “reflective pastoral leadership” includes helping people find their “theological voice”, 323.

⁶⁹ Ray H. Hughes, “Church Leadership,” in Stanley M. Burgess, Gary B. McGee, and Patrick H. Alexander, eds., Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements (Grand Rapids: Regency-Zondervan, 1988), 195-96 (195).

⁷⁰ Ibid: 196. Of great importance for contemporary church leadership, but not covered in this essay because of the specific nature of its focus, is the role of women. Harper and Metzger note that Acts 2 indicates “Women, upon whom Joel declares the Spirit of prophecy will fall in the last days, are included in the leadership of this new community”, Exploring Ecclesiology, 73. I concur. Kimberly Ervin Alexander and R. Hollis Gause, Women in Leadership: A Pentecostal Perspective, Pentecostal Leadership Series (Center for Pentecostal Leadership & Care, 2006) make a strong case for the positive and vital nature of women’s leadership role.

⁷¹ Hughes, “Church Leadership,” 196.

⁷² Ibid: 196.

⁷³ Vinson Synan, “Pastor, Role of,” in Stanley M. Burgess, Gary B. McGee, and Patrick H. Alexander, eds., Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements (Grand Rapids: Regency-Zondervan, 1988): 662-63.

⁷⁴ Ibid: 662.

⁷⁵ Ibid: 662.

⁷⁶ Ibid: 662.

⁷⁷ Ibid: 662.

⁷⁸ Ibid: 663.