Part 5

We need today strong, steady, biblical, theological sound, and culturally appropriate models of church leadership that work.  –George Cladis

A TURN AROUND STRATEGY

   Erwin Raphael McManus makes this poignant observation, “…our future is not to be found in our preservation but in our investment” (19).  It wasn’t until I read George Barna’s book Turnaround Churches, that I recognized what a challenging job it was to be a turnaround pastor.  In fact, as the truth of this began to settle in on me, that revelation almost turned to euphoria as I realized that I had not only turned one basically dead church around, I had also been able to pilot the turnaround efforts in the church I most recently pastored.  According to Barna, it is nearly impossible for a pastor of a declining church to successfully navigate a turnaround effort. 

…It appears that relatively few leaders currently serving the church are truly turnaround pastors.  And because of the personal toll the turnaround process takes on people, even these individuals are likely to revive only one or two churches during their ministry careers.  Thus, the chances of finding a turnaround pastor are slim (108-109).

   I was also comforted by the fact that I wasn’t exposed to Barna’s book until several years after I accomplished both feats.  The information provided by Gene Wood brought me much needed consolation.  He says, “True turnaround pastors can do it again, and again, and again” (17).  The idea that turning churches around can be done again and again is where the consolation comes in—especially as the Superintendent of a district that is desperately in need of being turned around. 

   While the overall picture still remains somewhat bleak, I am encouraged to see more inclusive enthusiasm across our district for change and revitalization than at any other time during my tenure as superintendent.  Our emerging culture is calling out for new leadership structures and the Scriptures provide better examples than the leadership models traditionally used in our congregations.  George Cladis shares the following insight:

Because the people whom we seek to reach with the Gospel, like most people, are heavily influenced by the social culture, team-based ministry fits well with their ideas and their experiences. …The church must never simply march to the beat of the cultural drummer.  We are called to live in a Kingdom that is in this world but not of it.  On the other hand, just as a missionary to a foreign land seeks to learn the local customs, dialects, foods, and traditions--that we can draw out those things in culture that are supportive of our message and use those in our ministry (17).

   What Cladis is alluding to is the major cultural change that Western society is currently experiencing—a shift from modernism to postmodernism.  He describes it this way:  “Postmodern culture is a complex set of societal variables that reflect a recent shift in the way people in Western society think, and this paradigm change is having dramatic effects on the life of the church as an organization” (18).  

   My goal is to find a way to move my district constituency beyond a mere desire to survive to that of experiencing the wonderful new opportunity they have for biblical renewal and transformation.  Why?  Because nationwide, seven more churches close every day than new ones are planted.  In the past ten years there has been a nine and a half percent decrease in Pentecostal church attendance, while during the same period the nation’s population grew by eleven percent.  Eighty-five percent of Assemblies of God churches in America have plateaued or are in decline.  Simply working harder at what we have been doing, instead of trying something new, is foolish.  After just over eleven years of working diligently to make this district better, I am convinced that simply (pardon the expression) “adding another coat of paint on the old barn” is not going to make that much of a difference. “No one pours new wine into old wineskins. The new wine would swell and burst the old skins. Then the wine would be lost, and the skins would be ruined. New wine must be put only into new wineskins”  (Luke 5:37-38 CEV).

According to Cladis,

People no longer respond well to orders from superiors.  When it comes time for difficult decisions to be made, people are finding it harder to hear, “the bishop has decided,” “the pastor says,” or “the Presbytery says you have to do it this way,” when they themselves have not been thoroughly involved in the decision-making process.  If the bishop is distant from the people of a congregation or the presbytery a vague consortium of strangers, their decisions that affect the life of the local congregation are like to be resented.  People in the postmodern world do not experience resentment passively.  They leave.  Consequently, churches that do not shift the way they operate in the postmodern world tend to have a difficult time surviving (21).

He goes on with this observation,

Ministry teams that are open, available, flexible, responsive, and representative of the people they lead will do better in the postmodern world than will leaders at the top of an old-style hierarchical pyramid.  Postmodernism requires organizations to turn the pyramid upside down so that leaders who were above are now below.  And instead of giving orders from above, they give support to the wider constituency from below (21).

   I have heard a lot of ministers talk about teams, but it is my opinion that few really understand the full implication of the word.  This is Bill Easum’s definition of team leadership:

“A small group of people with complimentary skills, who have affinity for one another, who are invited, not elected, by an individual to: achieve a common goal and place that goal before their individual interests; integrate their skills; and hold each other accountable to the goal.”  (Team Based Ministry Seminar, October 2004)

   Easum sees a true team as “an entrepreneurial partnership…an exploration team sent out into the unknown….” He says, “Teams are made up of autonomous, individuals who choose to form alliances and networks with others.” 

   Toshi T. Doi, employed by Sony Corporation in the 1980’s, was put in charge of reversing a downward trend by creating a new line of small office computers.  Their excitement for the project compelled them to spend nights and weekends working, making their dream a reality.  In six months, they created what usually takes two years to develop—a market-ready workstation.  Within one year the product took over 20 percent of the Japanese workstation market.  It was a remarkable team accomplishment.  Doi attributes their success to ardent application to this definition of a team:  “A small group with complimentary skills committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and a working approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable” (Doi). 

   The team concept is dramatically different from a committee concept.

  According to Easum:

1. Teams work best in web-like organizations that function around clearly defined and agreed upon Mission, Vision, Values, and Beliefs.  They do poorly in highly rigid, top-down hierarchical organizations.

2. Someone who wants passionately to achieve a goal chooses teams:  committees are nominated by an impartial or biased committee and elected by a group that may or may not have an interest in the goal.

3. One person who has a passion for the mission, and thinks each team member chosen shares this passion, chooses each team.

4. At the heart (although not necessarily the mind) of every true team, there is a leader.  Teams are only effective when there is the presence and influence of a strong leader over the entire organization and over each team.  Teams do not replace the need for an entrepreneurial individual at the center of the organization (Seminar Notes, p. 7).

   In their book, The Paradox Principle, the Price Waterhouse team reports on their study of several major successful organizations.  In this study they found that every organization with an effective team based ministry had an extremely strong leader at the center of the organization.  My experience is that, generally, in the absence of a strong leader, negative influences in the organization always try to take control.  However, this may not always be the case.  There are several excellent examples from scripture where the focus is not on a specific leader but on the efforts of a group (team).  In Mark, chapter two we discover how a team of people (at least four) had the conviction, vision, unity, and determination to take their ailing friend to Jesus for healing.

When [Jesus] returned from Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at home.  So many gathered around that there was no longer room for them, not even in front of the door, and he was speaking the word to them.  Then some people came, bring to him a paralyzed man, carried by four of them (verses 1-3).

   This team of four believed that Jesus could help their friend.  So much so that they learned to walk together in order to carry this man along an agreed upon route to where Jesus was teaching.  However, when reaching the place, they were faced with an obstacle; the large crowd prevented their entry.  Perhaps four other persons would have abandoned their plans.  After all, they made a valiant effort; they demonstrated sincerity and collegiality (shared power and authority) in getting their friend to Jesus.  But these four are not satisfied with less than total success in their mission. 

And when they could not bring him to Jesus because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him; and after having dug through it, they let down the mat on which the paralytic lay (verse 4).

   This creative team came up with a solution.  They managed to lift the man to the top of the roof, succeed in digging a hole, and evidently found a piece of rope.  Where did the rope come from?  Perhaps this team’s determination encouraged assistance from the neighbors.  In any case, the picture reveals that this team was not only innovative but also resourceful; coming up with the tools they need to accomplish their task.  And Jesus was impressed.  “When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, ‘Son, your sins are forgiven’” (verse 5).  Notice, when Jesus saw their faith, the man’s sins were forgiven.  Up to this point in the narrative nothing is said about the man’s faith.  The effort and conviction of the team that brought him to Jesus is acknowledged, and Jesus pardons the man’s sins.  Later, the paralytic would have an opportunity to demonstrate his own faith response to Jesus’ healing words:

“‘I say to you, stand up, take your mat and go to your home.’  And he stood up, and immediately took the mat and went out before all of them; so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, ‘We have never seen anything like this’” (verses 11-12).

   These four men who carried their friend on the mat had to learn to walk together carrying a heavy object, agree on the pathway to the house where Jesus was teaching, overcome the obstacle of finding no clear entry into the house, be innovative in their solution to the problem by getting their hand dirty, and secure enough necessary resources.  What was their motivation to go through all this trouble?  They had a clear vision that Jesus could heal their friend.

Team based ministries are primarily action oriented around a clearly defined [vision].  Teams exist to accomplish tasks more than make decisions.  The best teams come together around a clearly defined [vision] for which all the members on the team have a passion to accomplish.  (Easum Seminar Notes, p. 8)

   We need such visionary teams today, who help congregations to be clear about the specific mats they can use to bring the broken of our world to Jesus.  I believe it’s time we returned to the way God designed the Church to function in the first place.  He called us to be a royal priesthood not simply churchgoers.  The mission of the church today is not the responsibility of a few professionals; it is the divine responsibility of every Christian—every church member is a minister. 

   Perhaps one of the most important questions the church can ask is how does God plan to reach all the people living in our community?  Wayne Cordeiro, in his book Doing Church As A Team, makes this observation:

There are so many people scattered everywhere—and there’s only one minister in our church to try to reach them all!  Doing church as a team comes with a whole new way of looking at this dilemma.

Do you believe that God loves policemen?  I do.  Do you believe that He loves teachers?  Me, too.  What about construction workers?  Absolutely!  In fact, the Bible say, “The Lord…is not wishing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9 emphases added).  And if He truly does love them and wants to reach them with the gospel, then what would be the very best way to do that?

Through a pastor?  Possibly, but that may not be the most ideal.  People at your office or school may be quite intimidated and even put off if a pastor walked into the lunchroom and began preaching. 

What’s the best way to reach teachers?  It seems to me the best way would be through another teacher.  So what does God do?  He takes full-time ministers and disguises them as teachers!  Yup!  He takes saints like you and me, and He gives them gifts and a passion to be the best teacher they can be.  Then He sends them into the school system where they can reach other educators with God’s love.

How does God reach police officers?  He takes full-time ministers and disguises them as police officers.  He gives them the necessary gifts, passions, and credentials, and assigns them to police departments all over the nation.

God’s full-time ministers are everywhere!  We are all ambassadors.  We are all ministers.  Each one of us—not just pastors and evangelists—is called to represent Him in the world (39).

   I realize that moving from a top-down hierarchical organization structure to a team-based structure is a major challenge.  However, I believe that it is not only the right thing to do but the prudent thing to do as well.  The South Carolina District is currently “institutionally driven.”  It needs to become “missionally driven.”  To become missionally driven will require that we begin to think differently about the functions that both district and church leaders are called upon to perform.  The many denominational, fiscal, and administrative issues that district leaders face leaves little time to concentrate on the very pastors and congregations we are called to serve.

To comment on any part of this article, please scroll down.