Home Prayers Resources About Us Ministries Links Search

by Pastor Luciano Cozzi

 

Copyright © 2011 Grace Family Church of Rhode Island

Grace Family Church of Rhode Island Pastor Luciano Cozzi
< Back
Search this site

Church Administration

The Importance of the Lordship of Jesus

And the Work of the Holy Spirit

In the Practice of Church Administration

 

Copyright © 2002 Luciano Cozzi, All rights reserved.

 

As the 20th century was coming to a close, the world at large seemed to experience increasing anxiety about the quality of leadership and management available. Libraries and bookstores became flooded with books on leadership, management, administration and their specific functions, but no single solution to the leadership and management crisis was found. Today our world is still characterized by a chronic crisis of governance, an incapacity of most organizations to cope with the many and often unrealistic expectations of their constituents.1

 

In these unsettling times, the church community has not been an exception. The awareness that pastors, whether they like it or not, are also administrators, and that the church itself is a living, vital organism not too different from other types of organizations,2 has moved many to look for solutions to the management crisis in the theories and practices of the secular world.3

 

Although the church has been adopting business methods for a long time, during the 1970s and 1980s this practice became so prevalent that many congregations began to function more like a small business and pastors found themselves as their CEOs, surrounded by business people who began to dominate the decision-making process in the church.4  This market-like approach has focused many churches on the services their supporters want to meet their felt needs, and less on their spiritual condition. Numerical and financial growth became the thermometer of the church's “health” as an organization, and services had to be personalized as much as possible to guarantee maximum satisfaction to their “investors.”5 This business-like approach gave rise to mega-churches and became so prevalent that we may very well find a number of ministers echoing the words of Jamie Buckingham, who wrote, “I doubt if a single New Testament leader could last as a pastor in any of today's superchurches. You have to be more like Simon the Magician than Simon Peter to make it in today's market.”6

 

The  concept of the universality of administration or management principles7 has been perhaps the main rationale that moved many authors and theorists to look at the success stories of the multi-billion dollar enterprises of the world to find answers to the administrative crisis in the church. This concept assumes that the principles that govern good administration and management are similar in all aspects of society, even though their actual application may vary. Additionally, most would agree on the fact that “a well administered organism is required by the very nature of the church and is likely to be more usable under God than a disorderly organism.”8  This is further supported by the observation several authors make that secular researchers have come to a general concept of administration, management and leadership which bears a striking resemblance to the biblical model.9 In the words of Lawrence, “What is most interesting is that the leadership style which has evolved from multimillion dollars of research . . . is not far removed from the leadership style which Scripture delineates from the start!”10  

 

Ball, an advocate of the need of the church to “function as an organization” and of the pastor's role to be similar “to that of the president of a corporation,”11 sees the strong need for us as ministers to “learn from the successful institutions of the world the methods by which we may make our work successful,” and goes as far as to state that “it is by faithfully organizing, planning, laboring and carefully administering the affairs of His vineyard that we should be accounted good and faithful stewards of Christ and stand approved at last.”12  

 

But are the results we see today really what Jesus Christ had in mind? Will He really find us as good stewards and approve of our labor if we present to Him mega-churches filled with people who meet their needs and find satisfaction in what they have, with no need for change or growth in character? I remember visiting a very large church in Western New York that claimed the highest membership and attendance in the area, and found the auditorium empty only five minutes after the service was over. Most of those who remained in the building were so busy using the gym, the swimming pool and various other amenities the church had built in its facility, that they had no time to fellowship and talk. What happened to the transformational work of the Holy Spirit, and to the fervent desire of the members of the Body of Christ to be together in true Christian fellowship?13

 

As David Gordon pointed out in an article published in Tabletalk, “the trend of using the CEO or managerial role as a model raises some issues.” Having adopted such a managerial model, many have become much more concerned about the quantity of people they have as members than their quality. Instead of asking himself if the members of his church are growing spiritually, often the CEO pastor becomes immersed in the philosophy that “bigger is better.”14  Although not all churches that have integrated secular principles are alike, and not all authors who advocate such integration are extreme in their views, it seems evident that there is an element of danger in this approach that moves us to look at other viable alternatives.

 

Two important questions emerge: If the results of multimillions of dollars of research are so similar to what the Bible had been saying all along, why is it that the church, which should be the repository of its teachings and the very organism that should bring them to life in our practices, was not already utilizing them? Also, if so much research has so amply proven the importance and validity of the biblical model, why should we be so eager to adopt the less perfect secular models instead?  Could it indeed be that the issue reaches further, into the very core of our values?

 

A number of authors seem to agree and warn us against indiscriminately buying into secular theories and practices of administration and leadership.

 

Lawrence warns us not to forget that “Christian leadership is different from other kinds of leadership because no Christian leader can assume the position of 'number one,' that is, the leader. This is true because those who believe in Christ know there is only one 'Number One,' namely the Lord Jesus Christ.”15 This, as we shall see later, makes a significant difference in the way we are called to approach the various functions of church administration from a biblical perspective. Lawrence sees a very clear distinction between the Christian and non-Christian theories and methodologies as he writes,

 

Christian leaders have many things in common with non-Christian leaders: both must provide vision for their followers; both must earn the trust of their followers; both must communicate to their followers; both must use their abilities effectively in providing leadership. But only Christian leaders can count on the Holy Spirit to accomplish their purpose of affecting and changing others in the spiritual realm. The Spirit’s power will not make their leadership perfect, but it will guide them in a model of growing Christian maturity as well as enable them to have a spiritual impact that cannot be had in any other way or by any other kind of leader.16

 

Gangel observes that even though churches today have learned to be eclectic as they borrow secular theories and practices, process them through a biblical understanding and apply them to their ministries, we still need to remember that the gospel – and therefore the way the church is to administer its propagation and ministry – “has always been countercultural in every age and in every place.”17  He then warns against the danger of corrupting our basic values in the process. In fact, Gangel points out how the church has already been corrupted by concepts and philosophies like prosperity, assertiveness, and political clout18 – concepts all too familiar to the secular theories we have borrowed.

 

At this point, one may ask, what about the similarities, the universality of the principles and the experience acquired by many in the business world? Should we discard everything and formulate a biblical model from scratch, or can we still learn from the practical observations available?

 

As long as we maintain a truly biblical and theocentric model firmly established as our foundation, there is much we can learn from human experience. Perhaps the best way to approach this issue is to conduct a practical and comparative analysis between the experience acquired in secular fields and biblical theology in terms of the administrative functions we find in the church.

 

As we are discussing church administration, we should start by taking a look at the definition that is commonly given to the concept of administration. Most secular authors would agree in stating that administration is a process that includes the four basic functions of planning, organizing, directing and controlling.19 As such, it could be defined as the enlisting, organization, deployment and supervision of human, physical and financial resources in order to accomplish those tasks that are necessary to achieve a previously defined goal or organizational objective.20  

 

As we begin our comparative analysis, we should bear in mind that biblically the primacy of the Holy Spirit in the entire process is fundamental, and it transforms the process at its core. The Holy Spirit is not subject to human leadership or guidance, so a biblical model cannot and should not attempt to “preempt Him nor to direct, limit, or regiment His movement within the church. Christ is the Head of the church through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.”21

 

Therefore, in a biblical model, Jesus Christ establishes values and organizational objectives. The Holy Spirit then empowers the believers as well as the leadership to accomplish the tasks that are necessary to achieve the overall purpose of the Master, the one and only true CEO of the church. This, as we shall see, has an enormous impact in the way we are called to approach our administrative responsibilities.

 

The first and perhaps most important function of administration is that of planning. Planning requires defining the values and the purposes of an organization, as well as identifying the goals and tasks necessary to achieve them. It includes defining the mission or the objectives of the organization, determining politics, projects, programs, procedures, methods, systems, budgets, standards and strategies that are necessary to achieve such purposes.22 This function primarily involves decision-making processes, and it will certainly reflect the vision of the leadership of the organization. All other administrative functions will depend on and be shaped by these decisions.

 

In a secular setting, values are determined and established by the leadership of the organization, and are influenced to a great extent by the macro, operative and internal environments with which the organization interacts. Influencing factors in the macro environment can include political, international, technological, social and economical factors. In the operative environment we can find factors like the clients, interest groups, competition, normative agencies, and suppliers. In the internal environment, we can distinguish factors like structures, technology, personnel, organizational culture and politics.23

 

Although these factors are present in the church as well, they should not define its core values and objectives. When this occurs, often the result is less than pleasing. Michael Baer, in Leadership, shares what he thinks is a very good and valid approach to develop a vision in the church. The first step he suggests is an assessment. With this, he means making a list of “strengths and weaknesses of the church, and opportunities for growth or ministry.” Then, he suggests to establish a vision for the church. How? “This is done by choosing a few strengths to build on, a few weaknesses to improve, and a couple of opportunities to develop.”

 

Finally, he suggests setting some objectives and taking responsibility by making a clear commitment to accomplish them.24 However, this seems to be nothing more than a half hearted approach to integration. The problem with this approach is that the objectives and the goals of the church could easily become a reflection of the moods or views of the human leadership, which “becomes ultimately the inspiration and the driving force of the whole organization,”25 a responsibility hardly fitting a human leader, unless the leader is pointing to Jesus Christ as the real head of the church.

 

It is true that we have congregational needs that must be considered and carefully assessed and evaluated,26 but we also have a direction and a vision that has already been forged for us by our Founder, Jesus Christ.27 Therefore, it makes sense for us to look at the Founder for guidance as we seek to understand our corporate purpose,28 bearing in mind that he is still alive and very much involved in the leadership of his church.29 So, as we seek his guidance in understanding his purpose, we must also acknowledge and accept his leadership.

 

In synthesis, the declared purpose of the church is “to carry out the will of Christ in the world, to proclaim and apply His gospel.”30  The corporate reason and vision for being a church has already been given to us. What we must do, as faithful administrators, is to acknowledge it, and to seek ways to implement it in the daily functioning of the church. The challenge, of course, rests in the identification of the specific God-given purposes and objectives at the local level, and in a way that is reliable enough to guarantee that what we are pursuing is actually His will, rather than ours.

 

Thankfully we are not left alone in this task. Jesus Christ has sent to us the Holy Spirit to guide us in all things pertaining to His purpose for the church.31 It has been reported, in the experience of some churches and pastors, that the Holy Spirit communicates His purposes by endowing the membership with deep-rooted, God-given passions, sometimes referred to as “deeply held visionary values.”32 The concept is that of committing our ways to the Lord33 not just individually, but congregationally as well. If it is true that God sets individuals aside for a specific type of ministry,34 then it must also be true that collectively we reflect the sum total of the individual passions or calling God has given us. Since the Holy Spirit has already done this work, why not discover it and acknowledge it, instead of having to re-define it on our own?

 

Just as individually we can best discover our God-given passion through a personal inventory and actual practice,35 so also congregationally we can define it by taking careful inventory of the various passions we share as individuals. Although this may be very similar to the value assessment proposed by some authors, it maintains the lordship of Jesus Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit at the center of the model, with a full realization that it is his work, not our own, to determine the direction we should take.

 

Undoubtedly, it is very important for Christian leaders to plan their work. This is what God does and asks us to do as well.36 The key, as it was in the case of Nehemiah — one of the most effective leaders in the Old Testament — is to plan prayerfully and fully acknowledge the role of the Holy Spirit.37 Nehemiah set goals, but these were God-given goals, rather than personal ones. He seized the opportunities, but acknowledged that they were God-given ones. He anticipated the future, knowing how long the project would take and what materials would be needed to accomplish the task, but was also aware that it all depended on God's perfect timing.38 He was not the “commander-in-chief,” but rather a faithful captain, a soldier who kept his focus on the Lord,39 a vessel prepared and shaped for every good work the Master would entrust unto him.40 In the words of Lawrence,

 

the chief characteristic of a Christian leader must be submission to Christ.... Thus a significant element in leadership is the ability to show others which way the Leader is going. This principle has specific implications for leadership. First, a leader must have a clearly defined awareness of the Lord's revealed purposes. He must know what the Leader wants.41

 

This God-given vision must be effectively communicated and acquired collectively. God communicates his plan and vision for us so we can know what we need to be part of it. In so doing, He sets an example for us to follow.42 The whole congregation, beginning with the leaders, needs to seek such vision together, since each member's passion and gifts will directly affect the process of discovery and then later the implementation of the common vision. Appropriate and effective communication is therefore of primary importance for the success of the planning function of the administrator.

 

The second basic function of the administrator is the organizational function. This includes the analysis and determination of which resources and activities are required to achieve the objectives defined, the grouping of these activities in work groups, the delegation of responsibility to reach such goals to specific people, who are then empowered with sufficient authority to accomplish their task.43 This organizational function, however, should not be an end in itself, just to be able to say that we are “organized,” but should grow out of the needs we encounter in our work.44  

 

Elements of the organizational function are: objectives, resources, work groups, delegation and empowerment. Simply stated, the objectives are the results that need to be achieved in order to fulfill the overall purpose of the organization. They should be limited in scope, specific, challenging, balanced, realistic, involving and aimed at specific results.45 A whole theory of management by objectives46 has been developed and is being applied in many organizations, including churches. Tidwell, for example, has incorporated this theory in his model of church administration, calling it “ministering by objectives.”

 

In the context of church administration, he defines objectives as “statements of ultimate ends toward which a church aims its energies.”47 He then goes on to point out how objectives reflect the values of the church and serve to direct its efforts, providing standards for the determination of the means to be deployed as well as the motivation to do so. In the end, they also provide means needed to measure the results.48 The resources include human, physical and financial assets. In the context of the church, staff and membership comprise the human resources available; facilities, buildings and other assets comprise the physical resources, and donations, endowments and investments make up the financial resources. These can be departmentalized in the ministries the church sponsors or supports, with consequent delegation of authority and responsibility.49

 

Even in the best intentioned churches, however, it can be noted that “Spirit-filled people may feel stifled and unfulfilled, like square pegs expected to fit into round holes,”50 thus denoting a possible problem with the application of these principles to the church. As Gladden points out, often the organizational process in the church is reduced to setting up a series of slots that must be filled with people to “get the job done.” The whole process, however, becomes frustrating for the committees involved in the “recruitment war” as well as for those people who are coerced into serving in a way that is not fitting to them. Instead of being a motivating and fulfilling ministry, serving in these cases becomes a matter of enduring the duty of filling a position for a year or so.51

 

When I became the pastor of two churches, I have found that the congregations were de-motivated in serving, were not ministering or proclaiming the gospel, and set in their status quo. I noticed that most people in leadership positions had a “job” to do, but there was no connection to any common purpose, except maintenance. It seemed as if jobs were done with an illusion of service, but with no real objective. I quickly sensed the need for change if the congregations were to survive. The question was, how could this situation be turned into a biblical model? How could we re-organize the churches in a way that would be Christ-centered and Spirit-led?

 

In Scripture we find many examples of organization, from the decentralization of Moses' model suggested by Jethro, to the organizational example and skills of Nehemiah, to the example of the twelve apostles. In every case, however, we see that God is involved in the process. What Jethro suggested to Moses was to initiate a ministry that would equip and empower those in whom God was working.52 Even in this, the work of the Holy Spirit can be regarded as pivotal.

 

To apply the theocentric and pneumatological model to this administrative function, we need to acknowledge that the Holy Spirit distributes his gifts (divine abilities) to every member as he wishes and deems necessary, according to God's design, and for the common good of the Body of Christ.53 This again changes the scenario. First, it stresses the value of the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, as it points out that since every believer receives a gift for ministry, then every believer has a ministry to conduct, and therefore should be active in the work of the church as their living act of worship.54 While management models tend to elevate programs, states Gordon, the biblical model elevates and empowers people. “God has given different people different gifts, and it is this gifting that should determine the ministry of a church,”55 or better, the tasks that each member should be involved in doing while ministering in his or her area of God-given passion.

 

In this model, the job of the administrator is centered on the leadership of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit in the church. As we have defined so far, it consists of identifying the common passions among the members to establish what ministries the church should be involved in. Once the ministries are identified, then an analysis of the gifts of the members sharing a similar passion will reveal what the Holy Spirit has equipped them to do within that ministry. Their tasks, then, are easily identified and will be in harmony with their gifts and empowerment from the Holy Spirit.

 

The level of spiritual maturity of the member, his or her experience in that particular area of ministry, the ability to deal with people and the availability will then determine the level of responsibility and leadership that can be assigned to each individual within that ministry. The benefits of this model are also evident. Not only, as Tidwell suggests, will we distribute the work load and place responsibility where it belongs, reducing confusion and eliminating duplication of effort,56 but we will see individuals empowered by the Holy Spirit and motivated to serve the Lord with joy and fulfillment.

 

Delegating will no longer be a task dreaded by all, by which little or insignificant “filler” jobs become assigned to reluctant people,57 but will become an empowering experience in which the power and motivation of the Holy Spirit can be unleashed in its full potential for the common good. The example of God, who uses the energy and services of others, although he would not need to do so,58 shows that delegating and empowering should not be done for the sole benefit of the administrator, but in the interest of the individual and of the body.59

 

The third basic administrative function is that of directing. This includes the guidance and supervision of the activities that are essential to the purpose or vision of the organization. Megginson, Mosley and Pietri define this function as the art of making others do what needs to be done, which involves the qualities, the style and the power of the leader as well as his or her activities of communication, motivation and discipline.60 Vital elements for the success of this administrative function are the formation and development of the personnel,61 and their motivation to perform the assigned tasks.62 It is in these aspects and in particular in the area of motivation that the church adopting secular models often finds a serious challenge.

 

As mentioned earlier, Gangel warns us against the dangers of cultural corruption in the church, and perhaps it is in this area that such danger is most visible. When the church's leadership and teams are motivated by dreams of prosperity, assertiveness or dogmatism, political clout and control, the results are devastating.63

 

Even secular researchers have come to the conclusion that selfish interest is not a good motivator. After explaining the value of participation in the decision process of an organization in terms of motivation, Hagemann points out the importance of proper values in the strategic objectives and in the culture of an organization,64 and reminds us that while compensation is important, a good climate within the organization is even more important. The human being, she reminds us, does not live by bread alone. For many, being at ease and finding meaning in their work place is worth more than gold.65  Physical and materialistic gain may be an “antidemotivational” factor, but is not motivational. In other words, it may prevent a drop in performance, but it will not cause it to increase.66

 

Despite the evidence, however, there are two major problems we often encounter in the church's attempts to integrate secular practices. One is perhaps best described by the words of Gangel, who wrote, “We have been so blinded by Madison Avenue hype that we can carry its techniques into the church and never even notice the grevious sins we have committed in so doing. In fact, commercial hype is such a part of our culture it can even parody itself for a laugh.”67 We often import values and motives that are wrong.

 

Even more dangerous, however, is the subtle infiltration in the church of the philosophies that stand behind such practices and concepts, including Maslow's hierarchy of needs and other need-centered theories, the achievement theory of McClelland,  the theory of Herzberg and others.68 Although interesting and perhaps necessary, a full analysis of these theories and their problems would go well beyond the scope of this paper. It will be sufficient to state that such theories point to the fulfillment of self as a primary goal or motive, and when they are framed in a Christian milieu, they often cause us to relegate God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit to a side-role of fulfilling our needs and wants. This, of course, is opposed to many biblical teachings. How, then, can people be directed, guided, supervised and motivated in a more biblical model?

 

The first thing we notice in the biblical model is the example of God, who guides and directs. In his example we see that delegation involves far more than enlisting volunteers, but it extends to showing where to go, what to do, how to do it, and what to expect. It involves giving training, preparation, instruction and direction for the task at hand.69 That this is important in God's eyes can also be demonstrated by the fact that in 2 Timothy 2:2 the ability to teach is presented as a prerequisite for Christian leadership.

 

The model of Jesus and the apostles was a model of equipping people for the work of God. In Ephesians 4:11-16, Paul illustrates this concept as he clearly states that certain leadership positions within the church are given by God as a gift to the body, so that the body may be equipped to do the work of the Lord, and grow in maturity toward Him.70 We quickly realize, however, that although the administration of the church is an equipping ministry, what equips the people is the presence and work of the Holy Spirit, not our own efforts. The job of the administrator is to facilitate a process already started and conducted by the Holy Spirit, encouraging growth and development as the work of God is being carried out, and providing training that is geared to enhance the use fo the gifts each individual has received from God.

 

In turn, both volunteers and staff will sense that they are truly needed within the body in a concrete way. They will have many opportunities to help others and make a significant difference individually as well as collectively. As they use in God's service the gifts of the Spirit, these will be even more enhanced and manifest. Their newly developed or enhanced skills will be used as their responsibilities increase and opportunities are provided. They will build a strong sense of belonging and of interdependence as each member contributes to the edification of the whole body of which they are a part.71 They will receive affirmation not only from the gratitude of people ministered to by them, but also by the manifestation of God's blessings on their service. They will have continual opportunity to share their gifts and later to mentor others in them as well. They will be engaged in supporting a vital cause they not only believe in, but are passionate about.

 

All these, together with the promise of eternal reward, are strong motivating factors and reasons for which people volunteer.72 It is easy to see why in a model like this, recruitment wars can become a thing of the past.

 

The forth and last administrative function is that of control. This function includes the measurement, evaluation and analysis of the progress and includes some form of reward and corrective actions aimed at the improvement of the performance within the organization, as well as the enforcement of the organizational philosophy and policies. In secular theory, several axioms can be found at the basis of a theory of evaluation. Namely, that we cannot abstain from evaluating, that evaluations are always anchored to specific parameters, that evaluations have a specific and limited object, that they expose both the evaluator and those who are evaluated, and that they can be manifest or hidden.73 Some authors point out that without control, all the other functions so far discussed are ineffective. Control is the way to ensure that the planned actions are carried out as expected.74

 

The parameters that define our process of evaluation are part of our cognitive assets. These include parameters that are inherently part of a scientific discipline, social or cultural parameters, parameters of the organizational culture, and subjective parameters.75

 

The function of control can be considered as a complement of planning, since it is accomplished to ensure that what was planned is actually executed.76 Since in the church the product is not always physically measurable, a control cannot be quantitative. Techniques of nonquantitative control, therefore, can be more applicable. These include observation, periodic as well as unexpected inspections, reports and performance evaluation.77

 

The problem with control in the church, however, is that it can easily be subjective. For this reason, as Tidwell suggests, controls in the church should be designed and used so as to represent the will of the congregation rather than that of any person or group.78 This is best accomplished by establishing specific procedures outlining the steps that a person or a group should follow in order to include events or programs in the church's agenda or ministry plan.79 Some examples suggested by Tidwell include the church calendar, a church's constitution or bylaws, organizational charts outlining the various organizational components, departmental and organizational budgets, and so on.

 

A good control system should avoid micro-management by concentrating on relevant areas of activity, and be timely, efficient, precise and acceptable.80 Although a control system can be implemented by single leaders, it should be designed as a cooperative effort of the body, in accordance to God's parameters and with a clear line of intentional accountability in place, whereby any given individual in the process is voluntarily accountable to someone else.81 This invites the guidance of the Holy Spirit through the interdependent functioning of the body in its various parts.

 

Having established the methods or tools for the exercise of appropriate control, a very important area for consideration is the method by which we implement such control. Again, Scripture points us to the example of God, who exercises both reward and punishment in the working out of his plan. Rewarding whatever is done for his glory 82 is an expression of his righteousness just as much as his rebuke is. Following his example, we should ensure that we don't just correct wrongdoing, but we reward good and proper efforts as well.

 

Any reward we extend should be “appropriate and fair, and not an expression of bribery (Prov. 17:23). Our Lord could both commend and rebuke (Matt. 16:17,23), and the wise Christian leader will strive to do likewise.”83  

 

Finally, one of the goals of a good control system is that of maintaining interdependency among the various parts (or ministries) of the body. This could be accomplished by carefully planned interaction and linking of all the ministries with one another as well as with the administrator or leader.84  Linking the various parts of the body to one another, and not just to the leader, will help in preventing any single one of them to begin functioning independently from the body, and in ensuring that the work of the Holy Spirit will not be hindered.

 

In summary, we can state that although much can be learned from the cumulative secular experience in the field of administration, we should still maintain a clearly biblical model in our approach to research and practice within the church. This model should ensure that our administrative practices are Christ-centered and lead by the Holy Spirit. A brief analysis of the various functions of administration suggests that this model can be implemented through a careful analysis of the God-given passions and gifts within the membership of a congregation in order to formulate which ministries the body has been called to be actively involved in, and which tasks should be assigned to various individuals within each ministry.

 

As mentioned earlier, as I assumed the pastorate of two congregations, I sensed the pressing need to adopt a theocentric and pneumatological model of church administration in order to regain a vision and a system of administration and leadership in the church that would be God-given and Spirit-led. The congregations were slowly dying, and the mandate of Jesus Christ to the church had been forgotten, or at least not actively implemented. The prospective of change was not immediately welcomed by the leaders, nor by the members, and this presented a major challenge. A continual focus on our need to seek God's will in terms of our purpose for being a church and for ministering proved helpful, but could not avoid some casualties among those who would have preferred to seek the control of the congregation to maintain their power and status quo. Nevertheless, the change finally began to occur and gradually it became possible to gain the support of the congregation in adopting a new, more active and Christ-centered vision for the church.

 

For some time now, I have had the opportunity to see this model at work first-hand. As we began this process by assessing the spiritual endowments of the members, we quickly noticed how many people shared similar passions, but different gifts. Our observation of other churches led us to realize that people should not necessarily be grouped according to what they do best (gifts) but rather according to where they were called to minister (passions or calling). The different gifts available for each area of passion would provide the equipping necessary to perform the various tasks needed in each ministry.

 

It soon became evident that those who shared similar passions were brought together for a reason. Their diversity in gifts provided most if not all that we needed to start several potentially successful ministries. What became strikingly important is that all this was not the result of our own design for the congregation, but God's. He was the one who gave different passions and gifts to the members, and brought those people to our church. We simply looked at what He had given us, and respecting his design began to adapt our vision, goals and ministries to it.

 

So far the results have been very encouraging, and God’s blessing evident. Staff and volunteers are motivated, and share a sense of fulfillment and joy as they grow spiritually as a result of glorifying God and edifying the body in the way the Holy Spirit called them to do. The blessings of God along the way so far have provided ample reward and encouragement, and are moving people to respond more favorably to the changes inevitably brought about by the process. After years of stagnation and losses, the churches are once again beginning to grow. Of course, only time can reveal the long term results of such process, but so far we have reason to believe that a mighty work and great blessings are ahead.

 

 

 

NOTES:

(Click on a footnote to display it in this panel)

 

 

 

1. Kenneth O. Gangel, "Leadership: Coping with Cultural Corruption," Bibliotheca Sacra 144, no. 576 (1987): 450.

 

 

 

 

2. Charles F. Ball, "The Minister as Administrator," Bibliotheca Sacra 107, no. 426 (1950): 195-196.

 

 

 

 

3. Daniel H. Smith, "A Theology of Leadership," The Emmaus Journal 1, no. 1 (1991): 71.

 

 

 

 

4. Lloyd Rediger, "The Market-Driven Church," Clergy Journal, March 1993, 19-22.

 

 

 

 

5. Ibid.

 

 

 

 

6. Jamie Buckingham, "Are Church Staff Members Called, Too?," Ministries Today, Nov/Dec 1991, 20.

 

 

 

 

7. Charles A. Tidwell, Church Administration: Effective Leadership for Ministry (Nashville, Tenn.: Broadman Press, 1985), 23. Leon C. Megginson, Donald C. Mosley, and Paul H. Pietri, Management: Concetti E Applicazioni, trans. Mauro Formaggio and Placido Fallica, 3rd ed. (Milano, Italy: Franco Angeli, 1996), 41. Kenneth O. Gangel, Feeding & Leading - a Practical Handbook on Administration in Churches and Christian Organizations (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1989; reprint, 1998), 15-29.

 

8. Tidwell, 12.

 

 

 

 

9. A. Duane Litfin, "The Nature of the Pastoral Role: The Leader as Completer," Bibliotheca Sacra 139, no. 553 (1982): 59-60.

 

 

 

 

10. William D. Lawrence, "Distinctives of Christian Leadership," Bibliotheca Sacra 144, no. 575 (1987): 329.

 

 

 

 

11. Ball: 209-210.

 

 

 

 

12. Ibid.: 210.

 

 

 

 

13. Acts 2:37-47.

 

 

 

 

14. David Gordon, "Shepherd or Ceo?," Tabletalk, October 1994, 11-13.

 

 

 

 

15. Lawrence: 317.

 

 

 

 

16. Ibid.: 322.

 

 

 

 

17. Gangel, "Corruption," 451.

 

 

 

 

18. Ibid.: 452.

 

 

 

 

19. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 53-56. Gangel, Feeding & Leading, 15-20. Ball: 206.

 

 

 

 

20. Gangel, Feeding & Leading, 13. Tidwell, 27. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 48.

 

 

 

 

21. Tidwell, 22.

 

 

 

 

22. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 54.

 

 

 

 

23. Ibid., 127.

 

 

 

 

24. Michael R. Baer, "Strategic Planning Made Simple," Leadership, Spring 1989.

 

 

 

 

25. Ball: 197.

 

 

 

 

26. Gangel, Feeding & Leading, 117-124.

 

 

 

 

27. Ephesians 1:3-12; 2:10; Matthew 5:13-16; 28:18-20.

 

 

 

 

28. Tidwell, 59.

 

 

 

 

29. Matthew 28:20; Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:22-23; 4:15; 5:23.

 

 

 

 

30. Tidwell, 71. See also Matthew 28:18-20.

 

 

 

 

31. John 7:39; 14:26; 16:7-15.

 

 

 

 

32. Paul Johnson, "The Passion Driven Church," Leadership, Spring 1992.

 

 

 

 

33. Psalm 37:3-5.

 

 

 

 

34. Galatians 1:15-16.

 

 

 

 

35. Bruce Bugbee, What You Do Best in the Body of Christ - Discover Your Spiritual Gifts, Personal Style, and God-Given Passion (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995), 29-42.

 

 

 

36. See, for example, Acts 2:23; 4:28 and Luke 14:28-32.

 

 

 

 

37. Mark Porter, "How to Plan Ahead," Interest, February 1993.

 

 

 

 

38. Ibid.

 

 

 

 

39. Cf.: 2 Timothy 2:3-4.

 

 

 

 

40. Cf.: 2 Timothy 2:21.

 

 

 

 

41. Lawrence: 318.

 

 

 

 

42. Smith: 73.

 

 

 

 

43. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 55.

 

 

 

 

44. Gangel, Feeding & Leading, 65.

 

 

 

 

45. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 241-246.

 

 

 

 

46. Ibid., 247-252.

 

 

 

 

47. Tidwell, 77-78.

 

 

 

 

48. Ibid., 77-84.

 

 

 

 

49. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 369-381. Tidwell, 103.

 

 

 

 

50. Ron Gladden, "Matching Gifts and Ministry," Ministry, September 1993.

 

 

 

 

51. Ibid.

 

 

 

 

52. Exodus 18:13-27. Tidwell, 37-41.

 

 

 

 

53. 1 Corinthians 12; Ephesians 4:11-16.

 

 

 

 

54. Allen Guelzo, "Are You a Priest?," Christianity Today, September 16 1991.

 

 

 

 

55. Gordon.

 

 

 

 

56. Tidwell, 109.

 

 

 

 

57. James M. Jenks and John M. Kelly, Saper Delegare: Il Segreto Dei Manager Di Successo, trans. Luca Tomasi, 2nd ed. (Varese, Italy: Sperling & Kupfer Editori, 1987), 33-34. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 398.

 

 

 

58. Matthew 28:18-20.

 

 

 

 

59. Smith: 74.

 

 

 

 

60. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 55-56.

 

 

 

 

61. Ibid., 461.

 

 

 

 

62. Ibid., 529-566.

 

 

 

 

63. Gangel, "Corruption."

 

 

 

 

64. Gisela Hagemann, Eccellenza Nella Motivazione: Incentivi Materiali, Comunicazione Aperta, Partecipazione, trans. Adriano Caiani, 2nd ed. (Milano, Italy: Franco Angeli, 1992), 17-18.

 

 

 

65. Ibid., 68.

 

 

 

 

66. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 556-558.

 

 

 

 

67. Gangel, Feeding & Leading, 164-165.

 

 

 

 

68. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 537-555.

 

 

 

 

69. Smith: 75.

 

 

 

 

70. Tidwell, 43.

 

 

 

 

71. Colossians 2:2, 19; Ephesians 4:15-16.

 

 

 

 

72. Gangel, Feeding & Leading, 168-169.

 

 

 

 

73. Laura Borgogni, ed., Valutazione E Motivazione Delle Risorse Umane Nelle Organizzazioni (Milano, Italy: Franco Angeli, 1996), 22-23.

 

 

 

 

74. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 56.

 

 

 

 

75. Borgogni, ed., 25-30.

 

 

 

 

76. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 710.

 

 

 

 

77. Ibid., 752-754.

 

 

 

 

78. Tidwell, 180.

 

 

 

 

79. Ibid., 181.

 

 

 

 

80. Megginson, Mosley, and Pietri, 724-726.

 

 

 

 

81. Matthew R. St. John, "Augustine's Self-Watch: A Model for Pastoral Leadership," Bibliotheca Sacra 155, no. 617 (1998): 101.

 

 

 

 

82. Hebrews 6:10.

 

 

 

 

83. Smith: 77.

 

 

 

 

84. Charles Margerison and Dick McCann, Team Management: Come Condurre E Gestire Il Lavoro Di Gruppo, trans. Dr. Fiorella Vidoli (Milano, Italy: Il Sole 24 Ore, 1991), 73-98.