Throughout the Bible, people lead. Whether they are judges, kings, or prophets, they lead the people of God by showing them a direction in which to go. Leading is good. Leading is required, for without it we are like sheep gone astray, crying for a shepherd and prone to false ones. Churches need direction (even if that direction is ‘sit still’).
Of course, if there’s leading to be done, we assume the people doing it are leaders and that the science of what they’re doing can be called leadership. This is where I fear we start to come unstuck.
I have two complementary concerns that I’ve touched on before. Firstly that the language we use to describe things actually creates reality. Secondly that we’ve imported a set of concerns and solutions from the business world uncritically, to the point that in some more extreme instances the governance of our churches looks more like a corporation—or a large charity—than it does the assembly of the household of God.
My point on language is not particularly sophisticated. When we use metaphors or shorthand to describe something that aren’t exactly what we mean, we will find that those metaphors are more effective than the unsaid thing we did actually mean. They plough furrows in our mind that our thought then will flow down like a well-irrigated field. If they lead us otherwise, it is hard work to think against the grain—to mix metaphors—and it is often helpful to plough new furrows that send the water where we wanted it to go. In other words, if we say something that isn’t what we mean, our thought, practice, and (crucially) vibes (a technical term) will align themselves with what we say rather than what we meant. This is a slow process and is particularly pronounced when passing from one generation to another, but it’s a real phenomenon.
When we start calling Pastors leaders, and some other people leaders too, is it any wonder if the distinctions between that office and someone who is leading something are worn down? Or, if we start calling Pastors leaders, is it any wonder if they start to act more like business leaders than Pastors?
My second point is essentially that ‘leader’ is not a noun used in the New Testament. You might point to Hebrews 13 and I’ll come back with ‘those who rule’ is not ‘leader.’ It’s particularly not the same as what most of us picture as a leader. Leadership is not a science that is known in the New Testament, either. Leading is mentioned as something some people should be doing (Romans 12). They aren’t leaders. I suspect they are engaging in leadership, but whether that’s the same thing as what you find in a leadership book is a question we should examine carefully.
We could note that there are a number of other verbs and verbal phrases that we could bundle with ‘lead’ that are Biblical. We could speak of judging, or ruling, or overseeing, or shepherding, or taking dominion. Many of those might make us uncomfortable as we’re products of an anti-authoritarian age.
Clarity helps because the language we use and the stories we tell form our social imaginary: the lenses through which we encounter reality. It’s helpful if they show us the truth.
It would help us to call people what they are. If someone holds a Biblical office of pastor/elder or deacon, then they aren’t a ‘leader’ and we should use the name of their office. Not least because these function institutionally: they are moulds that form us towards particular behaviours and habits. It would probably help fs we stop elevating some above others too, if we believe (as I do) that the New Testament dictates our churches are led by a plurality of elders then we shouldn’t call someone Senior Pastor. They’ll start to think that means something and it’s not just their fault they do, it’s everyone’s who allowed them to have that title. That’s not plurality. Of course, you need a system that’s clear on what to do if you can’t agree, the Bible gives us some guardrails there, but you should find something that doesn’t remove your plurality.
If instead your leaders are called leaders, it shouldn’t surprise you if they start to act like people running a corporation or charity rather than elders and deacons.
The other angle on this that we need to consider is that for all these offices lead they don’t do so in the same way. We could say the same about teachers, evangelists, apostles, and prophets too. They all ‘lead’ by which we mean ‘equip the saints for the work of ministry’ (Ephesians 4), but the content of the verb ‘lead’ is wildly different for each of them. There will be some crossover between them and we can call this crossover material ‘leadership,’ but my concern is that we have so focused on the crossover that we have forgotten all the ways that their leading is delineated and demonstrably different because of the office (or role if you don’t think those are all offices) that they have been appointed to.
So, what do we do about our leadership training and development? I don’t think we just drop it all, and I’ve made some suggestions for leadership development before. I’ve designed leadership development programmes, both in and out of the church. I have a fairly good idea how some parts of the corporate world do this (I designed and ran an award-winning global leadership programme for one of the most recognised brands in the world); some of that is transferable to the church, but all of it is transformed in the transfer.
Can we plunder the Egyptians? Yes, but be wary of golden bulls jumping out of fires (Exodus 32). Gold corrupts and it furnishes the Temple furniture. Should you be thinking through the best secular leadership books if you are training pastors? Absolutely. You’re going to be reading Edwin Friedman. You’re also going to be critically assessing all of this against the Bible before you pass it on.
Should the average pastor? Maybe if a coach or mentor has suggested a particular business book or resource to help with a particular problem. There’s a whole evangelical industrial complex—mostly in the US but with tendrils here in the UK—that seems to think Pastors read Christian leadership and business books only. How many actual Pastors are doing that in the UK, I have no idea, but if that’s you and you’re reading this, you need to rebalance your diet. Read the Bible, read about the Bible, read some theology, read old saints. There are ‘leadership’ riches here to mine which have the added benefit that they don’t need filtering through a sieve to see if it’s appropriate for a Pastor to act like that.
Even with the average Christian there’s a strong seam of teaching that they should ‘lead’ in their own lives and families. Some of that is good, some of it less so, but I do wonder if we could find less vague verbs. If we mean ‘take dominion,’ then let’s say that.
And as a parting shot, leading isn’t unknown in the Bible, but what’s much more known is following. We could do with a lot more of that.
Photo by Ilyass SEDDOUG on Unsplash
To subscribe and receive email notifications for future posts, scroll all the way to the bottom of the page.
Would you like to support my work? The best thing you can do is share this post with your friends. Why not consider also joining my Patreon to keep my writing free for everyone. You can see other ways to support me here.
nuakh 