LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Assignment Title: Does leadership in the church vary from leadership in other areas of society?
Course: CHMN 699 - Internship
Student: Kristine Sage
Date: January 29, 2022
Professor: Dr. Joel Breidenbaugh
Does leadership in the church vary from leadership in other areas of society?
Does leadership in a church vary from leadership in any other kind of organization? We believe
there are both parallels and distinctions. All organizations, including the church, are subject to
organizational laws that have their origins in creation. These laws include social laws, psychological laws,
organizational laws, and laws of human conduct. These profound and enduring patterns of human life
and community are discernible in the highest Christian wisdom. God's general grace enables even those
who may not identify as Christians to serve as effective organizational leaders. Reformation-era
Christians are continually conscious of the fact that God has created the entire world and is still actively
at work in it. There is, nevertheless, a distinction. Christ and the Spirit reside in the church, which is a
special organism. The church is governed by specific commitments and practices, such as prayer,
worship, study, witness, and service, which give the church's existence and ministry a peculiar shape.
The church also has a special source of life and is directed toward certain purposes and goals. The
church cannot be understood solely in terms of organizational structure, and it is important to avoid
leadership styles that merely conform to the culture at large (see William Willimon's Pastor: A Theology
and Practice of Ordained Ministry, Abingdon, 2002, p. 70).
(Note: Synodical guidelines for understanding leadership, office, and ordina- tion [Acts of Synod
2001, pp. 503-504] and a synodical research committee report titled "Ecclesiastical Office and
Ordination" both provide a more thorough exposition of many of these subjects.)
Hands Off, Hands on: Case Study 1
The council's chair, Susan Bridge, was forced to make a choice. The new pastor had successfully
introduced new initiatives with zeal and devotion. However, some people felt trampled. Should the
council apply the breaks, slow him down, or hold him back? The congregation of Center Church was
sizable, and the staff was also sizable. The previous senior pastor was an excellent preacher of the Word;
it was evident on Sunday that he had invested a lot of time each week in his study. He carefully
examined God's Word, and through his insightful examples, the church gained new insights.
He disliked the business end of ministry, though. Various ministries were carried out by the
employees as they deemed fit. The congregation appreciated the pastor's teachings, but they perceived
him to be distant or reserved due of his lack of engagement with them. The council heard the criticism
since he was getting close to retirement but thought the church would be different when he left.
In contrast to their previous pastor, Center recruited a lively younger pastor to lead their
congregation. He assumed leadership of the personnel and provided them and the council with sound
guidance, but he was forced to leave the ministry after having a heart attack and almost passing away.
The loss was deeply felt by the church. For two years, they employed a retired preacher to assist them.
The pastor enjoyed a strong reputation within the church for his persuasive preaching, kindness, and
capacity to manage a team and launch new initiatives.
The council and congregation were satisfied with the decision, so the church believed they were
good to go.
Nine months later, trouble clouds hid the promising beginning. Some members of the staff and
council were upset with the new pastor for "bulldozing" his way through new initiatives. They did
appreciate his zeal and vigor. The congregation admired his friendly demeanor. All ages were drawn to
him. However, he essentially disregarded the council, receiving endorsement for his concepts "out and
about."
Although Center has committees, the pastor made his decisions and informed them of his plans.
Even Susan Bridge witnessed it. Others also noticed it. The matter was now being discussed by council.
Should we take a "hands off" approach and continue on as is? Or ought it to be "hands on," intervening
in some way to alter the pastor's behavior?
Case study 2: Mission, Mission, Who's Got the Mission?
Faith Church was surrounded by confusion. While the congregation was lagging or even refusing to
move on with the church's mission, Rev. Sharon Wilson was moving forward. The council was in the
middle, observing the turning wheels but unsure of what to do.
Faith was once a thriving church, but some of its members left to join congregations closer to their
new homes. Faith had welcomed a few new families to the area, and there were also some non-
churchgoers there. When Rev. Wilson arrived, she observed that the search team had overstated the
congregation's support for the new paths that the study committee had approved.
But Rev. Wilson was confident that if she implemented the reforms right away, the church would
follow. She had been gently reprimanded by a few council members, but she continued with excitement
and all of her effort. A few Faith members soon left the building. Using a consultant, the council began a
new round of direction-setting and modified its course. Rev. Wilson persevered through the transition
and continued to implement the new strategy.
The strategy included reaching out to the neighborhood. God rewarded that work by increasing the
number of churchgoers. However, the congregation became weary, retreated in their effort, and several
ministries really gave up. For the third time, Rev. Wilson gathered a small group of leaders to do "vision
establishing." Rev. Wilson was happy with the strategy because it appeared to be sound. The
congregation objected to her for persistently hinting that they weren't devoted as she pushed and
preached it. Their enthusiasm waned, and Rev. Wilson's flame was turning to coals. The council
observed these reductions and questioned why there had been three attempts at change with no
apparent success. Was a fourth necessary yet? Was it time to stop preparing altogether and just "be the
church," as some members urged? There was no doubt that something needed to be done. What then?
