Previous | Next 

EDITORIAL
Choosing leaders

Jim Coggins

Considerable attention is being given in the MB Church these days to the discerning of leaders. There is a shortage of church planters, pastors, board members and other leaders, at both the local church and Conference levels.

Who?

Who are we looking for when we say we are seeking leaders in the Christian church?

The first requirement is that the leader must be called by God. This is the obvious answer, but in itself it raises more questions. How do we discern the will of God? Nowadays we sometimes think of the call as an “inner sense”, but then what we are talking about is a feeling, an emotion. While God does speak through our feelings, feelings can also fool us. More is required.

The Bible also says that a church leader should be a committed Christian – someone who has been with Jesus and who has experienced the resurrection (Acts 1:21-22) and whose doctrine is orthodox (Titus 1:9). We may take this requirement for granted, but the history of the church contains many instances when people were placed into church leadership without this qualification; it was thought that their gifts were so important for the church that their lack of theological soundness was overlooked.

According to the qualifications for leadership listed by Paul, the primary requirement is what we would call spiritual fruit or spiritual maturity: A leader should be temperate, self-controlled, hospitable, gentle, upright, not violent, not quarrelsome, not greedy, etc. (1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:6-9). Leaders must also see themselves as servants of the people they lead (Matthew 23:8-12; Luke 22:25-26; 1 Peter 5:1-4).

In theory, we say that spiritual maturity is far more important than spiritual giftedness. In practice, I suspect, we often look at spiritual giftedness first (because giftedness is easier to judge than spiritual maturity is). I think our theory is correct. Nevertheless, giftedness is also an important requirement (1 Corinthians 12; Ephesians 4:11). Church leaders must be “able to teach” (1 Timothy 3:3) and lead or they won’t really be leaders.

We should also notice that in the New Testament potential leaders were trained by existing leaders, as Paul discipled Timothy, and Timothy nurtured others.

How?

The Bible is less clear as to the how of choosing church leaders. The apostle Matthias was chosen by lot (although from candidates carefully screened by the other leaders of the time: Acts 1:15-26). It appears that Paul, Timothy and other leaders appointed further leaders in churches (for example, Titus 1:5), although that was a church planting situation and it is not clear to what extent it can be taken as a model for the church in all times and places. Certainly existing leaders, by virtue of their qualifications as leaders, should have a significant role to play in the examination of other potential leaders.

On the other hand, the first deacons were chosen by the church members (Acts 6:1-6). Moreover, elders were required to be “above reproach” and to “have a good reputation” (1 Timothy 3:2,7). A leader must have “the consent of the governed” or the leader cannot lead.

There are also the lessons of church history. The very first Anabaptists in Zurich, Switzerland, insisted that church leaders should be chosen by their congregations. This was because of their experience with a church structure in which all leaders were appointed by the leaders above them. Such a concentration of power led unscrupulous, greedy and power-hungry men to seek and gain church leadership, often by dishonest means, including bribery. The result was a church in which leaders were despised, theology was distorted, and the mass of church members were cold, cynical and indifferent.

Perhaps the best system is one in which leaders are both discerned by other church leaders and affirmed by the people they are to lead.

The present

Is that how church leaders are discerned in the MB Church today? It seems to me that we often fail in both areas.

Increasingly, local churches hire pastors without first gaining the approval of other leaders such as Conference credentialling boards (it is assumed that this “rubber stamp” can be obtained later). Some disasters have resulted. In some congregations, board members are elected in a process that is little more than a popularity contest.

To counteract these problems, we have sometimes moved too far in the other direction. In some churches, pastors are appointed by the church board without allowing the members to affirm them in a vote. At the Conference level, senior Conference staff are sometimes appointed by Conference boards without ratification by a convention, especially if an appointment is made between conventions. At both the congregational level and the Conference level, elected positions are often filled by slates of nominees presented by a nominating committee (that is, a committee of leaders) and approved “by acclamation” by a hand vote of delegates/members.

A balance

I agree that nominations should go through a discernment committee. Otherwise, totally inappropriate people (lacking orthodox theology, spiritual maturity or giftedness) can be nominated and elected. A good discernment/nominating committee can seek out good candidates, examine them thoroughly, weed out popular but unsuitable candidates and make wiser decisions.

On the other hand, sometimes in practice a nominating committee may not display any more discernment than the congregation/convention. They simply nominate the people they know (the people who are “popular” with the committee) while others complain about an “old boys network” that monopolizes power.

Nominating committees must, therefore, make a distinct effort to seek input and nominations from the people, and they must take that input seriously. Nominating committees must also be open to nominating more than one candidate for each position, to give delegates a real option about which direction they think a church or Conference should be going. Otherwise, the people may simply opt out of the process, convinced that the system is so closed that it does not matter what or who they suggest.

As well, even if there is only one candidate for each position, ratification in the congregational meeting/Conference convention must be taken very seriously. Nominees’ names should be publicized ahead of time, and opportunities provided for questions and feedback. As well, ratification votes should be by secret ballot with the real possibility of the nominee being rejected.

To be effective, leaders must be both discerned by other leaders and affirmed by the people they are to lead. Church leadership is so important that candidates must be rigorously examined and prepared. Opportunities must also be allowed for people to commit themselves to following leaders. Leaders cannot lead if no one is willing to follow.

Previous | Next 

Last modified July 17, 2001.

© 2001 Mennonite Brethren Herald.
Published by the Canadian Conference of MB Churches.
Masthead and usage information.