New members should become church leaders as soon as possible-or so I once thought. When Matt first came to our church, he was a young man hungry for spiritual nourishment and Christian fellowship, and the church’s younger adults promptly included him in their activities.
He was good looking, intelligent, and “brought up well.” Even beyond that, people soon recognized he was one of a kind. He came from a family prominent in civic and academic circles, with a father nationally known in his field, and Matt seemed poised to make his own mark (he was in the process of completing a doctorate).
Although not believers, his parents had sent Matt to a Christian boarding school, where he heard the gospel. By the time he came to us, he was growing toward an evangelical faith.
We took care not to be intimidated by or draw attention to Matt’s background; we simply included him in our fellowship. He responded with an eager willingness to work. The summer after joining us, he was baptized, and by the following winter he was a member of our congregation’s governing council. We needed leaders, his gifts were obvious, and he had wanted the job.
It soon became clear, however, that we had rushed our smart, enthusiastic, sophisticated, and committed wunderkind into leadership. Whenever he was not the center of attention, he complained about “being taken for granted.” If he felt that any group of the church was, however innocently, excluding him, he became piqued about the “in group.” Though we liked Matt, soon few of us sympathized with his attitude.
He didn’t finish his term on the church council. He drifted into another fellowship, where for a time he became, as he had with us, the center of attention. I don’t know what happened after that. I hope that by now his expectations about church life have been tempered.
When should new members become leaders? As I learned from Matt, not too soon. Traits of selflessness and sacrifice are key ingredients for church leaders, and those take time to become evident.
Then again, Wally taught me to be cautious about caution.
Wally first attended our church as an interested observer, a not-yet-committed Christian. His wife had been reared in a strict evangelical church, but by the standards of their small rural community, she and Wally lived on the wild side. They worked hard, but they also partied hard.
In his early 30s, Wally developed a desire to know God and suggested to his wife that they start attending church.
“All right,” she said, “but I can’t party like we have and then go to church on Sunday morning. I wasn’t brought up that way.”
“Okay,” said Wally. “We’ll stop partying.”
They went to church, and Wally never looked back. He was converted, and his wife was restored. Their small and discouraged congregation saw them as a Godsend and rushed them into leadership. Like an elder straight from the pages of Acts, Wally matured as a Christian and church leader simultaneously.
His greatest test came a few years after his conversion, when he presided over a painful separation: the church had to discipline and release the pastor who had led him to Christ. Those of us assisting in the situation marveled at how he could acknowledge his personal feelings and yet deal objectively with his pastor, like a basketball coach who must kick his own son off the team for bad grades. I have been part of decision-making at every level of denominational life, but I have never seen a more mature example of Christian leadership than Wally displayed in that situation.
He didn’t fit what many would consider to be the mold of a leader. With no more than a high-school education, constitutionally unable, it seemed, to utter two grammatically correct sentences in a row, Wally nevertheless gained a reputation that quickly grew beyond the local congregation. By the time he was 40, his denomination elected him to a position at the regional level.
When should new members become leaders? With people like Wally, as soon as possible.
The important difference between Matt and Wally was not that of an educated snob and a humble man of the people. That is a tempting, easy, but entirely human judgment. The vital difference was spiritual. Unfortunately, spiritual qualifications are not always clear-cut. How can you distinguish the mature from the childish, the wise from the foolish?
Making the Judgment Calls
Years after my experiences with Matt and Wally, I served as the organizing chairman of our denominational Board of Human Resources (read, “chief headhunter”). It was the board’s job, among other things, to nominate qualified candidates for the administrative boards of The Evangelical Covenant Church.
We solicited recommendations and resums from every regional conference and local church. Then we sorted out the Matts and Wallys as best we could in order to prepare the ballot.
Naturally, the board thought a great deal about how from a distance we were to recognize spiritual thoroughbreds. We realized that no foolproof system could be devised, but we learned some things that apply to local leadership as well as regional or denominational office.
Eagerness to serve is not in itself a qualification. Sometimes in bantam-weight churches the “how soon” question will answer itself, as in Wally’s case. There is simply nobody else available.
But in larger churches where experienced people occasionally cling to power or are jaded and eager to quit, the question is harder. Should an eager, though callow, new member be rewarded for his eagerness? The obvious answer is no, though we sometimes fly in the face of this common sense simply because experienced members are eager to step down. But eagerness does not necessarily indicate leadership gifts or character.
A policy doesn’t solve the problem. A by-law arbitrarily excluding new members from office for a stipulated number of months or years solves some problems but creates others. While some Christians mature during a waiting period, others are no more qualified after three or five years than they were the day they joined the church. The leadership forced upon Wally was one reason he matured so quickly. On the other hand, Matt’s immaturity did not become obvious until he was in leadership.
There is no substitute for godly, Spirit-led, common sense on the part of the nominating committee.
Weigh secular skills on a separate scale. I’m not overly impressed with secular leadership abilities. A new Christian who is a leader in business or a profession may not appreciate the dynamics of leadership in a volunteer organization, much less in a spiritual fellowship.
The reading of a construction contract or a financial statement by a practiced eye can be useful, as can the insights of a psychologist or social worker in a disciplinary situation. But in the end, church leadership does not depend on such skills. Secular skills often rely on secular values.
Recently I was questioning an accountant about an auditor’s responsibility. He said, “It extends to seeing to it that accounts are posted accurately, so that anyone reading the financial statements can tell where the money is spent. But it does not extend to judging whether the money is well-spent.”
That’s a helpful illustration, too, of the distinction between being skilled and being spiritually mature.
In the church, we don’t need a spiritual leader to tell us whether our books are honest; a good accountant can tell us that. Instead we need Christian leaders able to discern whether the money is well spent-that is, in accordance with our Christian mission. That is a theological as well as a business judgment.
It works the other way as well: if we look at outward appearances alone, Wally’s grammar would disqualify him from leadership. As it turned out, by other criteria he measured up.
Four Key Criteria
To determine if someone has leadership ability beyond technique and knowledge, I look for four things. And I’ve found I’m asking for trouble if we nominate people who do not meet at least three of these criteria. I look for a leader who:
1. Readily accepts responsibilities. If a potential leader lays low when there is a clear need for his or her help, that’s a red flag. Willingness to volunteer for smaller responsibilities is one of the clearest indications of leadership potential. I first met one of the most effective denominational executives I know when, as a young housewife, she headed the kitchen crew at a regional annual meeting.
2. Understands the informal social rules. Good leaders grasp both the formal rules (bylaws and constitution) and the informal, often unspoken assumptions of congregational life. They know what is precious to the church. They sense what can and cannot be accomplished in the congregation. And they know whether objections are based on reality or “bogey-men.”
In one fellowship, a simple majority is never enough to approve a program, no matter what the bylaws say. In another, you never raise your voice in discussion; in still another, you are not taken seriously until you raise your voice.
Candidates for leadership don’t have to have total mastery of a church’s mores, just a basic competence in reading them.
New member Jane at first sits silently through congregational meetings, then begins to ask relevant questions about process and policy, and then volunteers for and completes short-term tasks within her reach. Jane, sensitive to what is going on and wanting to be a part, is a possible leader.
By contrast, new member Jack has sparkling credentials gained in ministry elsewhere, but he never comes to congregational meetings here. He is either indifferent to church business or unconcerned about any event of which he is not a leader. Despite Jack’s credentials, I would be quicker to nominate Jane. No matter Jack’s credentials, he needs to know what is going on here before he takes leadership.
New leaders will tinker with the engine once they get into office, so they should understand and be sensitive to what they are changing. Wreckage has piled up in our churches because of people who have assumed leadership without being sensitive to informal church rules.
3. Knows the people. Christians may be ready for leadership when they indicate that they understand the people in the fellowship. A church leader is a leader of persons, not the manager of a product or the operator of a machine. Thus a new member, who has not established a network of relationships within the church, is probably not ready for leadership.
I don’t necessarily look for people who have extraordinary skills at being “good with people.” I prize courtesy, not manipulation. Being good with people is not always synonymous with being good for people. Understanding people is not a style of approach, but a state of heart and commitment.
I look for the ability to carry on ordinary, concerned friendships with others. In rare cases even courtesy is dispensable: Linda is brusque and combative, but denominational leaders scramble to get her on their boards. She understands and she cares.
4. Agrees with the church’s general philosophy of ministry. In most churches, it would be counterproductive to have a church leader who objects to world missions or to offerings during worship. Although believers may hold such convictions, we don’t owe them a nomination to the board.
Though we are dealing with newcomers who haven’t had many opportunities to reveal their philosophies, their behaviors will tell us something. If your church has a long and successful tradition of financial pledges as part of its stewardship program, you would not quickly choose for the stewardship committee someone who has never pledged.
If your church has a strong tradition of support for denominational causes, you might look more than twice before you nominate someone to the board who boasts about being denominationally indifferent.
I have great confidence in Fred, for several reasons, among the most important, how quickly he identified himself with work and fellowship beyond the local church. From his first years with us, he would attend any open district meeting (no matter how few accompanied him); if there was a denominational chore within his reach, he took hold.
Actually, Fred’s move into leadership sums up a lot of what I’ve been saying. He had been converted to Christ as a soldier during the Vietnam war, but he had put his discipleship on hold for several years. One evening in our vacation Bible school, his small son raised his hand to receive Christ. That reignited his fire. The next day he came to church himself and brought the rest of his family.
But he came all the way-not only to the local congregation, but to all it represented. By the way he volunteered for jobs in the church and denomination and by his evident concern for the church’s missions abroad, I gradually saw he was ready for church leadership. For Fred, as for all Christian leaders, responsibility is a matter not just of election or appointment, but a matter of the heart.
Copyright © 1991 by the author or Christianity Today/Leadership Journal. Click here for reprint information on Leadership Journal.
