A friend of mine recently introduced me to a very vibrant church called NewSpring.  NewSpring is one of those churches that you go to and you feel like you are at a concert, but you don't remain there as you get really hard and relevant truth presented in a way that our culture understands.  Now I have to admit that I have never been to NewSpring, but I have watched their church leadership conference, UnLeashed, online.  Perry Noble is the Sr Pastor at NewSpring and spoke at the two main sessions which can be viewed here.  Before going any further it is important to note that NewSpring is one of the fastest growing churches in the US.  It started with about 20 in 1999 and has grown to over 8,000 today.  Should we look at what churches like NewSpring are doing?  Have you ever seen those little wood and golf tee games that they have at Cracker Barrell?  I am thinking specifically of the triangle one where the goal is to leave only one golf tee on the board.  On the back of the game they have a grading system.  If you leave one you are a genius (just for the record I have actually done this), if you leave two you are pretty smart, if you leave 3 you are dumb and if you leave 4 or more you are an ignoramoose.  Well, I think we would be an ignoramoose (sp?) if we didn't look at what NewSpring is doing.  

One of the most challenging and thought-provoking statements made by Perry during the 2007 conference was that most churches are structured for failure.  Most churches are structured for failure.  Is yours?  The model of leadership NewSpring holds to is such that the pastor has the vision and decisions are made according to the vision.  There are no committees that determine the direction of the church, no voting that concludes what the primary mission is.  Most churches have committees that hire and fire staff, and make decisions regarding the life of the church.  In fact this is the bread and butter of United Methodist polity.  Andy Stanley commented that he has two UMC pastor friends and he was amazed that they did not have the final word on who was hired and fired.  This is one aspect of leadership that will either set a church up for success or failure.  The staff at a church needs to operate as a team, and the pastor is the leader of that team and should have the authority to pick her or his team.  If someone is not committed to the same vision as the pastor then the pastor needs to have the ability to let that person go and find someone who can be a part of the team.  Now theoretically this can be accomplished by a committee, but the question we have to ask is: is this the best way?  For the UMC it may be.  I don't believe you can change one aspect of our polity without affecting the rest.  The fact that we have a short-term itinerancy lends credit to the SPR system.  If a pastor is only at a church for 4 or 5 years then it would reek havoc for every pastor to fire the old staff and hire new.  Or for that matter to change the vision of what the church should be doing.  So we have to ask: are we structured for failure?  

God has really been dealing with me about vision.  To effectively lead a church we need vision and those who are not willing to embrace that vision are welcome to find somewhere they can faithfully serve and worship.  Not that there should be resentment or bitterness but the matter is simply that a pastor is given leadership of a congregation and cannot effectively lead without the ability to follow God's vision.  Can that vision be discerned in community?  Of course.  Should it be determined by the community?  No.  As pastors we cannot sacrifice the vision God has given us to satisfy everyone.  Is there danger in this model?  Sure.  Is there danger in the way we have always done it?  Sure.  The first type of danger is that a pastor may not be seeking God and lead a church in a direction away from the kingdom.  The danger in the second is that pastors are not free to pursue the vision God has given them and we have safe pastors and risk-free churches.  The kingdom never comes easily and for many pastors to pursue a vision will require sacrifice and trials.  Erwin McManus, pastor of Mosaic, tells of time when his church membership dwindled to nearly a quarter of the size it was at when he had arrived.  It was a very trying time during which he developed a nervous tick in his eye.  However, God used his pursuit of the vision to prune the church and prepare it for what it now is, a multi-ethnic urban congregation of thousands that meet in six different locations in LA.  Are we ready to lose people so that we can pursue the Kingdom?  God never calls us to a fair fight.  To gain the Kingdom risk is a pre-requisite.  Are we a church that risks, or are we structured to be risk-free? 

Posted In: leadership church

Bookmark This Article: Del.icio.us, Digg, Reddit, Facebook, Stumbledupon