BETHEL UNIVERSITY

BETHEL SEMINARY ST. PAUL

DEVELOPING LEADERS IN A NEW ENGLAND SMALL CHURCH CONTEXT:

RETURNING THE TASK OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

TO THE LOCAL CHURCH

A THESIS PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE DOCTOR OF MINISTRY DEGREE IN

LEADING FROM THE INSIDE OUT

BY

PHILLIP G. ANDRADE

ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA

JUNE 2010
ii
 iii

CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................. v
CHAPTER ONE: PROBLEM AND RESEARCH DESIGN............................................. 1
Definition of Terms......................................................................................................... 2
CHAPTER TWO: THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION ...................................................... 21
Leadership Development in the Old Testament........................................................ 21
Jesus’ Leadership Development Model .................................................................... 26
Leadership Development in the Book of Acts.......................................................... 31
Leadership Development in the Epistles................................................................... 32
Leadership Development in the Second through Third Centuries............................ 48
Leadership Development From the Fourth Century Until the Reformation............. 50
Leadership Development During and After the Reformation................................... 52
Future of the Seminary.............................................................................................. 56
CHAPTER THREE: RELATED RESEARCH ................................................................ 58
Formal Models and Definition.................................................................................. 58
Innate or Learned ...................................................................................................... 69
Nature of the Call...................................................................................................... 71
Leadership vs. Management ..................................................................................... 73
What Makes A Leader? ................................................................................................ 75
Present Models of Leadership Development ................................................................ 81
CHAPTER FOUR: PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................... 93
Case Studies .................................................................................................................. 93
Surveys........................................................................................................................ 112
CHAPTER FIVE: ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 118
Case Study and Leadership Literature Integration...................................................... 118
Seminary Model Effectiveness ................................................................................... 133
Small Church Leadership Development Effectiveness............................................... 135
Toward a New Model ................................................................................................. 137
Clearly Define Purpose ........................................................................................... 138
 iv

Seminary as Apostle ............................................................................................... 139

Partnering in Assessment........................................................................................ 140
Community Centered Learning............................................................................... 141
Mentors or Team Leadership .................................................................................. 142
Provide Frequent Ministry Opportunities ............................................................... 143
CHAPTER SIX: EVALUATION................................................................................... 148
Project Weaknesses..................................................................................................... 148
Project Strengths ......................................................................................................... 150
Suggestions for Improvement ..................................................................................... 151
CHAPTER SEVEN: REFLECTION.............................................................................. 153
Researcher’s Personal Insights ................................................................................... 153
Further Questions to Be Considered ........................................................................... 158
APPENDIX A: INSTRUMENTS AND SURVEY RESULTS...................................... 162
APPENDIX B: NVIVO REPORTS AND DATA.......................................................... 173
BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................... 178
 v

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 2.1 Leadership Qualities……………………………………………………..34

TABLE 3.1 The Difference Between Managers and Leaders…………………..…….74

TABLE 3.2 McKenna’s Taxonomy of Key Events……………………………….…..83

TABLE 5.1 Holistic Leadership Development……………………..………………..145

TABLE 5.2 Leadership Development Partnership-Based Model……………….…...146

TABLE 5.3 Leadership Development Local Church-Based Model…………….…...147

 vi

ABSTRACT

Though many small churches have some sort of discipleship process, very few even think

about developing the leaders that are in their own congregations. Traditionally, this task

of preparing full-time church leaders has been given to the seminary without any

examination of the other options available. Yet, in too many cases traditional seminary

education is not meeting the needs of the leaders and congregations it seeks to help.

Graduates leave the seminary environment and find that their training does not prepare

them for the roles they have taken. Once in the local church context, challenges

repeatedly address the character of the leader but more often than not the leader’s

character and spiritual formation were not dealt with in the seminary curriculum.

Through case study and grounded theory, this project revealed seven components that can

address this problem. These components are essential whether the leadership

development process is in partnership with a seminary or whether it is completely

church-based. Ultimately, these findings bring to light a holistic model of leadership

development that can be implemented in any church.

 vii

"Leadership is a combination of strategy and character. If you must be

without one, be without the strategy"
—Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf
 1

CHAPTER ONE: PROBLEM AND RESEARCH DESIGN

The Problem

There is a large paradigm shift occurring in the area of leadership development in

churches. This shift is multifaceted and is due to a number of problems facing leadership

development in churches. The purpose of this project is to address one of those problems:

the lack of leadership development leading to full time ministry in small evangelical New

England churches. In attempting to address this problem, a number of factors come into

play. The culture of small churches is unique. The religious and social culture of New

England is unique and complex. Though many small churches have some sort of

discipleship process, very few even think about developing the leaders that are in their

own congregations. Traditionally, this task of preparing full-time church leaders has been

given to the seminary. Due to a variety of factors, which will be discussed later in this

paper, small New England churches are experiencing a lack of leadership. In response to

this problem the researcher will (a) review the relevant literature relating to leadership

development, (b) explore the paradigms or leadership development models presently

 2

being practiced in churches with special attention given to those programs being used in

small New England churches, (c) assess the effectiveness of these paradigms or

leadership development models presently being practiced in these churches, (d) examine

the role of seminary training in the process of leadership development within these local

churches, and based upon these investigations (e) develop a model to develop leaders

within the New England small church context.

Definition of Terms

Apostolic Leadership: An emerging style of leadership that resembles first

century church leadership in the following ways: it is visionary, missional, team-oriented,

and kingdom conscious. In addition, this type of leader empowers others in order to share

the ministry outside of the immediate leadership circle. Apostolic leaders are

entrepreneurial in the classic sense of the word, that is, they organize, manage and

assume risk for the sake of the mission.1

1
Reggie McNeal, Revolution in Leadership: Training Apostles for Tomorrow’s
Church (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998), 28-30.
 3

Attenders: Those who attend church services or meetings without a formal

commitment to that local church.

Bishop: A term used for certain type of leader in the New Testament and in

church history. Bishop (ejpivskopoß) is sometimes translated “overseer.” The terms

“bishop” and “overseer” are used interchangeably in this paper depending upon context

or cited references. The term ejpivskopoß is used interchangeably with presbuteroß and

poimhn in the Bible (Acts 20:28, 1 Peter 5:1-2). This is not the case throughout church

history.

Call: The belief that one has been set apart for particular ministry in a way that

goes beyond the general Christian command to serve.

Discipleship: The process by which a follower of Jesus becomes more like Jesus.

Elder: A term used for a certain type of leader in the New Testament and in

church history. Elder (presbuteroß) is sometimes translated “presbyter.” The terms

“elder” and “presbyter” are used interchangeably in this paper depending upon context or

cited references.

Established church: A church that has been in existence at least 15 years.

Evangelical: Those followers of Jesus who hold to historical orthodox Christian

beliefs centered in the authority of the Scriptures and who would say that they have made
 4

a personal commitment to Christ as their Savior. In addition, evangelicals meet the

following seven conditions:

(1) Saying their faith is very important in their life today; (2) believing they have
a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-
Christians; (3) believing Satan exists; (4) believing that eternal salvation is
possible only through grace, not works; (5) believing that Jesus Christ lived a
sinless life on earth; (6) asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches;
and (7) describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created
the universe and still rules it today. Being classified as an evangelical is not
dependent on church attendance or the denominational affiliation of the church
attended.2

Full-time ministry: Any ministry that takes the greater part of the minister’s time.

Hebraic forms: The belief that we “act our way into a new way of thinking”3. That

is, in the context of everyday life, lessons can be learned that will change how we think.

Hellenistic forms: The belief that we “think our way into a new way of acting,” 4

that is, enough information will bring about behavioral change.

Leaders: Those who have been gifted and empowered by God to hold authority

and have been given responsibility over a local church.

2
David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons, UnChristian: What a New Generation Really
Thinks About Christianity. . . and Why It Matters (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books,
2007), 249-250.
3
Alan Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church (Grand
Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2007), 122.
4
Ibid.
 5

Leadership Development:5 A process including, but not limited to, training in

theology, developing practical skill sets for ministry and encouraging character formation

in order to bring out the full potential in the people God has chosen the leader to lead,

helping them to love God and love others.

Local church: An assembly of believers who have gathered together under the

guidance of the Holy Spirit for the purpose of worship, fellowship, mutual discipleship

and carrying out the great commission and the great commandment.

Member: Those who have identified themselves as belonging to a local church

through baptism or another formal process.

Missional Leader: An emerging leadership paradigm that seeks to help believers

“to function like cross-cultural missionaries rather than being a gathering place where

people come to receive religious goods and services.”6

5
Within the present literature on leadership there is a diversity of views on the
nature of leadership. Questions revolving around giftedness, natural leadership, a call to
ministry, ordination, professional versus lay leadership and the like allude to the fact that
getting a handle on a culturally relevant, biblical model of leadership is not easy. The
answer to this dilemma will be fully explored later in this paper. Hence, the terms
“leader” and “leadership development,” in this paper, may be unclear due to one of the
very problems this dissertation hopes to address.
6
Alan J. Roxburgh and Fred Romanuk, The Missional Leader: Equipping Your
Church to Reach a Changing World (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2006), 13.
 6

New England: The area comprised by Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont,

Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut.

Servant leadership: A style of leadership that is not based on one’s position,

power or role, but is characterized by selfless service to others.

Small church: Churches that have an average Sunday morning attendance of

fewer than 150 people.

Transformational Leadership: A style of leadership that motivates by casting a

vision to guide the organization, training and motivating its people to ignore personal

self-interests and working for the greater good of the whole.

Delimitations

The research will be limited to small churches within New England, and churches

within the evangelical tradition. Additionally, the research will only focus on examining

the leadership development of those with leadership gifts or a call to full time ministry.

The overall church discipleship process will not be examined.

 7

Assumptions

The researcher assumes that those with leadership gifts and calling need to be

prepared for ministry. Leaders do not develop on their own. The researcher also assumes

that the local church is central to God’s plan in developing leaders. The researcher’s third

assumption is that God provides every healthy church with all the resources necessary for

ministry. Therefore, leadership development is possible within the small church context.

The researcher also assumes that leaders need to develop holistically. Leaders must grow

emotionally, in skill, intellect and in their inner spiritual life to be effective. Finally, the

researcher assumes that leadership development requires more than just formal education.

Leaders must understand biblical theology, the use and abuse of power, the dynamics of

change and systems, management skills, and inner life issues. They must manage family

life effectively and grasp the difference between a calling and the simple desire to serve.

Setting of the Project

The setting for the research will be among evangelical churches in New England

that number less than 150 attenders. Most evangelical churches within New England fall
 8

within this category.7 New England has had a long history of strong Christian influence

from the early Puritans to the Great Awakening. The situation is markedly different

today. A study done by the Barna Group in 2006 focused upon a representative sample of

4014 adults. The study defined born again Christians as “people who said they have made

a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and also

indicated they believe that when they die they will go to heaven because they had

confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior.” 8 The term

“evangelical” encompasses the born again definition in addition to seven other criteria.9

Many more people identified themselves as “born-again” than as “evangelical.”

According to the Barna Group, the northeast has the fewest number of born-again

Christians when compared to the rest of the country. Since the term “born-again” and

“evangelical” are not necessarily synonymous, it would seem that there are fewer

7
The Association of Religion Data Archives, “U.S. Congregational Membership
Reports,” The ARDA, http://www.thearda.com/mapsReports /reports/advanced
RCMSstate.asp?p2000=&c=09&c=23&c=25&c=33&c=44&c=50 (accessed October 4,
2009).
8
The Barna Group, “Survey Explores Who Qualifies As an Evangelical,” The
Barna Group, http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrow
Preview&Barna UpdateID=263 (accessed February 22, 2009).
9
Ibid.
 9

practicing evangelicals in New England than the percentages reported for those who

considered themselves born-again.10

A recent study conducted by the Boston-based Vision New England examined the

effectiveness of evangelism in New England. This study reported, “80% of New England

churches say evangelism is one of their top three priorities, yet only 2% of churches show

ongoing adult conversions.”11 The study also found that “a church will not develop a

culture of reaching out to the lost without the pastor's leadership. He leads the way in

developing personal relationships and by providing an example.”12 It seems that, at least

for New England, strong leadership is the key to effective evangelism and healthy

kingdom expansion.

10
Residents of the South are more likely than average to be classified as born
again Christians. More than half of those living in the South (53%) are classified as born
again, compared to 45% of individuals who live in the Midwest, 34% of those living in
the West, and 29% of individuals who live in the Northeast. (2007). The Barna Group,
“Survey Explores Who Qualifies As an Evangelical,” The Barna Group,
http://www.barna.org /FlexPage.aspx?Page=Topic&TopicID=8 (accessed October 14,
2008).
11
Vision New England, “Vision New England Recent Convert Study - Vision
New England,” Vision New England, http://sites.silaspartners.com/partner/Article_
Display _ Page/ 0,,PTID14438| CHID114781|CIID2314274,00.html (accessed October
23, 2008).
12
Ibid.
 10

An additional study conducted by Vision New England in partnership with

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary found that New Englanders are unique in their

attitudes and behaviors when compared to the rest of the country. Preliminary results

found that most New Englanders manifest eight cultural characteristics. These traits are

that New Englanders tend to (1) resist change, (2) value tradition, (3) be Roman Catholic,

(4) have a secular mindset, (5) be self-reliant, (6) be reserved, (7) favor insiders, and

(8) operate locally.13 Despite the shifting population and the relative homogeneous

nature of America, New Englanders have maintained a distinct culture that is readily

recognizable to anyone. This distinct culture obviously influences how the local church

does ministry, especially when it comes to leadership development. Hard questions need

to be asked if effective leadership development is to be expanded in New England.

Since New Englanders tend to operate locally, how does this impact someone’s

willingness to seek out training? Are local church-based leadership development centers

the future? Would they work alone or in concert with established seminaries? Do they

work at all? How does the characteristic of self-reliance impact the personal development

13
New England Research Project, “What Are the Unique Traits of New
Englanders? A Preliminary Study of New England Culture” (A Strategic Partnership of
Vision New England and the Ockenga Institute of Gordon-Conwell Theological
Seminary, 1997)
 11

of a potential leader? The strong resistance to change found in New Englanders (35.7%

versus 21.2 % in the United States overall14) will influence much of the methodology in

which leadership development occurs. The implications of these traits are numerous.

Rein Nauta’s study has shown that personal affinity and social similarity are key

factors in drawing individuals to a local congregation.15 In light of this, perhaps a strong

leadership development process that takes into account the unique characteristics of New

Englanders will be able to meet the needs of the many small churches in New England.

The Importance of the Project

The Importance of the Project to the Researcher

Though the researcher felt a call to ministry soon after his conversion, the role of

pastor was one for which he had not planned. The researcher’s early ministry was that of

a youth minister or associate pastor in a variety of churches. Those ministry roles were

very focused. The researcher could do his ministry without the responsibility of a whole

church on his shoulders. Conflict and tough issues were always handed up to the senior

14
Ibid.
15
Rein Nauta, “People Make the Place: Religious Leadership and the Identity of
the Local Congregation,” Pastoral Psychology 56 (2007).
 12

staff. Later, as a missionary to Japan, his role was that of a teacher. In this context, the

role of teacher was limited as well. The stress placed upon the researcher was unique to

his context. Cultural adaptation and learning a new language was paramount. While in

Japan, the researcher’s ministry was focused upon leadership development. However, the

ministry context was a Bible college modeled after the western paradigm. The program

was highly Hellenistic in its structure. Hebraic forms were virtually unknown. The

ministry focused on the education of the students biblically and theologically. The

researcher, due to his lack of cultural understanding, felt he was never was able to meet

the inner spiritual needs of others nor assist in the development of indigenous leadership.

When the researcher left the mission field suddenly and became a solo pastor, he found

that he was not fully prepared for the task of leading a church, despite seminary training

and twelve years of professional ministry experience.

Though the researcher had done exceedingly well in the academic environment of

seminary, he found that the pastoral role required more than just the skill set and biblical

knowledge he had acquired in seminary. The researcher found that change and conflict

were two sides of the same coin even among a church body that wanted to follow the

Lord’s leading. Struggles in his own spiritual life could not be separated from his

ministry life. Dealing with emotional exhaustion and the busyness of ministry were not
 13

talked about in his seminary experience. Mentorship and a proactive pattern of seeking

out additional learning helped the researcher begin to understand that the roles of leader

and pastor required more than what a seminary education and typical ministry experience

had afforded him.

The researcher began to wonder if others had experienced the same thing. Is the

high attrition rate among pastors due to this disconnect between the academic and the

pastor’s inner spiritual life?16 Was this lack of training keeping churches small in New

England? Had the local church abdicated its role of training leaders? Being passionate

about seeing lives transformed in New England, the researcher could not let these

questions go unanswered. Upon entering a Doctor of Ministry program, many of those

questions rose again to the surface as the researcher looked deep into his own calling.

Early coursework and practical application in human dysfunction, systems thinking, and

spiritual formation helped the researcher begin to see that leadership development must

go beyond the typical or traditional pathways available today.

16
For more insight into clergy attrition rates see Dean R. Hoge and Jacqueline E.
Wenger, Pastors in Transition: Why Clergy Leave Local Church Ministry (Grand Rapids,
MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 2005).
 14

The Importance of the Project to the Immediate Ministry Context

The researcher’s local church is a typical small New England church. The church

has grown steadily but has repeatedly hit barriers due to the lack of developed leadership

over its 50-year history. On a small scale, these barriers are simply the lack of leaders to

head up new initiatives, teach a Sunday School class or undertake other ministry

assignments. On a greater scale, these barriers force churches to ask the question: “If

someone feels called to full time ministry, what do we do?” Even as many lament the

lack of trained, effective church planters in New England, one has to wonder where these

church planters, who understand the New England subculture, would come from. As God

began sending people who felt called to full-time ministry to our church we did not have

an adequate answer. “Go to seminary” was the assumption, but given the researcher’s

own inadequate experience and the rising cost of a seminary education, the assumption

did not seem feasible nor obtainable to the potential young leaders within the church.

What does a church do with its potential leaders when, for a variety of reasons, the

traditional training pathways to full-time ministry do not fit or apply? Too often our only

response was to hope it would just happen somehow, that God would lead. There was no

plan. The researcher began to wonder if “trusting that God would lead” was an excuse to
 15

avoid the church’s responsibility to train the leaders God sent them. What is clear from

the Scriptures is that the local church developed leaders from within in the first centuries

of the Christian movement and this should provide a model for the twenty-first century.

While trying to understand the unique culture of New England and taking into

consideration those God was sending the researcher’s local church, Evangelical Baptist

Church began to offer opportunities to address these barriers to leadership growth. The

efforts up to this time have been programmatic but have produced some results. A

complete process or a model to train potential leaders that will take into account the

unique characteristics of small New England churches, global paradigm shifts, Biblical

principles, and reliance upon the provision and empowerment of God is needed.

The Importance of the Project to the Church at Large.

Though the research will be limited to small New England Churches, in many

ways it applies to the church universal. Surprisingly, the mortality rate among

congregations is the lowest when compared with other organizations (1 percent), yet
 16

smaller churches are closing at a higher rate, leaving many small communities without an

evangelical witness.17

What most people accept as true regarding the relevance of the church comes

from the media. The local church is becoming less and less relevant to the younger

generations.18 This perception of the church is intensified when local church leaders are

seen as aloof and uncaring to their needs. That is, what the congregation perceives as

their needs does not match the leader’s perception or cannot be met because of a hole in

the leader’s pastoral skills. Professional clergy, who once were seen as trustworthy are

now seen as being untrustworthy if not dangerous.19 Prominent church leaders have

fallen and many pastors quietly leave the ministry never to return. The decline of

mainline churches has been documented for some time. Unfortunately, evangelical

churches are beginning to manifest some of the same signs of decline as mainline

churches. Leaders, chosen and trained by God, who can cast a God-sized vision, are

needed to reverse this trend. Surely God can bring revival, and this researcher believes

17
Shawna l. Anderson, Jessica H. Martines, Catherine Hoegman, Gary Adler and
Mark Chaves, “Dearly Departed: How Often Do Congregations Close?” Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion 42, no. 2 (2008): 321-328.
18
Kinnaman, 40.
19
Maryland Association of CPAs, “What are the Most Trusted Professions for
2008?” Maryland Association of CPAs, http://www.cpasuccess.com/2008/11/who-are-
the-mos.html (accessed January 12, 2009).
 17

that the local church constitutes God’s method in bringing the message of redemption to

the world.

In this rapidly changing world, we need to ask: What is God asking us to do with

the resource of leaders he sends to the local church? Is there a new process of training

leaders emerging or are the traditional ways still good enough? This researcher believes

that the answer is to these questions are critical to the future of the church. The crucial

question to ask is not “what is the future of the seminary?” or even “how can we

effectively train leaders?” but “how can the Church complete the mission given her?”

Any discussion of leadership development within the local church must take this question

into account.

Data and Methodology

Nature of the Research

This project was qualitative in nature. Case study and grounded theory research

were the main models employed. The primary tools used were personal interviews,

surveys, documents and observational field notes. Case study and grounded theory were

deemed sound methodologies in dealing with the subproblems that arise from this
 18

project’s main problem. The subproblems were as follows: to understand the history and

scope of leadership development within the small church context, to find and examine the

models of leadership development presently being used in local churches, to discover

how effective small churches are in developing leaders, to discover how effective

traditional seminary education is in assisting the local church in developing leaders, to

integrate what the literature reveals about leadership development in small church

systems, and to develop a preliminary process for small churches to develop leaders

within their contexts.

Primary data that was gathered to address the problem included (a) on-site

personal interviews with pastors or key staff members, (b) personal observations recorded

in field notes and (c) the responses from the surveys administered. Secondary data

included biblical, theological and secular literature dealing with issues relevant to the

problem of this project. Relevant church documents from on-site visits were also

examined and analyzed.

An extensive review of relevant literature related to the study was conducted in

order to determine the nature and scope of leadership development as it pertained to the

small church context. In addition, the historical development of various leadership

 19

training methodologies within the church and the present state of Christian seminary

education was studied.

Over the course of a year, the researcher arranged meetings with pastors of small

New England churches who are presently engaged in some form of leadership

development within their congregations. The researcher conducted personal interviews

with the pastor or pastors and students and sometimes observed leadership training events

within the church community. The researcher observed the learning environment and

interactions between students and teachers and obtained relevant documents including

curriculum and strategic plans.

The researcher surveyed a larger sample of small church pastors regarding their

views on leadership development and formal theological education. The researcher

contacted eight denominational leaders of various evangelical traditions and requested

that they ask small church pastors in their denomination to fill out a short online form in

order to complete the sample.

 20

Tools and Researcher’s Assumed Bias

To address the researcher‘s potential bias due to his personal experiences in

seminary, ministry and churches, the researcher had his analysis and evaluation reviewed

by two peers.
 21

CHAPTER TWO: THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION

Biblical and Theological Basis

The Scriptures tell the story of God’s interaction with man through the eyes of the

leaders he chose throughout history. Though the impact of the common man was of great

importance, it was the leadership God chose and empowered that was the driving force

behind successful kingdom expansion. In almost every example, those who God chose as

leaders underwent some form of leadership development.

Leadership Development in the Old Testament

In the Old Testament, leadership development often took the form of on-the-job

training. Leaders such as Moses, Joshua and Gideon were trained as they followed God in

steps of obedience.

The result was greater faith and a changed character. No formal leadership

training is mentioned (though what could be called an apprenticeship may have been the
 22

case with Moses and Joshua). Though Moses was called to be the leader of Israel, he did

not lead alone. When the burdens of leadership became too much for him, Jethro

suggested that he appoint others to assist him in some of the leadership tasks. Jethro’s

reasoning was simple:

You and these people who come to you will only wear yourselves out. The work
is too heavy for you; you cannot handle it alone.…but select capable men from all
the people—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain—and
appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens (Exodus
18:17-18, 21).20

The Scriptures are unclear as to what made these men “capable.” The qualities of

fearing God, being trustworthy, and hating dishonest gain indicate an attitude of the heart

rather than some skill set. Whatever the full assessment was, Moses was able to gain the

assistance of a leadership team. From God’s perspective, the essence of leadership is an

attitude of the heart. When Samuel spoke to King Saul regarding the future of his

kingdom, he said: “But now your kingdom will not endure; the LORD has sought out a

man after his own heart and appointed him leader of his people, because you have not

kept the LORD’s command” (1 Samuel 13:14).

20
Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture citations are from The Holy Bible, New
International Version, (Colorado Springs, CO: International Bible Society, 1984).
 23

The quintessential passage that speaks of God’s requirements for leadership

comes from the book of First Samuel when Samuel was looking for Saul’s replacement.

Heart attitude or character clearly is the litmus test for leadership:

But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not consider his appearance or his height, for I
have rejected him. The LORD does not look at the things man looks at. Man
looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart" (1 Samuel
16:7).

The contrast between Saul and David is striking. Saul was the king the people

wanted. Saul was outwardly impressive, decisive and looked like a leader. His skills

were equally impressive. He was a warrior and a leader of men. The Scriptures infer that

though Saul was the king of Israel, he was much like the kings of the pagan nations.

Though David had similar skills, he apparently was not king material even in his father’s

eyes (1 Samuel 16:1-13). David’s distinguishing mark was his heart for God. David

understood that being king was not about his status in society. David’s kingship was

designed to reflect the status of the Lord to the nations.

Lawrence echoes this understanding when he wrote about modern leaders:

“Leadership in the kingdom of God is not an end in itself. It exists to serve a greater

end—the mission of God.…It is about service, not self-development.”21

21
James Lawrence, Growing Leaders: Cultivating Discipleship For Yourself and
Others (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004), 232.
 24

Obviously, the specific methods of leadership development at this period are

unclear. However, what is very clear is that God trained these men and women in the

context of the faith community. The common people followed because they saw the hand

of God upon the leader. Proverbs 21 reflects this idea:

The king's heart is in the hand of the Lord; he directs it like a watercourse
wherever he pleases. All a man's ways seem right to him, but the Lord weighs the
heart. To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice
(Proverbs 21:1-3).

Leaders such as David, in addition to on-the-job training, had the benefit of God’s

prophets. These prophets redirected the leaders when they strayed, helped in the

management of God’s people and kept the leader and the people in a state of holy

discomfort so that God’s people would concentrate on developing a heart after God rather

than fulfilling the selfish desires of the heart.

Additionally, we should not diminish the idea of God’s call. In the Old Testament,

God specifically called people. God called Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and other

leaders for a specific time and for a specific purpose. Often after the call these leaders

were publically anointed or somehow consecrated for God’s service. After the call, God

intensively trained and developed the leader he saw within. These leaders, through an

ongoing experience of God’s faithfulness, developed the skills, character and passions

that God wanted them to manifest. The constant refrain to “remember” reinforced the fact
 25

that an ongoing experience of God’s faithfulness was key not only to the leader’s

development but to the people’s development as well (e.g., Exodus 3:6, Deuteronomy

7:18).

Much of what we know about leadership in the Old Testament comes from these

well-known personages. Yet, there is another level of leadership mentioned but often

ignored.

The verb “elder” (,qz() means “to be old.” Its noun form ( ,q(z(), usually means

“chin or beard.”22 Over 180 times the word “elder” simply refers to older adults. In its

noun form, the term often refers to a distinct leadership position and does not only refer

to age. The term described leaders who performed priestly, judicial or general leadership

functions within their communities. Mappes suggests that these elders did not function in

the same way throughout Israel’s history, but they still played an important leadership

role in society. The Scriptures do not indicate how elders were developed or even if

formal training existed at all. What is significant is that these leaders were developed in

community and were required to have certain moral qualities that established them as

22
Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English
Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford, England: Clarendon, 1907), 278.
 26

elders.23 In Campbell’s extensive study, he showed that elders held their power based on

relationships: “‘The elders’ was shown to be a term of honour for those whose power was

based on relationships that already existed, rather than a precise office, entered through

appointment, election or ordination.”24

These elders played a great role during the divided kingdom period and especially

during the exilic period when Israel had no centralized leadership. Elders and leaders

such as Mordecai and Zerubbabel functioned without the benefit of formal election.

Jesus’ Leadership Development Model

Jesus’ mission was to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10). As the creator of all

things, Jesus needed no help in accomplishing his mission. He could have done it all by

himself. Nevertheless, he chose disciples. Continuing the pattern of the call from the Old

Testament, he called them by name. He then spent the next three years investing himself

in their lives. He taught them by verbal instruction (both formally and informally), by

mentoring, and by on-the-job training (Matthew 8:4; Luke 10:1; John 6:1-14). Jesus

23
A full discussion of ,qz( can be found in David Mappes, “The “Elder” in the
Old and New Testaments,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154 (1997): 80 – 92.
24
R. Alastair Campbell, The Elders: Seniority within Earliest Christianity
(Edinburg, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1994), 240.
 27

understood that in the training of his disciples and by the power of the Holy Spirit, his

ministry could continue even after his ascension into heaven. Jesus spoke of this when he

said: “I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He

will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father” (John 14:12).

The word “greater” (meizona) implies quality rather than quantity. It is not that

the disciples would do more miracles than Jesus, but that the work they did and we do are

greater in quality precisely because his Spirit had been given. The combination of Jesus’

teaching, ministry assignments, and empowerment by the Holy Spirit enabled the early

followers of Jesus to do greater works by sharing the Gospel to the ends of the earth.

Jesus often followed up his teaching with an experience that would make practical

what they had heard verbally. In Matthew 14:13-21 the disciples wanted to send the

crowds of people away. Speaking to his disciples, Jesus said, “You give them something

to eat.” The miraculous feeding of thousands of people followed this seemingly

impossible request. Jesus taught this lesson regarding the provision of God verbally,

visually, and hands-on as his disciples picked up the leftovers. The pattern of verbal

instruction, experience, and ministry assignment can be found throughout the Gospels.
 28

Kohl summarizes Jesus’ leadership development model this way:

For three years, Jesus taught and mentored twelve full-time students (disciples) as
well as many more part-time students and others who are just “auditing” the
course. As a teacher, whatever he taught he practiced himself with his students.
He seldom lectured; rather, he spent most of his time in dialogue and practical
demonstration, using everyday issues as they arose as the basis for his teaching.25

Often Jesus followed up on his teaching by sending them on a practical

application of what he taught. We find this interesting story in all the synoptic Gospels:

When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to
drive out all demons and to cure diseases, and he sent them out to preach the
kingdom of God and to heal the sick. He told them: "Take nothing for the
journey--no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra tunic. Whatever house
you enter, stay there until you leave that town. If people do not welcome you,
shake the dust off your feet when you leave their town, as a testimony against
them.” So they set out and went from village to village, preaching the gospel and
healing people everywhere (Luke 9:1-6).

After commissioning them, Jesus sent them out on a practical mission to practice

what they had heard and what they had seen. The description of their ministry echoes the

description of Jesus’ ministry. Jesus had power and authority. Jesus drove out demons

and cured diseases. Jesus preached the kingdom. Jesus owned little or nothing. It is clear,

that in every way, Jesus desired his disciples to imitate him.

25
Manfred W. Kohl, “Radical Change is Required for the Leadership of the
Church Today ‘Let’s Get Back to Basics,’” International Congregational Journal 6, no.
2 (2007): 115-116.
 29

The apostle Paul echoed the same desire when he said, “Follow my example, as I

follow the example of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1). Both Jesus and Paul understood

modeling as a necessary component to leadership development and spiritual growth.

As time progressed, the disciples slowly began to see that the nature of a true

leader is manifested in service. However, the disciples did not fully grasp the concept

until after the resurrection. Servant leadership was crucial in the ministry of Jesus and his

disciples saw this as they watched Jesus model what he taught:

Jesus called them together and said, "You know that those who are regarded as
rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority
over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you
must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even
the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a
ransom for many" (Mark 10:42-45).

This new paradigm of the servant leader as opposed to the authoritative leader

was revolutionary. As Norman Shawchuck says, “Jesus certainly had his leadership

problems!”26 Arguments, broken relationships, and one-upmanship plagued the disciples.

It was imperative to Jesus that the leadership model of his followers was not the same as

the model of the world. The servant-leader paradigm made no sense in the world the

disciples lived in but as they saw Jesus live out this new paradigm they became

26
Norman Shawchuck, What It Means to Be a Church Leader (Leith, ND:
Spiritual Growth Resources, 1984), 14.
 30

convinced that service and leadership were inseparable. Because Jesus poured his life

into these early disciples, they became versed in practical theology and conflict

resolution. Jesus taught them regarding the conflicting value systems of the world versus

that of the kingdom. The disciple’s question “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of

heaven?” betrayed their confusion (Matthew 18:1). Repeatedly Jesus told them that his

kingdom was “not of this world” (John 18:36). If someone wanted to lead in God’s

kingdom then greatness was to be found in humility (Matthew 18:4). The humblest of all

men, Moses, was also one of God’s greatest leaders (Numbers 12:3). In the world’s

economy, this made no sense. Jesus trained his disciples to be leaders who had their

minds focused upon the kingdom’s economy.

With the coming of the Holy Spirit, combined with their training, the disciples

became catalysts that transformed the world. Jesus understood the value of developing

leaders. He took what he saw in twelve rough young men and honed them so that they

could bring maximum glory to God. Through a variety of methods, time and prayer, tax

collectors, zealots, fishermen and the like became the greatest influencers the world had

ever seen. Jesus came to redeem the world but without his investment in the training of

leaders that message may not have been spread. The greatest legacy of leadership that
 31

Jesus left was passing on to his disciples his passion for the mission (Matthew 9:36-38;

28:18-20).

Leadership Development in the Book of Acts

Paul’s farewell to the elders of Ephesus in Acts 20:17-38 is a key passage in

understanding the early church’s view of leadership development. Walton says the

following regarding this important passage when compared to Luke’s overall view of

Christian leadership:

A sharply-focused portrait of Christian leadership as Luke understands it

emerges—a portrait seen first in the life and teaching of Jesus, and then reflected
in the ministry and teaching of Paul. Key features of this portrait include: the
heart of Christian leadership being the imitation of Jesus, following in the path of
servanthood which he walked; facing suffering as an inevitable concomitant of
leadership, suffering which ultimately leads to glory; and expressing faithful
following in handling money and work.27

Though it is unclear exactly what structure leadership took in these early

churches, Paul’s writings indicate that an important focus of leadership was that the

leader must watch over the flock and over himself (Acts 20:28). Dangers to the church

did not always come from the wolves roaming on the outside. Many times the dangers

27
Steve Walton, "Leadership and Lifestyle: Luke's Paul, Luke's Jesus and the
Paul of 1 Thessalonians," Tyndale Bulletin 48, no. 2 (1997): 379.
 32

came from within. Leaders needed to be on guard that they did not become the problem

themselves. It was possible for shepherds to become wolves if they were not vigilant.

Though this passage is traditionally known as Paul’s farewell address, it can be better

understood as Paul’s final attempt to train leaders about the potential dark sides of their

characters. Unfortunately, the Ephesians did not fully take heed of Paul’s warnings.

Eventually, Paul sent Timothy to deal with some of these very issues (1 Timothy 1:3-11).

Leadership Development in the Epistles

Paul who himself was seemingly trained directly by Jesus took leadership

development very seriously (Galatians 1:12-18; 1 Corinthians 11:23).28 Paul came

alongside Timothy and nurtured him. Timothy was transformed from a young,

inexperienced person into a strong church leader. John Mark was also transformed from a

young man to a valued partner in Paul’s journeys even to the point where Paul relied on

him at the end of his life. In the lives of these early church leaders, Paul passed on his

passion for leadership development.

28
Note use of paralambanw in Galatians 1:12.
 33

Much has been written regarding the qualifications for leadership listed in First Timothy

and Titus. Questions remain as to whether these qualifications were simply a polemic

against false teachers or go deeper into the essence of biblical leadership.29 Mounce’s

chart30 is helpful and contrasting these qualifications:

29
David A. Mappes, "Moral Virtues Associated with Eldership," Bibliotheca
Sacra 160, no. 638 (2003): 202-218.
30
William D. Mounce, “Pastoral Epistles,” Word Biblical Commentary
(Nashville: Nelson Publishers, 2000), 156-158.
 34

Table 2.1 Leadership Qualities

Overseer Deacons Elder False Teachers
1 Tim. 3:1-7 1 Tim. 3:8-13 Titus 1:5-9
“good work” “worthless for any good deed”
(Titus 1:16)
“above “above “above Bring reproach on the church
reproach”; reproach” reproach” (Titus 1:11-14)
“good
reputation”
“one-woman “one-woman “one-woman Seduce women (2 Tim. 3:6)
man” man” man”
“self-controlled” “self- Uncontrolled (2 Tim. 3:6)
controlled”
“hospitable” “hospitable” Upset house churches
(2 Tim. 3:6)
“skilled teacher” “able to Teaching a different gospel
exhort with (1 Tim. 1:3; cf. 4:7; 5:3; 6:4,
sound 20; 2 Tim. 4-3-4)
teaching and
rebuke”
“do not fall into Taken captive by the devil
the devils snare” (1 Tim. 1:20; 4:1; 5:15; 2 Tim.
2:26)
“gracious” “not Teaching results in “quarrels”
arrogant” (2 Tim. 2:23; Titus 3:9)
“not a lover of “not greedy” “not greedy Think godliness is a “means of
money” for gain” profit” (1 Tim. 6:5); “lovers of
money” (2 Tim. 3:2); “shameful
gain” (Titus 1:11)
“managing his “managing “having “disobedient to parents”
own household their children faithful (2 Tim. 3:2); “rebellious”
well, having and their own children, not (Titus 1:10)
submissive household rebellious”
children” well”
 35

Whether or not the qualifications were a polemic, what is clear is that leaders

were called to model a godly life.

Glasscock understands that the qualifications listed in the Timothy and Titus

passages should be grouped into four categories: personal character, public testimony,

family, and ministry. He realizes “some of these naturally overlap, that is, any family

failure will affect one’s ministry or personal qualifications.”31 He goes on to say, “These

qualifications clearly emphasize the character of the person rather than his educational

achievements.”32

Mappes points out that these qualifications were not intended to segregate

believers in two distinct classes, rather they were intended to be practiced so that others

could imitate the godly life they lived.33 Paul emphasized this pattern of modeling

leadership development when he instructed Timothy: “The things you have heard me say

in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to

teach others” (2 Timothy 2:2). Paul’s style of leadership development went beyond

passing on correct doctrine. Modeling the faith entrusted to him was of great importance.

31
Ed Glasscock, “The Biblical Concept of Elder,” Bibliotheca Sacra 144, no. 573
(1987): 73.
32
Ibid., 74.
33
Mappes, 215.
 36

He argues, “Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1).

For Paul there was no faith without action. In essence, Christianity was faith put into

action. It was imperative that leaders, above all others, “live a life worthy of the calling”

(Ephesians 4:1). Paul went on to say:

An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children
believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. Since an
overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless-not overbearing, not
quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest
gain. Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-
controlled, upright, holy and disciplined (Titus 1:6-8).

These qualifications are really issues of character. The instructions were similar

in regard to deacons in 1 Timothy 3:8-12. Paul realized that leadership would rise or fall

based on the leader’s character. It is no mistake that when Paul addressed the letter to the

Philippians to “all the saints in Christ Jesus at Philippi, together with the overseers and

deacons” (Philippians 1:1b), he encouraged them to have the “same attitude as that of

Christ Jesus” (Philippians 2:5). For Paul, the development of the leader’s character was

not optional but crucial. Glasscock stresses the importance of character as he summarizes

the biblical concept of elder.

In many churches today men are placed into positions of pastor or elder based on
education, personality, or professional achievements. However, the Bible does not
consider any of these. In the Scriptures, an elder was an older, mature adult who
was recognized for his wisdom and experience. He was to be looked up to for
advice and guidance. His character, not his achievements, was important.…
However, this is not automatic; therefore, the Scriptures give further instructions
 37

that not every man was an elder in the official sense. They were selected from the
older men based on their wisdom and experience.34

Glasscock does not take into account biblical examples of young elders such as Timothy

but his point regarding the centrality of character is paramount.

Shawchuck emphasizes this point in his book Leading the Congregation: “The

care and feeding of the pastor’s interior life is not auxiliary to ministry—it is the

foundation of ministry.”35

Paul was also concerned that his leaders understood the Scriptures. Paul wanted

his leaders to “do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who

does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy

2:15).

The phrase o∆rqotome:ivn to;n lo√gon th:ß a;lhqe√iaß (“correctly handles the word of

truth”) has the connotation of “being straight.”36 Paul wanted Timothy to stay on target by

focusing upon the Word without being drawn into “godless chatter, because those who

indulge in it will become more and more ungodly” (2 Timothy 2:16). Paul presumed that

34
Glasscock, 70.
35
Norman Shawchuck and Roger Heuser, Leading the Congregation (Nashville,
TN: Abingdon Press, 1993), 28.
36
Frederick William Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and
Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), s.v.
“o∆pqotome√w (o∆pqo√ß, te√mnw)”
 38

if leaders would focus on the Word of God they would be able to effectively use it in the

Gospel’s service. Paul made this practical when he instructed Timothy to “preach the

Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage–with great

patience and careful instruction” (2 Timothy 4:2).

It was never enough to just know God’s Word or to have the skill set to

“correctly handle” it. God’s Word must be applied, in this case, by preaching so that

correction and encouragement was administered to God’s people. The early Christian

movement expanded rapidly for that very reason. The Gospel was not only preached and

talked about, it was lived out.

It is significant that Paul combined the handling of God’s Word with the concept

of modeling. He instructed Timothy:

What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and
love in Christ Jesus. Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you–guard it
with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us (2 Timothy 1:13-14).

In First Thessalonians, Paul praised them because they imitated Jesus despite the

hardships they were enduring:

You became imitators of us and of the Lord; in spite of severe suffering, you
welcomed the message with the joy given by the Holy Spirit. And so you became
a model to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia (1 Thessalonians 1:6-7).

In turn the Thessalonians themselves became models that other believers could imitate.

Throughout the New Testament this concept modeling and imitation is frequently linked
 39

to the concept of multiplication. Hirsch calls this type of modeling “embodiment.” He

goes on to say:

Embodiment literally means to give flesh to the ideas and experiences that
animate us. If these ideas and experiences are really believed in and valued, they
must be lived out.… Jim Wallis says that, “the only way to propagate a message
is to live it.”37

Hirsch emphasizes that Jesus was effective because of the way he embodied the

kingdom of God. Jesus embodied the grand themes of the Gospel in a way that was

highly relational and attractive. The end result was a movement of people and not a

philosophy “mediated by a religious elite.”38

Paul saw the responsibility of leadership development to be foundational to the

role of leaders in training all of God’s people:

It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be

evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God's people for
works of service [emphasis added], so that the body of Christ may be built up until
we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and
become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. Then we
will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and
there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their
deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow
up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and
held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as
each part does its work (Ephesians 4:11-16).

37
Hirsch, 114-115.
38
Hirsch, 114.
 40

This passage is usually understood to mean that those who have been entrusted

with leadership gifts, whether they are apostles, prophets, evangelists, or pastors and

teachers, are responsible for the training of others. Gordon argues, however, that there is

no distinctive role for leaders in the training of the “saints.” He maintains that the

passage has widespread application to the whole congregation.39 The saints are to equip

the saints. Gordon does not deny that some are called to leadership within the church. In

fact, he points out that deacons were appointed so that leaders could focus upon the

ministries of the Word and prayer (Acts 6:4).40 Whatever the case, the primacy of

developing the giftedness of individuals is clear in this passage. Given the responsibility

and privilege that church leaders have, how much more should this be applied to the

training of those others with leadership gifts.

Paul’s writings clearly stressed that qualifications for leadership were centered in

the leader’s character and call. That character manifested itself in the embodiment of the

Gospel through modeling. Leadership development is a matter of multiplication. Healthy

leaders can produce other healthy leaders. Healthy leaders choose to empower others

rather than empower themselves. In the small church environment, poor leadership can

39
David T. Gordon, “Equipping Ministry in Ephesians 4,” Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 37, no. 1 (1994): 69-78.
40
Ibid.
 41

kill a church. In fact, Nauta’s study indicates that congregational identity is highly

dependent upon the leader and not based in structures, strategies, programs and policies.41

It is necessary, therefore, to give leadership development its proper importance in the life

of the local church.

Clergy and Laity

Traditionally, the terms “clergy” and “laity” distinguished leaders in the local

church from non-leaders. These distinctions were made for a variety of reasons that were

often based on the level of education the leader received, personal power structures the

leader possessed and the specific church organization the leader functioned in.

Vooys questions the clergy and laity distinction. In discussing Ephesians 4:11-13,

he makes the case that all are responsible to equip the body. Vooys summarizes his view:

Christ is the one who has given specially gifted persons to his church. These
particular gifted ones are charged with equipping every one in the body so that
they may all minister, and minister in such a way that the church is built up in
Christ and becomes mature in Christ. This task is given to all who make up the
body of Christ, the church, while she waits for the return of her Master.42

41
Nauta, 45-52.
42
John Vooys, “No Clergy or Laity: All Christians are Ministers in the Body of
Christ Ephesians 4:11-13,” Direction 20, no. 1 (1991): 94.
 42

Vooys’ view does stand in opposition to the idea of professional clergy doing all

the ministry. However, the distinction is not that clear. Horrell provides evidence of

conflict over the ideologies between what he calls “charismatic” and “community

organizer” forms of itinerant leadership.43 Horrell goes on to say that,

Although our evidence is scarce, and much of it relates to the Pauline churches, it
is clear that the major locus of leadership power and authority in the earliest
churches was an itinerant office apostolic missionaries such as Peter and Paul.…
A considerable number of itinerant missionaries exercise authority and leadership
in earliest Christianity.44

As far as the Scriptures are concerned, there is no division between clergy and

laity. To be sure, there are functional distinctions between various ministries and gifts but

those distinctions should not be misconstrued as a hierarchical division. Viola calls this a

“functional mindset.” He continues,

Leadership in the New Testament places a high premium on the unique gifting,
spiritual maturity, and sacrificial service of each member. It lays stress on
functions, not offices. It emphasizes tasks rather than titles. Its main concern lies
in activities like pastor-ing, elder-ing, prophesy-ing, oversee-ing, apostle-ing,
etc.45

43
David Horrell, “Leadership Patterns in the Development of Ideology in Early
Christianity,” Sociology of Religion 58, no.4 (1997): 323–341.
44
Ibid., 325.
45
Frank Viola, Reimagining Church: Pursuing the Dream of Organic
Christianity (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook, 2008), 154.
 43

For Viola biblical leadership is organic and primarily functional. The hierarchical

model is “fundamentally worldly.”46 Although many would not go as far as Viola, Jesus

clearly spoke to the inherent dangers of a hierarchical model:

But you are not to be called “Rabbi,” for you have only one Master and you are
all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth “father,” for you have one Father,
and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called “teacher,” for you have one Teacher,
the Christ (Matthew 23:8-10).

As the Kingdom expanded, resident leadership began to gain prominence over

these itinerant apostolic leaders. Part of that transition can be seen in “Paul’s farewell to

the Ephesian elders.” Paul, the itinerant leader, is in essence passing on the ministry and

authority to resident leadership. Very early on, terms that described functions began to

describe an office. Terms such as presbuvteroß (“Elder”), e∆pi√skopoß (“overseer”), and

poimevnaß (“pastors”) were not only interchangeable but began to describe an office.47

By the time Philippians was written, church leaders were referred to as “overseers” and

“deacons.” “Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, to all the saints in Christ Jesus at

Philippi, together with [emphasis mine] the overseers and deacons (Philippians 1:1).

What qualified someone to be an elder has been debated extensively. Given its

connection with the Hebrew word for elder in the Septuagint, age seems to be central.

46
Ibid., 155.
47
David Mappes, “The New Testament Elder, Overseer, and Pastor,” Bibliotheca
Sacra 154 (1997): 162-174.
 44

Many commentators assumed that age to be in the fifties. Yet, one example from the

Qumran text “Damascus Document” calls for 30 years of age as the minimum to become

an elder.48 Even Jesus “grew in wisdom and stature” (Luke 2:52). HJliki√a/ (“stature”) has

a basic meaning of age.49 Jesus simply grew in age and as Luke states, “when he began

his ministry, Jesus was about 30 years of age” (Luke 3:23). However, whatever the age

factor was, Paul never saw it having primacy over the qualifications of godly character

and spiritual giftedness. For this very reason, Paul instructed Timothy, a young elder, to

take the “things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to

reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others” (2 Timothy 2:2). This is the

essence of leadership development. By the end of the first century, the pattern of

appointing local leaders or elders, with little regard for age, became normative in the

churches.

One question remains: If leadership development is a biblical concept then where

did it take place in the early church? Obviously, the church did not have seminaries that

48
Damascus Document X, 5-10. Unless otherwise noted, all Dead Sea Scroll
citations are from Florentino G. Martinez and Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea
Scrolls: Study Edition Volumes 1 and 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1997).
49
Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), s.v “hJliki√a"
 45

were official centers of training until much later. Undoubtedly, leadership development

was done in the context of the local church. The testimony of the Scriptures, from the

beginning to the end, is that leaders were developed within the community of believers.

God designed the church to be a place where the leader’s character, skills, and

dependence on God were to be developed. Certainly an individual’s experiences and

God’s sovereign hand adds much to a leader’s development, yet God designed the church

to be a place where all these aspects of a leader’s development are combined, honed,

practiced, and empowered. Webber sums up the local church’s impact as follows:

In Acts, the local churches, or clusters of churches, were the primary units of
leader development. Typically, the churches did not send their emerging leaders
off to be built somewhere else by someone else. Just as parents are, quite
naturally, the best ones to build their own children, so churches in the New
Testament themselves embraced the responsibility and privilege of building their
own spiritual sons and daughters….The local church is the most natural and most
potent place to build the whole person. In the local church, there is an
extraordinary transformational environment of spiritual, relational, experiential
and instructional dynamics. In the normal life and ministry of the local church
there can be leaders building leaders, spiritual mothers and fathers, role models,
examples, mentors, coaches, responsibilities, challenges, prayer and worship, the
Presence of God, sufferings, instruction in the Truth of God’s Word. All of this is
already present in the local church – at least potentially.50

50
Malcolm Webber, “Church-Integrated Leader Development,” Leadership
Letters, http://www.leadershipletters.com/2008/12/29/church-integrated-leader-
development/ (accessed February 22, 2009).
 46

Jesus’ Development as a Leader

The most striking example of leadership development in the Scriptures comes

from the book of Hebrews:

During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with
loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard
because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience
from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal
salvation for all who obey him and was designated by God to be high priest in the
order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 5:7-10 NIV).

The Scripture plainly state that Jesus developed as well. He “learned obedience

from what he suffered” (Hebrews 5:8). The mystery of the incarnation implies that the

Son of God developed not only as a human (Luke 2:52) but also as a leader. When God

chooses leaders today, they are called to walk the path that Jesus walked (Matthew

10:25). Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you”

(John 20:21). That path includes the sharing of the Gospel, seeking justice, helping the

poor and the other things associated with the ministry of Christ (Luke 4:18).

Jesus affirmed the need to have trained leaders to carry on his ministry. Three

years of the Master’s life were devoted to training leaders. Jesus’ commitment to this

endeavor was a catalyst in expanding the kingdom after his ascension. Though most

churches did not start with indigenous trained leaders, Jesus had left behind trained
 47

apostles to add stability and leadership as the early church grew. A leadership crisis was

averted by the training of these early apostles. Webber, addressing a similar worldwide

leadership crisis today, says:

Biblical Christian leadership is not vision-based, competency-based, success-

based or even values or character-based; it is Christ-based. Everything must come
from an inward union with him.… Making this distinction doesn’t undermine the
importance of vision, competency or character. In fact, it establishes that true
vision, competency and character, from the indwelling life of Christ and not from
human effort or capacity.51

In the first century, living in community and sharing life developed Christian

leaders. In this shared life, skills were developed, character was transformed, the Holy

Spirit led by the distribution of gifts and miraculous guidance. In community, these early

leaders learned the work of the Gospel by modeling and being mentored by older or more

experienced leaders. Stevens states the point simply when he says:

The best structure for equipping every Christian is already in place. It predates the
seminary and the weekend seminar and will outlast both. In the New Testament
no other nurturing and equipping is offered other than in the local church. In the
New Testament church, as in the ministry of Jesus, people learned in the furnace
of life, in a relational, living, working and ministering context.52

51
Malcolm Webber, “Ministry Leadership Culture,” Ministry Today,
http://bluetoad.com/publication/index.php?i=9061&m=&l=&p=34 (accessed December
3, 2008).
52
R. Paul Stevens, Liberating the Laity (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,
1985), 46.
 48

Leadership Development in the Second through Third Centuries

Not long after the death of the apostles, leadership in the church took a turn from

its original design. Elders of various churches rose in prominence, which then led to the

development of a quasi-professional clergy. For example, in the Didache, a late first

century-early second century document, prophets are to be given payment because they

act as “chief priests.”53 In addition, the people were instructed to appoint bishops and

deacons “worthy of the Lord.”54 These bishops and deacons were to “perform for you the

ministry of prophets and teachers” (Didache 15:1). Ignatius of Antioch was visited by the

bishop and elders from the church in Magnesia prior to his martyrdom.55 “Bishops,”

“deacons,” and “elders” became terms to describe offices more than functions. Even at

this early date, the office of bishop was gaining power,56 yet the influence of the bishop

was in flux. They were the ones who ministered, yet others could minister to them.57

53
Didache 13:1-4. Unless otherwise noted all citations from the Early Church
Fathers come from J.B. Lightfoot and J.R. Harmer, The Apostolic Fathers. (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1984). The use of ajrcierei:ß identifies Christian
leaders symbolically with Jewish high-priests.
54
Ibid.
55
Ignatius to the Magnesians 2:1
56
Ibid., 7; Ignatius to the Ephesians 6:1
 49

Churches on the outskirts of the Empire were still training their leaders in

community. As local bishops gained influence, the ministry of itinerant apostles became

less influential and eventually disappeared. The Didache expresses the tension between

the apostle’s power and an undercurrent of mistrust.58 These isolated churches first

depended on itinerant apostles, prophets, and teachers for additional leadership but by the

writing of Didache formal bishops were being selected. Prescribed methods of ordination

were in place by AD 215.59

This process was not foreign to the New Testament. Even Paul began the practice

of appointing elders in the churches he visited. With the gradual disappearance of

itinerant apostles, leadership was handed over to the elder or local bishop.

Concurrently, monastic communities were being established throughout the

Empire. Many of these monasteries became centers of learning. By 200 AD, a formal

57
Epistle to Hero 3:2-3. “Do nothing without the bishops; for they are priests, and
thou a servant of the priests. They baptize, offer sacrifice, ordain, and lay on hands; but
thou ministerest to them, [emphasis mine] as the holy Stephen did at Jerusalem to James
and the presbyters.” The Wesley Center Online, “The Epistle of Ignatius to Hero,” The
Wesley Center Online, http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/fathers/ante-
nic/ignatius/ighero.htm (accessed June 8, 2009).
58
Didache 11:1-12
59
Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus 2:1-4:13. “Apostolic Tradition of
Hippolytus,” The Journal of Theological Studies, http://jts.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/
issue_pdf/backmatter_pdf/os-XXXV/140.pdf (accessed June 8, 2009).
 50

school was founded in Alexandria that focused on the study of Christian theology.60 This

anomaly was short lived and most leadership development returned to the bishop training

and mentoring model.

Leadership Development From the Fourth Century Until the Reformation

With the conversion of Constantine, the nature of leadership within the church

began to change. By the sixth century, the qualifications for Christian leadership had

changed. Issues of character took second place to learning the traditions, rituals and

liturgies of the church. In addition, official schools to train bishops were established

throughout the Empire. This type of training may have been modeled after the rabbinic

yeshiva, which also began to be developed after the destruction of the Second Temple.

Though a definite connection cannot be made, the focus of the both models was the study

of texts and rituals.

Reactionary movements also occurred during this period. Monastic communities

and those associated with the Cappadocian writers all sought to keep the communal roots

60
Coptic Orthodox Church Network, “Lectures in Patrology: The School of
Alexandria, Book One. Before Origen,” Coptic Orthodox Church Network,
http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/ patrology/schoolofalex/index.html (accessed October
9, 2009).
 51

of Christianity alive. This tension between community rule and the rise of a clergy caste

was exemplified in Basil the Great being ordained against his will.61 The slow

transformation from a community-centered, church-based leadership development model

into a more centralized academic-based model was completed by 1200 AD.62 Certain

churches had amassed substantial resources and were able to found theological schools of

their own. These cathedral schools further transformed into what became the modern

university. These early universities generally focused upon seven liberal arts. The study

of grammar, rhetoric, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, logic, and music were thought to

make a well-rounded, educated person. Graduate schools added to the list by teaching

medicine, law, and theology. The rise of scholasticism attempted to reconcile Christian

theology with Aristotelian philosophy. Christianity became a faith of intellect and reason

combined with revelation. Brown summarizes the spirit of the day:

In one sense the Middle Ages were an age of faith. The questions that the
schoolmen asked all had a theological bearing. But ironically the questions which
so preoccupied them were a hindrance to hearing the message of the Bible about
God and his love in Christ.63

61
Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity, Volume 1: The Early Church to
the Dawn of the Reformation (New York: Harper and Row, 1984), 183.
62
William Boyd, The History of Western Education (New York: Barnes & Noble,
1967), 128-129.
63
Colin Brown, “Scholasticism,” in Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of
Christianity, ed. Tim Dowley (Grand Rapids, IL: Eerdman’s Publishing Co., 1977), 279.
 52

Obviously, intellect and reason can help us know about God but they cannot replace

Jesus’ emphasis in knowing God personally.

The Hebraic model that sought to integrate character, giftedness, calling,

mentoring, modeling and reliance upon the power of the Holy Spirit gave way to a

Hellenistic model whose primary focus was upon an academic understanding of the

Scriptures. The first century model, that saints train saints, became a professional model,

the task of which was to train professional ministers to the exclusion of all others.

Throughout the centuries this slow process moved the responsibility of training leaders

away from the church and placed it solely in the hands of the academy.

Leadership Development During and After the Reformation

Though Martin Luther’s “Table Talk” are the center of some controversy,64 they

demonstrate one attempt to return at least some portion of leadership training to the local

church. “Table Talk” was first compiled in 1566 and contains discussions Luther

presented to a number of his friends and colleagues. “Table Talk” primarily focused on

64
The New York Times, “Luther’s Table Talk and the Forgeries,” The New York
Times, http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=
9E07EFD71330E333A25754C2A 9679D94669ED7CF (accessed October 9, 2009).
 53

topics of theology with a little politics thrown in. Yet, despite their academic focus,

Luther touched upon issues of Christian character in his discussions “Of Christian Life”

and “Of Discord”. However, Luther’s attempt at church-based pastoral training was not

the norm.

Burnett’s study of early Protestant clergy in Basel, Switzerland demonstrates the

drift towards a systematized educational process for pastoral ministry. During this period

rhetoric and dialectic were paramount in the training of clergy. Increased uniformity and

systematization were evident by the large number of materials and publications created.

The primacy of preaching from highly educated clergy became the center of worship.65

One reason Protestantism expanded so rapidly was that its clergy became very

well educated. Protestant clergy were among the best educated in Europe.66 In response

to this phenomenon, the Catholic Church founded its first seminaries in the late sixteenth

century.

65
Amy Nelson Burnett, Teaching the Reformation: Ministers and Their Message
in Basel, 1529-1629 (New York: Oxford University Press. 2006).
66
George Marsden, The Soul of the American University: From Protestant
Establishment to Established Nonbelief (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), 37.
 54

American Seminaries and Log Colleges

As the Americas became populated, the first colleges arose to train pastors for the

growing population. Initially these colleges, such as Harvard (1636) and Yale (1701),

were fairly successful in the task. As the population of America expanded westward the

need arose to provide theological education on the new frontier. In the early 1700s

approximately 150 colleges were founded to aid in the effort. These church colleges were

designed to not only educate the minister but also to bring some semblance of educated

culture to the west. These small liberal arts colleges were the centers of higher education

for both Christian leaders and the general population.67

“Log colleges” took up some of the slack and attempted to provide a basic liberal

arts education as well as pastoral training through a modified apprenticeship model.68

One such log college was located in Warminster, Pennsylvania. It was founded in 1726

and eventually gave rise to Princeton University in 1746. However, by the mid-twentieth

67
Mark A. Noll, Nathan O. Hatch, George M. Marsden, David F. Wells, and
John D. Woodbridge, eds., Eerdmans Handbook to Christianity in America (Grand
Rapids, IL: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1983), 225.
68
Timothy Z. Witmer, “Seminary: a Place to Prepare Pastors?” Westminster
Theological Journal 69 (2007): 231-233.
 55

century these colleges became less effective as training centers for Christian leaders

because they lost their religious distinctiveness and focus.

The Great Awakening (1730-1740) quickly increased the number of churches and

the need for qualified pastors. In many cases, the answer was a theological seminary.

With an ever-increasing population as a main driving factor, the first Protestant seminary

was opened in New York by the Dutch Reformed Church in 1784 in order to provide

trained ministers. Other institutions such as Andover Seminary in Massachusetts (1807)

began because of theological disagreements. The desire for theological purity and

orthodoxy had an additional effect as older institutions became more and more liberal.

Bible Colleges

An additional response to the Great Awakening and the rise of liberal theology in

the nation’s universities was that Bible colleges began to be created. These early Bible

colleges differed from seminaries in that they were designed to train laypeople to become

Christian workers. These Bible colleges primarily focused on giving the student Bible

knowledge though some, such as Moody Bible Institute (1870), sought to give practical

pastoral training as well.

 56

These institutions, from seminaries to Bible colleges, arose because of a need

perceived by the church at large. As American culture and local church culture shifted,

these responses attempted to meet those needs and prepare for the future.

It is not within the scope of this paper to determine if these responses succeeded

or not. However, what is clear to this researcher is that innovative leadership

development efforts seem to start first with a perceived need within the church, that is,

institutions that develop Christian leaders do not begin with only a general purpose in

mind. They usually begin to address a specific need whether that need is to increase the

number of available pastors or to bolster the church’s theological integrity.

Future of the Seminary

Today there is a shift occurring. A number of seminaries are rethinking their role

in the development of the churches’ next-generation of leaders. Frank Viola quotes Clyde

McDowell in order to sum up the problem many church leaders face today:

I came through the whole system with the best education that evangelicalism had
to offer – yet I really didn’t receive the training that I needed.… Seven years of
higher education in top rated evangelical schools didn’t prepare me to (1) do
ministry and (2) be a leader. I began to analyze why I could preach a great
sermon and people afterwards would shake my hand and say, “Great sermon,
Pastor.” But these were the very people who were struggling with self-esteem,
 57

beating their spouses, struggling as workaholics, succumbing to their addictions.

Their lives weren’t changing. I had to ask myself why this great knowledge I was
presenting didn’t move from their heads to their hearts and their lives. And I
began to realize that the breakdown in the church was actually based on what we
learned in seminary. We were taught that if you just give people information,
that’s enough!69

Summary

The churches’ rapid expansion throughout the world brought unique challenges as

they sought to train their leaders. As different cultures were encountered, methodologies

changed. This continued with the passage of time as each generation attempted to

develop leaders to meet the unique challenges they encountered. Throughout history the

biblical principles of leadership development were utilized to differing degrees and with

differing levels of success.

69
Frank Viola and George Barna, Pagan Christianity (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale
House Publishers, 2008), 218.
 58

CHAPTER THREE: RELATED RESEARCH

What is Leadership?

Formal Models and Definition

Much has been written regarding leaders and leadership. Yet despite the number

of studies there is no universally accepted understanding of what leaders do or, more

importantly, who they are to be. Warren Bennis’s book, Leaders: Strategies for Taking

Charge, describes this difficulty. Bennis uncovers over 850 definitions of leadership yet

each definition only reveals a facet of leadership and not the whole. Bennis states:

Decades of academic analysis have given us more than 850 definitions of

leadership. Literally thousands of empirical investigations of leaders have been
conducted in the last seventy-five years alone, but no clear and unequivocal
understanding exists as to what distinguishes leaders from non-leaders, and
perhaps more important, what distinguishes effective leaders from ineffective
leaders and effective organizations from ineffective organizations. Never have so
many labored so long to say so little.70

Bennis’s corporate American context exemplifies the problem. As many

corporations restructure they find that effective leadership is nonexistent in the new

70
Warren G. Bennis and Burt Nanus , Leaders: Strategies for Taking Charge
(New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1997), 4.
 59

climate of distrust and globalization. In these environments, management and leadership

became intertwined or confused. Bennis goes on to say:

Like love, leadership continued to be something everyone knew existed but

nobody could define. Many other theories of leadership have come and gone.
Some looked at the leader. Some look at the situation. None has stood the test of
time. With such a track record, it is understandable why leadership research and
theory have been so frustrating as to deserve the label “the La Brea Tar Pits” of
organizational inquiry.71

Blackaby sees the same difficulty within the church. Different understandings of

leadership are helpful but normally focus on general leadership principles. They “do not

take God and his purposes into account.”72

Blackaby sees a clear distinction between leaders in the secular world and

spiritual leaders. Secular leaders primarily attempt to lead people to achieve the goals of

the organization. Blackaby contends that spiritual leadership is more than meeting goals.

He defines true spiritual leadership as “moving people onto God’s agenda.”73 Blackaby

recognizes that his definition is supported by Robert Clinton’s research when he states:

“Clinton wisely observes that God’s purposes are the key to spiritual leadership—and

dreams and visions of leaders are not.”74

71
Ibid., 5.
72
Henry and Richard Blackaby, Spiritual Leadership (Nashville, TN: B&H
Publishing Group, 2001), 17.
73
Ibid., 20.
74
Blackaby, 19.
 60

For centuries the church has seen leadership fitting into certain models.

Typically, a church leader would choose the model that best suits his personal

characteristics and leadership style. Often denominational traditions dictate the model.

Lyle E. Schaller summarizes many of these models.75 According to Schaller, the

“leader as priest” model focuses on the leader’s ability to learn new rituals of his belief

system. The knowledge of these rituals separates the leader from the laity. Schaller notes

that “this basis for leadership gained ascendancy with the rise of the sacerdotal priesthood

in the second and third centuries.”76 This model is most often seen in “high church”

traditions.

The “leader as educator” model focuses on the leader’s position as resident

scholar. During the Reformation the emphasis on preaching gained preeminence over the

Roman Catholic focus on ritual. Today, this emphasis is seen in churches that value a

high level of educational training and skilled preaching over other leadership qualities.

The “leader as parish minister” model emphasizes the pastoral role of shepherd.

This model views the leader as being responsible for all those within a geographical

75
Lyle E. Schaller, Revolution in Leadership: Training Apostles for Tomorrow’s
Church (Nashville, TN: Abington Press, 1998), 26-27.
76
Schaller, 27.
 61

boundary. In Protestant manifestations of this model, the leader’s primary purpose is to

take care of a flock.

A more recent development is the “leader as a professional minister” model. Not

unlike the CEO of an organization, the leader “marshals and manages resources in

directing that church’s ministry program and staff.”77

Schaller sees a new model emerging, which he calls “apostolic leadership.” This

model of leadership, Schaller says, resembles the leadership of the first century church,

that is, apostolic leaders tend to be visionary and missional. They tend to empower

others for ministry and are team-oriented. Many apostolic leaders are entrepreneurial in

the classic sense: they organize, manage, and assume risk to see the mission through. In

addition, apostolic leaders tend to emerge from real-life settings rather than come from

backgrounds with formal training.78 Finally, these leaders are kingdom-conscious rather

than focusing on a certain locality or parish.

Schaller’s models all refer to leaders that are resident within their church

community. David Horrell describes another model that was prevalent in the early church

though extremely rare today. The model of itinerant leader is clearly distinct from the

77
Ibid.
78
Schaller, 29.
 62

resident leader models Schaller outlines. Horrell identifies two types of itinerant leaders.

“Itinerant charismatics” were those who depended upon local churches for their material

support.79 Other itinerant church planting leaders, such as Paul and his coworkers,

preferred to work to support themselves. Despite the different practices in gaining

support, both types of itinerant leaders are similar to the apostolic model in how they

function.

Defining leadership through understanding different leadership models may have

some merit. Primarily this is because a clear and concise definition of Christian

leadership has been elusive. Much of the present leadership research concentrates on

whether the definition of a leader should be broad or narrow. A broad definition would

view all Christians as leaders because they seek to influence a person’s behavior or

values. Narrower definitions focus upon an individual’s personal “call” or position in a

ministry context. The complexity of the broad/narrow debate emerges when the questions

do not distinguish between the leader and leadership, that is, is a leader something

someone does or is it something someone is? Walter Wright demonstrates this tension

between the broad and narrow definitions of leadership when he says: “Leadership is a

79
David Horrell, “Leadership Patterns in the Development of Ideology in Early
Christianity,” Sociology of Religion 58, no.4 (1997): 323-341.
 63

relationship—a relationship in which one person seeks to influence the thoughts,

behaviors, beliefs or values of another person.”80 For the sake of this paper, this

researcher will focus upon the narrow definition.

In J. Robert Clinton’s book, The Making of a Leader, he defines leadership as:

Dynamic process in which any man or woman with God given capacity influences
a specific group of God’s people toward His purposes for the group. This is
contrary to the popular notion that a leader must have a formal position, a formal
title, or formal training.81

In Clinton’s endnotes he has an extended definition of leadership. It is as follows:

Leadership is a dynamic process over an extended period of time in various

situations in which a leader utilizing leadership resources and by a specific
leadership behaviors, influences the thoughts and activities of followers toward
accomplishment of aims usually mutually beneficial for leaders, followers, and
the macro context of which they are part. A biblical leader is defined as a person
with God-given capacity and God-given responsibility to influence a specific
group of God’s people towards His purposes for the group.82

The emphasis in Clinton’s definitions is on the “God-given capacity” of

leadership. Clinton sees leaders as those who are called, set apart, and molded by God for

a specific purpose. The idea of a personal call is foundational to those whom God had

chosen to lead. The call always came before the position or title. Therefore, the key to

80
Walter Wright; quoted by Leighton Ford, Transforming Leadership (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1991), 92.
81
Dr. J. Robert Clinton, The Making of a Leader (Colorado Springs, CO:
NavPress, 1988), 14.
82
Clinton, 213.
 64

effectiveness is believing and trusting God’s call and leading. This is Clinton’s point. A

leader is not a leader without God-given capacity or spiritual empowerment.

Kouzes and Posner’s idea of what makes a leader is basic: “To be a leader, you

have to have constituents.”83 Maxwell has a similar view on leadership. He states "the

true measure of leadership is influence, nothing more, nothing less." 84 These simplistic

definitions may help identify leaders but they do little to define leadership. Kouzes and

Posner add some insight into the functioning of effective leadership. Through case

studies and surveys they discovered “fundamental practices of exemplary leadership.”

These practices are (1) challenge the process, (2) inspire a shared vision, (3) enable others

to act, (4) model the way, and (5) encouraged the heart.85 Some of these practices

parallel Schaller’s emerging model of apostolic leadership.

Like Schaller, Shawchuck attempts to understand leadership by equating

leadership with the models of ministry that Jesus embodied.86

83
James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner, The Leadership Challenge (San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1995), xxiii.
84
John C. Maxwell, The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership: Follow Them and
People Will Follow You (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998),16.
85
Kouzes and Posner, 9.
86
Norman Shawchuck, What It Means to Be a Church Leader: A Biblical Point
of View (Leith, ND: Spiritual Growth Resources, 1984), 12-18.
 65

The first model that Shawchuck describes is that of the good shepherd. By good

shepherd, Shawchuck sees the responsibilities of the leader to include both the roles of

“priest” and “leader.” These roles enable the leader to know his people and to effectively

“lead them out from the comfort and security of the sheepfold into the world outside.”87

The second model Shawchuck describes is Servant-Leader. To be effective the

leader must first be a servant. Servanthood involves adaptation in order to serve the

needs of those who follow. Shawchuck writes:

What is he [Jesus] trying to teach us about our own leadership? He is teaching us

that sometimes we must be “priest”; we must accept, affirm, forgive, love the
people whom we wish to influence and lead. At other times we must be
“prophet”; we must challenge, confront, instruct, disagree. And on other
occasions we must be “leader”; we must help them set goals, make plans, marshal
resources and create programs to change their lives and world. Then we must give
them the freedom to carry out their plans, to succeed, to fail, to learn. For by this
they grow from immature, weak Christians who stumble over every stone, or
collapse under every adversity, into strong Christians who are quite capable of
serving God in every circumstance.88

The notion of servant-leadership has its modern manifestation in the writings of

Robert Greenleaf.89 Greenleaf concluded that true leadership came from those whose

primary motivation was “a deep desire to help others.”90 That is, the desire to serve

87
Shawchuck, 12.
88
Shawchuck, 17.
89
Robert K. Greenleaf, Servant Leadership (New York: Paulist Press, 1977)
90
Larry C. Spears, “Practicing Servant-Leadership,” Leader to Leader 34, vol.
2004, (2004): 7-11.
 66

others must far outweigh the desire to be a leader. Leadership then becomes a means of

serving.91 Following up on Greenleaf’s work, Spears identifies ten characteristics that are

key in the development of servant-leaders. These characteristics are (1) listening, (2)

empathy, (3) healing, which implies healing oneself and others from a variety of

emotional hurts. In addition, servant-leaders manifest (4) awareness, (5) persuasion, (6)

conceptualization, which is similar to having a vision. The ability to have (7) foresight,

which includes the ability to understand and analyze lessons from the past, is paramount.

The characteristics of (8) stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and (10)

building community, finish out the list.92

Leith Anderson believes that trying to define the qualifications of a leader is an

exercise in futility. Anderson sees leadership as being more than the leader’s

qualifications. Leadership is about “a matrix of followers, organizations, circumstances,

power in history.”93 Anderson’s view of leadership takes into account the system in

which the leader exists.

91
Shawchuck and Heuser, 35.
92
Spears, 8-10.
93
Leith Anderson, Leadership That Works (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House
Publishers, 1999), 44.
 67

Meindl’s understanding is similar. Using the results of his romance of leadership

scale, Meindl concludes that “leadership is very much in the eyes of the beholder.

Followers, not the leader, and not researchers define it.” 94

This radical concept of leadership should not be so radical to Christ followers. As

Eddie Gibbs points out:

Such thinking is in line with our understanding of the church as the body of Christ.
It is a living organism, in which all members (1) find personal significance in the
context of relationships, which enables them to (2) develop their full potential as
they (3) make their distinctive contribution in conjunction with others.95

Gibbs welcomes this view as it supplies as an “antidote” to the pervasive

individualized faith prevalent in so many churches.96 Community is the key to individual

health and wholeness. Gibbs’s viewpoint underscores the notion that a leader is part of a

system and therefore his leadership is influenced by that system. Gibbs continues this

line of thought when he asserts that leaders in the twenty-first century must re-examine

all of their “assumptions, policies and procedures,”97 that is, the leader must be willing to

ask hard questions as to whether these assumptions, policies and procedures are obstacles

94
James R. Meindl, “The Romance of Leadership as Follower-Centric Theory: A
Social Construction Approach.” Leadership Quarterly 6, (1995): 331.
95
Eddie Gibbs, LeadershipNext (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005),
34.
96
Ibid.
97
Gibbs, LeadershipNext, 35.
 68

or avenues to a more effective ministry. The leader must go “beyond preserving the

inherited institution: meeting a mission-focused community of disciples.”98

This tension between preserving what was inherited and being missional in focus

is discussed in Roxburgh and Romanuk’s The Missional Leader. Roxburgh and Romanuk

discuss a case where a local congregation crafted a job description that called for an

entrepreneurial leader. This terminology was used because the previous pastor could not

effect change. Clearly the church was using a business model of leadership, which was

ultimately detrimental to building a missional focused community.99 In essence, without

the emphasis in cultivating an environment focused upon mission, the church defaults to

preservation mode. The authors view most leadership models as simply repackaging old

paradigms. The solution they propose is leadership that is truly missional. Missional

leaders set the context or environment for success: “In the same way, missional

leadership is about creating an environment within which the people of God in a

particular location may thrive.”100

98
Ibid., 38.
99
Alan J. Roxburgh and Fred Romanuk, The Missional Leader: Equipping Your
Church to Reach a Changing World (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2006), 5-6.
100
Roxburgh and Romanuk, 6.
 69

Innate or Learned

Within the literature another debate is ongoing. Is leadership innate or is it

something that can be learned? Until recently the prevailing assumption was that leaders

were born. Carlyle’s classic work on the heroic shaped much thought on the formation of

leaders until the 1950s.101 By comparing the lives of a number of influential leaders,

Carlyle concluded that leadership consisted of inborn qualities that were measurable to a

great degree. However, there are a number of modern studies that have shown that

leadership is mostly learned though there are some natural abilities associated with

leadership.102 Riggio summarizes these studies by saying,

The best estimates offered by research is that leadership is about one-third born
and two-thirds made. The job of leading an organization, a military unit, or a
nation, and doing so effectively, is fantastically complex. To expect that person
would be born with all of the tools needed to lead it just doesn’t make sense based
on what we know about the complex city of social groups and processes.103

101
Thomas Carlyle, On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History
(Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1966).
102
Richard D. Arvey, Zhen Zhang, Bruce J. Avolio and Robert F. Kruger,
“Developmental and Genetic Determinants of Leadership Role Occupancy Among
Women,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no.3 (2007): 693-706. and Richard D
Arvey, Maria Rotundo, Wendy Johnson, Zhen Zhang and Matt McGue, “The
Determinants of Leadership Role Occupancy: Genetic and Personal Factors,” The
Leadership Quarterly 17, (2006):1-20.
103
Ronald E. Riggio, “Leaders: Born or Made?” Psychology Today Online,
http://www.psychologytoday.com/node/3915 (accessed July 1, 2009).
 70

Riggio goes on to discuss some of those factors associated with inborn

characteristics. Those who are naturally assertive or risk-takers are often found in

leadership roles. Other characteristics include intelligence, that is, the natural ability to

analyze situations and determine the best course of action. Most importantly, intelligence

focuses upon the ability to analyze social situations. Other factors include empathy and

boldness.104

Of course, this is not to imply that people who are introverts, less empathetic, or

non-risk-takers can never become leaders. Since leadership is mostly learned, these

attributes can obviously be developed. For the Christian leader, it is imperative that he

does not ignore the transformational influence of the Holy Spirit and the power

associated with the call to ministry. Leighton Ford addresses this dynamic:

I believe you can make either of two opposite mistakes viewing leadership
development. One is to attach a mystique to leadership that says in effect, “God
calls leaders. Leaders are born. There is nothing we can do about it.” The opposite
is to say, “Leaders are made. With the right techniques, we can produce them.”
It is always true that God gives leadership to his church and his kingdom.… It is
also true that there are processes that God uses to produce his leaders.105

104
Ibid.
105
Leighton Ford, foreword to The Making of a Leader (Colorado Springs:
NavPress, 1988), 10.
 71

Nature of the Call

Little research has been done to understand the nature of the call to Christian

leadership. This is significant because Christian leaders exist in the world between the

spiritual nature of a call from God and the professional demands of a career in Christian

ministry. Is leadership a spiritual endeavor or simply a set of practices and skills? The

answer to this question has practical ramifications for the church. Are the previously

discussed models of ministry such as servant leadership, missional, and good shepherd

the only valid models or can the church adapt various business models?

Christopherson defines a calling as “a task set by God with a sense of obligation

to work for purposes other than one’s own.”106 This idea is directly opposed to how one

thinks of a career. A career is chosen based on what is best for the person. A call is

accepted based on what is best for the kingdom. Christopherson suggests that Christian

leaders are people who have been “called to a career.”107 Christopherson rightly

concludes that a Christian leader’s identity and self-worth are defined by the call. He

states:

106
Richard W. Christopherson, “Calling and Career in Christian Ministry,”
Review of Religious Research 35, no. 3 (1994): 219.
107
Ibid., 220.
 72

Without a conviction of God’s leading, clergy are left to pursue the secular,
rational, professionalize goals of individual careers—careers that draw them into
unequal competition with practitioners of the modern, science-based
professions.108

Christian leaders are charged with the task of balancing the necessity of practical

leadership skills and development, for a particular ministry situation, with the ultimate

responsibility of being true to the personal call of God. Sweet’s perception of the call

points out a subtle nuance. Sweet believes:

Leaders are summoned. They are called into existence by circumstances. Those
who rise to the occasion are leaders. Everyone is “called” by God for some kind
of mission. But sometimes the “called” are “called out” for leadership.109

McNeal’s definition of the call is similar to Christopherson’s. McNeal explains:

Call recipients understand that God has a very special claim on their lives for
special purposes. This awareness goes beyond a general sense of feeling
purposeful or significant. Clearly God wants all people to experience this. Those
who described themselves as called mean that they have made a commitment of
life into God’s service, to be at his disposal, to be his employ for the efforts of
accomplishing his agenda.… Spiritual leaders describe their whole lives in terms
of the call.110

The concept of the call is not based on the leader’s skills or desires. The call is

about the realization that the leader has been chosen to uniquely fulfill a role in God’s

kingdom agenda. This agenda is obviously much larger than any temporary position the

108
Christopherson, 222.
109
Leonard Sweet, Summoned to Lead (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2004),
12-13.
110
Reggie McNeal, A Work of Heart: Understanding How God Shapes Spiritual
Leaders (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000), 95.
 73

leader is in. The call lends clarity, energizes and gives the leader confidence in who he is.

As McNeal emphasizes, “leaders secure in their call will charge hell with a water

pistol.”111 McNeal stresses the importance of a call in the leader’s life: “It is tough

enough to serve as a Christian leader with a call. Without it, the choice constitutes cruel

and unusual self-punishment.”112 The call is not only indispensable to the leader but also

to those he leads. McNeal asserts: “As the recipients of his [Jesus’] ministry legacy, we

were all counting on Jesus to stay with his call. There are people counting on every leader

to do the same.”113

Leadership vs. Management

Another facet of the leadership debate is whether leadership and management

are similar or diametrically opposed to one another. While it is true that leaders need to

have some management skills, leaders are not managers nor are managers leaders.

Bennis reasons that the essence of leadership is centered upon the spirit. It is

about character, personality and vision. Management is centered upon the mind. It is

111
McNeal, A Work of Heart, 96.
112
McNeal, 99.
113
Ibid., 60.
 74

concerned with methods, routine, and statistics.114 He goes on to say that these

differences are major not minor. He lists these critical differences:

Table 3.1 The Difference Between Managers and Leaders

MANAGER LEADER

The manager administers. The leader innovates.

The manager is a copy The leader is an original.

The manager maintains. The leader develops.

The manager focuses on systems and The leader focuses on people.
structure.
The manager relies on control. The leader inspires trust.

The manager has a short-range view. The leader has a long-range perspective.

The manager asks how and when. The leader asks what and why.

The manager has his eye on the bottom The leader has his eye on the horizon.

line.

The manager imitates. The leader originates.

The manager accepts the status quo. A leader challenges it.

The manager is the classic good soldier. The leader is his own person.

The manager does things right. The leader does the right thing.115

114
Warren Bennis, “Managing the Dream: Leadership in the 21st Century,”
Antioch Review 49, no.1 (Winter, 1991): 23.
115
Ibid.
 75

Blackaby has these same differences in mind when he states:

Managers often become embroiled in the daily grind of keeping the organizational
machinery functioning properly. Leaders realize they must occasionally step back
from that day-to-day operations in order to gain perspective on the broader issues
such as the nature and future of their organizations.
One of the key differences between leaders and managers is that managers
are responsible for how something is done; leaders must also consider why it is
being done, and continually communicate this to their followers.116

What Makes A Leader?

The researcher has attempted to understand leadership in terms of roles,

definitions, origins (born or made), and the nature of the call, yet the question still

remains: what makes a leader? Sweet points out the problematic nature of understanding

leadership:

After nearly 200 pages and 7,500 citations on leadership, one report concluded
that it found “no clear and unequivocal understanding of what distinguishes
leaders from non-leaders, effective leaders from ineffective leaders, and effective
organizations from ineffective organizations.” Another study of the congested
analysis of leadership, having compiled 110 different definitions, concludes that
“attempts to define leadership have been confusing, varied, disorganized,
idiosyncratic, muddled, and, according to conventional wisdom, quite
unrewarding.”117

116
Blackaby, 210-211.
117
Sweet, 17-18.
 76

Hirsch attempts to define leadership by looking at history. Hirsch, in examining

historical movements, discovers key leaders in networks that are decentralized rather than

in the centralized networks that are so prevalent today. He explains that,

We must seek it [good leadership] where leadership really does work – and the
remarkable Jesus movements of history. It is remarkable that most leaders in these
mission movements would lack the qualifications necessary to lead in our
Western churches, and yet by and large the impact of their influence across
decentralized networks is exponentially greater than that of our Western
counterparts in centralized institutions.118

Hirsch goes on to ask why this is. How can those with no titles or centralized

institutions backing them lead and have great spiritual authority? His conclusion is that it

is wholly dependent on God’s exercise in authorizing people, at his pleasure, for spiritual

leadership.119 In essence, God makes the leader.

Clinton’s “leadership development study” (LDS), has defined many of the

processes that God uses as he calls and develops leaders. In the course of studying

leaders, both biblical and modern, Clinton uncovered six phases that leaders can go

through in the course of their life. Each of these phases represents definable sections and

milestones in a leader’s development. The six main phases are: (1) sovereign foundations,

(2) inner life growth, (3) ministry maturity, (4) life maturing, (5) convergence and (6)

118
Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways, 118.
119
Ibid., 119.
 77

afterglow.120 God develops each leader as they progress uniquely through these phases by

confronting challenges or what Clinton calls “process items.” These process items and

the leader’s response to them, reveal patterns that allow the leader to grow in skills,

character, and relationships as they learn through their experiences. It is clear from

Clinton’s research that there are definitive patterns and stages that God uses to develop

all leaders. Clinton aptly summarizes this process:

God develops a leader over a lifetime. That development is a function of the use
of events and people to impress leadership lessons upon a leader (processing),
time, and a leader’s response. Processing is central to this theory. All leaders can
point to critical incidents in their lives where God taught them something very
important.121

Burns conceptualized leadership as either transactional or transformational.122

Bass and Riggio summarize Burns’ thoughts:

Transactional leaders are those who lead to social exchange. As Burns notes,
politicians, for example, lead by “exchanging one thing for another: jobs for
votes, or subsidies for campaign contributions.” In the same way, transactional
business leaders offer financial rewards for productivity or deny rewards for lack
of productivity. Transformational leaders, on the other hand, are those who
stimulate and inspire followers to both achieve extraordinary outcomes and, in the
process, develop their own leadership capacity.123

120
Clinton, Making of A Leader, 44-47.
121
Ibid., 25.
122
James MacGregor Burns, Leadership (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1978).
123
Bernard M. Bass and Ronald E. Riggio, Transformational Leadership 2nd ed.
(Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 2006), 3.
 78

The thought that leaders are to inspire and develop leadership capacity in others is not

unique. Clinton addresses this subject when he talks about divine contacts. Clinton

believes because of the leader’s ability to influence others, he/she needs to be able to

recognize that he/she may be a divine contact in the life of another leader’s

development.124 In fact, Clinton’s mentoring process item speaks to this issue:

A mentoring process item refers to the process and results of a mentor helping a
potential leader. The mentor is a special kind of divine contact, one who may
offer a prolonged help or guidance.125

Hirsch calls Burn’s transformational leadership “inspirational leadership.”

Inspirational leaders influence one another toward common purposes while at the same

time attempting to transform “followers into leaders in their own right.”126 Hirsch

believes the early church, despite its lack of trained leaders, could be faithful because, in

the apostles, they saw congruence and consistency between the messenger and the

message they bore. By modeling the Gospel, Paul’s life had a great impact on the

churches he planted. Hirsch says,

Because the apostles were essentially the custodians of the DNA of God’s people,
the embodiment of the Gospel had to be observed as living integrity in their lives
for the message to have any lasting effect.… The teachings must embed

124
Clinton, 129.
125
Ibid., 130.
126
Hirsch, 117.
 79

themselves in the lives of the followers, and this can be achieved only through the
discipling relationship.127

In his short article Hinnant ties Christian leadership with kingdom greatness.128

Hinnant argues that Jesus revealed three key requisites to advance in kingdom greatness

and hence leadership effectiveness. Drawing on Jesus’ greatness statements (Matthew

18:4, 20:20-27), Hinnant points out that humility, servanthood and suffering are central

pillars to develop the leaders character, capacity to teach, and general ministry. What is

striking about the three keys is the inclusion of suffering. Often the leadership path leads

towards suffering. Paul’s claim that “if we suffer [for Him], we shall also reign with him”

(2 Tim. 2:12) is clearly the experience of many Christian leaders.

Summary

Leadership has been understood in many ways. Some understand leadership

being centered in various characteristics. These characteristics covered a wide range. No

conclusive statement can be made to cover all the leadership qualities talked about in the

research. Other approaches focused on leadership styles or models of leadership.

127
Ibid., 116.
128
Greg Hinnant, “ Growing in Kingdom Greatness,” Ministry Today (2009): 42.
 80

Recently, leader-centric approaches have given way to follower-centric points of view. In

addition, there is a divergence of opinion on whether leaders are born or made. However,

for the Christ follower, the weight of the evidence points to a developmental process,

orchestrated by God, which refines innate qualities. This process cannot be manufactured

nor be confined to a program. The process begins as God chooses, calls, and shapes the

potential leader into a leader proper. This process enables the leader to have spiritual

authority despite the fact that he may function without the support of a centralized

institution. Leaders are leaders whether they have a formal position or not. Leaders are

not defined by their position but by the call of God. Despite the nebulous nature of

leadership, it is clear that most leaders have been developed by God in the following

areas: (1) Character: the importance of character is central in the biblical record and in

the bulk of leadership literature. (2) Competency: leaders must have a basic skill set to

function in their roles. Depending the leader’s position, different skill sets must be

learned and applied with effectiveness and efficiency. (3) Empowerment: the Christian

leader does not function based on his own power. God’s enablement, in the sense of a

solid call to ministry, is not optional but essential. (4) Vision: vision is primarily the

ability to focus upon God’s purposes and agenda rather than our own. Leaders have the

ability to focus and help others focus upon God’s purposes. In addition, this would
 81

include the idea of influence. Blackaby understands this to be the ability to “move people

from where they are to where God wants them to be.”129

In attempting to navigate through the literature in order to understand leadership

we can lose focus. It is apropos to quote again Webber’s summary of leadership:

Biblical Christian leadership is not vision-based, competency-based, success-

based or even values or character-based; it is Christ-based. Everything must come
from an inward union with him.… Making this distinction doesn’t undermine the
importance of vision, competency or character. In fact, it establishes that true
vision, competency and character, from the indwelling life of Christ and not from
human effort or capacity.130

The church needs to ask a question regarding the effectiveness of its leadership

development processes. Are we effectively partnering with God in the development of

leaders?

Present Models of Leadership Development

Seminary

This researcher has assumed that leadership, or the lack of it, is a significant

factor in the ministry of the local church. Therefore, hard questions need to be asked

129
Blackaby, Spiritual Leadership, 20.
130
Malcolm Webber, “Ministry Leadership Culture,” Ministry Today,
http://bluetoad.com/publication/index.php?i=9061&m=&l=&p=34 (accessed December
3, 2008).
 82

regarding the decline of the local church in the United States and particularly in New

England. If leadership is key then we must examine the very structures that train leaders

for local church ministry. Are present models of training a help or hindrance to the

development of biblical leadership? The model most utilized is the theological seminary.

Hirsch describes the problems with leadership development in some seminary

contexts:

For the most part, the would-be leader is withdrawn from the context of ordinary
life and ministry in order to study in a somewhat cloistered environment, for up to
seven years in some cases. During that period they are subjected to an immense
amount of complex information relating to the biblical disciplines, theology,
ethics, church history, pastoral theology, etc. and while the vast majority of this
information is useful and correct, what is dangerous to discipleship in that setting
is the actual socialization processes that the student undergoes along the way. In
effect, he or she is socialized out of ordinary life and develops a kind of language
and thinking that is seldom understood and expressed outside of the seminary.131

There is no doubt that a seminary education is beneficial for the leader but is it all

a leader needs to be effective in ministry? Hirsh points out the negative effects that the

student undergoes as he is “socialized out of ordinary life” and into the “culture of the

seminary.” In effect, the leader must “unlearn” seminary language and even culture to be

effective in a local church context. In addition, most seminaries have adopted a

Hellenistic model. The Hellenistic or academic model says that learning comes from the

131
Hirsh, The Forgotten Ways, 121.
 83

acquisition of knowledge, that is, the more you know the better leader you will be.

Recent studies have shown this not to be true. In fact, most leadership development and

growth happens while the leader is facing the multiple experiences associated with day-

to-day ministry.132 McKenna’s study indicated that education and training were

important aspects of a leader’s development, but the impact of on-the-job experiences,

transitions, relationships, and even failures far outweighed the impact of any formal

education.133 The elements of McKenna’s taxonomy follows:

Table 3.2 McKenna’s Taxonomy of Key Events134

Events Percentage of Key Events Description
Setting the Stage 6.7% This category primarily included the leader’s
conversion and call to ministry as well as non-
church work experience
Transitions 26.6% This category included various transitions of
life with the highest responses in the areas of
personal trauma and leading with others.
Leading in the 32.3% This category includes the practical areas of
Trenches leadership from organization to authority and
starting ministries from scratch.
Other Events 12.3% What is significant about this category is that
only 8.2 % of pastoral leaders said that formal
education and training were significant.

132
Robert B. McKenna, Paul R. Yost and Tanya N. Boyd, “ Leadership
Development and Clergy: Understanding the Events and Lessons that Shape Pastoral
Leaders,” Journal of Psychology and Theology 35, no.3 (2007): 179-189
133
McKenna, 187.
134
McKenna, 182.
 84

The influence of these on-the-job and transition-focused factors is an important

discovery given the emphasis and requirement of a formal seminary education in many

denominations. Weber sites a study by the Hartford Institute for Religion in 2001 that

adds credence to the McKenna study:

The final report contained some deeply disturbing findings about the impact of
seminary education on church life and leadership. On the positive side it observed
that seminary training leads to better sermon preparation and delivery and more
involvement in ecumenical worship and social ministries. But seminary education
also has a negative impact on basic religious and community values. Nonseminary
trained pastors are more likely to be leading churches that are “vital and alive,
growing in members, using contemporary worship, clear about purpose and
mission, and well organized.” In obvious understatement, the researchers
concluded that “these findings would suggest the need for a careful review of the
educational process of leadership preparation.”135

Seminary itself does not seem to be the problem. Seminary education produces

both negative and positive results. The difficulty lies in how the education is given. In the

very same article Weber states:

Face-to-face encounters and ongoing scholarly communities are still the best way
to prepare leaders in changing and difficult times. That much seems both self-
evident and provable to seminary administrators, faculty, and alumni who look
back on their theological education with gratitude and appreciation.136

135
Timothy P. Weber, “The Seminaries and Churches: Looking for New
Relationships,” Theological Education 44, no.1 (2008): 81.
136
Ibid., 82.
 85

Weber assumes this to be true despite the weight of research to the contrary and

even contradicts the evidence he just presented. What Weber does get right is the need

for community, but it is this researcher’s opinion that the church community rather than

the scholarly community is the best way to prepare leaders in changing and difficult

times.

Apparently traditional models of seminary education are not doing the job they

were intended to do. Dowson’s important research illuminates this reality:

A widespread argument expressed in the literature is that traditional models of

ministry education have not served the church or the world well. Specifically,
traditional models of ministry education are said to have produced ministers who
are largely incapable of responding effectively to contemporary developments in
church life, especially those developments related to large scale cultural and
social movements such as globalization, pluralism, multi-culturalism, post-
modernism, and post-denominationalism.137

Dowson encourages institutions to re-examine their ability to help ministers

operate effectively in the real life context of their ministries.138 This is in light of the fact

that more experienced leaders come to realize the limited nature of their theological

education as they move through their professional careers.

137
Martin Dowson and Dennis M. McInerney, “ For What Should Theological
Colleges Educate? A Systematic Investigation of Ministry Education Perceptions and
Priorities,” Review of Religious Research 46, no.4 (2005): 403.
138
Ibid.
 86

In response to this developing body of research, many seminaries are reexamining

not only their curricula but also their reasons for existence. The old purpose of many

seminaries was to create professional ministers or leaders. These professional leaders (as

opposed to lay leaders) would grow in maturity and knowledge during their seminary

experience and then be able to lead strong and growing churches. Today’s seminaries

have expanded their purpose. No longer do seminaries train only professional leaders, but

lay leaders as well. Seminaries are beginning to expand their focus beyond knowledge to

a more holistic picture of spiritual formation. The goal is to “form a person, not a

professional.”139 Many seminaries are returning to a more Hebraic model of leadership

development. These seminaries require mentorship and the application of knowledge into

the local church in practical ways. In many ways the seminary is returning to its roots

with the focus being the Great Commission and the centrality of the local church. Weber

summarizes this historical relationship between the seminary and the church:

Most seminaries were founded by church bodies, or struggles within ecclesial

communities, or religious movements that, typically, mature into church bodies.
Most theological schools continue in some pattern of relationship. There is no
parallel in other forms of graduate professional education. Law schools were not
founded by courts or legislatures or law firms. Medical schools were seldom

139
Timothy Z. Witmer, “Seminary: a Place to Prepare Pastors?” Westminster
Theological Journal 69 (2007): 238.
 87

founded by hospitals.… The theological schools had a one of a kind relationship

with the communities that established them.140

But have the theological schools moved too far away from the church community that

founded them?

In order to alleviate some of the problems associated with traditional seminary

education many institutions began extension programs. These programs allowed students

who could not reside at the school to benefit from the same classes that residential

students were offered. In many cases these students could attend seminary while

remaining in their ministry contexts. Some of these extension-learning programs simply

paralleled the regular seminary curriculum. Others were more proactive in integrating the

coursework into the student’s ministry situation. Various formats from correspondence

work to interactive online classrooms and lectures are utilized.

As traditional seminaries struggle to readjust and realign their educational

processes the environment of theological education is changing. Cultural shifts in the

perception of how people become ministers and what is required of them are

materializing. Ron Benefiel points out:

Competition from nonseminary sources weighs heavily on everyone’s table. In

many circles, theological schools at one time cornered the market on training
ministers. But that is no longer the case, thanks to the Internet, the rise of “virtual
seminaries” and the like, often under the auspices of so-called teaching churches.

140
Weber, The Seminaries and Churches, 65.
 88

Choices abound, and increasing numbers of leaders no longer look to theological

schools as their primary source for the latest information on best practices, new
ministry models, or developing strategic plans for reaching the culture.141

Benefiel concedes that the high costs of tuition and the increasing number of

single students who find it necessary to work full-time are additional factors that add to

the recruitment woes of many evangelical seminaries.142 Benefiel concludes that the

seminary needs the church in this rapidly changing environment. The church can assist

the seminary by providing insight to professors who may not have served for years in a

local church. Professors may “be teaching students how to minister in a world that no

longer exists.”143 In turn, seminary provides a community of theological wisdom in

various disciplines that cannot be duplicated in most churches.

Alternative Seminary Models

Recently a number of innovational models of training have emerged. Bethel

Seminary of the East’s (BSOE) model boasts no permanent campus. The faculty is

mobile and many are still involved in local church-based ministry. Students are required

141
Ron Benefiel, “The Ecology of Evangelical Seminaries,” Theological
Education 44, no.1 (2008): 23.
142
Ibid., 24.
143
Benefiel, 25.
 89

to have an internship in a church, which provides them with a context to apply the

classroom learning. The conferring of a degree is based in the combination of academics

and practical ministry under the mentorship of a local church.144

Another program at Bethel Seminary targets those already in a ministry position.

The InMinistry program admits only those in full-time ministry. This program is at the

MDiv. level but is modeled after a DMin. style program. Combining on-campus

intensive courses and distance courses, this program seeks to integrate academics and the

real-life experiences of its students.145

Luther Seminary has launched a contextual leadership program in which MDiv.

and MA students are placed in local congregations for a least four semesters.146 The

students meet in monthly cluster meetings comprised of students, pastors and faculty

members in order to integrate the seminary’s curriculum into the practical ministry

experiences of it’s students. Sometimes virtual clusters (email and Blackboard) are

utilized so that students at distances can interact with one another. The dual blessing of

144
Harry L. Poe, “The Revolution in Ministry Training,” Theological Education
33 (1996): 28.
145
Kristin M. Anderson, “A Case Narrative of Bethel Seminary's InMinistry
Program,” Theological Education 42, no. 2 (2007): 67-78.
146
Randy A. Nelson, “Learning Congregational Leadership in Context: A Case
study in Contextualizing Theological Education,” Theological Education 40, (2005): 75-
86.
 90

the contextual leadership program is that students and faculty have a greater impact in

local congregations and that congregations can now influence the theological education

process.

Local Church Based

Models of theological education in local churches are few. When it does occur it

is because of the felt needs in the congregation rather than because of some preset

curriculum the church has adopted. Traditional seminaries offer few courses on

peacemaking or abuse and addiction. If traditional seminaries cover these topics it is

usually in the one or two counseling courses a student might encounter. However for a

local church these issues are dealt with daily. It is no wonder that local churches sponsor

conferences and seminars relating to these topics and a myriad of others.

In the specific area of leadership development various mega-churches have been

at the helm in providing training. Willow Creek’s annual Leadership Summit and Global

Leadership Summit attract thousands from across the country and world. Saddleback

provides resources for leadership training and holds Celebrate Recovery Regional
 91

Conferences to effectively train leaders to handle the tough side of ministry. Benefiel has

insight into the reasoning behind this phenomenon:

Mega-churches tend to do in-house training as they raise up leaders from within

that they do not want to lose, even for a time. For part time students already
connected to a church who don’t want to relocate for a seminary education, they
will consider other options for education locally147

In addition to conferences some organizations and denominations are formulating

various curriculums and placing them in the hands of local church pastors to facilitate in-

house training of leaders.

Summary

In too many cases traditional seminary education is not meeting the needs of the

leaders and congregations it seeks to help. Too often the theological and academic have

been divorced from practical ministry applications. Graduates leave the seminary

environment and find that their training does not prepare them for the roles they have

taken. Once in the local church context, challenges repeatedly address the character of

the leader but more often than not the leader’s character and spiritual formation were not

dealt with in the seminary curriculum. The small church is especially affected. Small

147
Benefiel, 24.
 92

churches tend to rely on a single pastor. All the leadership pressures and expectations are

his responsibility. There is not a leadership team where multiple gifts and skills could

more effectively deal with a variety of issues a leader might encounter. Therefore, the

gaps in his training cannot be covered up by the skills of another staff member.

Surprisingly, in Weber’s study, a seminary-trained leader was detrimental to

church growth. This is not to say that a traditional seminary education is bad. In fact other

indicators show that a traditional education is often significant in a leader’s growth.

There is no doubt that seminaries can provide their students with a solid biblical and

theological foundation. However, training for practical ministry challenges is virtually

non-existent. Concerns of overreaching plague each side of the debate. Poe asserts:

Critics of the seminaries charged them with an excessive concern for theory over
practice, while defenders of the seminaries warn that a pragmatic agenda threatens
to rob the church of its core faith commitments.148

Seminaries need to reevaluate the level of partnership they have with small New

England churches. Seminaries can provide excellent training but they cannot provide the

context. Churches may not have the staff to provide the training but they certainly have

the context. The pressure for seminaries to attract students and keep the coffers filled149

sometimes outweighs the necessity to find out if their students are actually called of God.

148
Poe, The Revolution in Ministry Training, 23.
149
Poe, 24.
 93

CHAPTER FOUR: PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Case Studies

Case Study Narratives

In order to gather data to address the problem of the lack of leadership

development leading to full-time ministry in small evangelical New England churches,

the researcher arranged to interview leadership of four such churches. Additional data

such as brochures and various publications were also gathered to fully understand the

context in which these churches develop leadership. Due to the sensitive nature of one

situation a pseudonym for that church and its pastor has been adopted.

It should be noted that the researcher had difficulty in locating suitable small

churches that fit the project criteria. Simply stated, there are very few small churches

attempting any kind of leadership development that leads to full-time ministry in New

England. Hence, the following case studies are the exception and not the rule in New

England.
 94

BeFree Church, New Hampshire

History. BeFree Church (formerly Barrington Evangelical Free Church) of

Barrington, New Hampshire is the mother church of a multisite church planting effort.

BeFree’s church plants are designed to share a “common DNA.”150 Rather than defining

and redefining the core values and vision of each church that is planted, BeFree opted to

strategically saturate their regional location with “one church-three locations.”151

BeFree’s story begins like many other small New England church stories begin. Pastor

Clinch explains: “Despite routine talk of evangelism, we had become insular and self

preoccupied.”152 From that realization the church began to focus outward. Their current

church planting strategy is the end result of a seven-year period of strategic change that

ended in 2000. Like many churches that desire to change and be culturally relevant,

BeFree began to realign how it did ministry. Some changes were typical. Churchy

language was done away with. Contemporary translations were used and worship was

more upbeat. On a deeper level, biblical teaching focused on bringing about life-change

150
Church Document. “BeFree Community: A Mentoring, Multi-Site Church.”
151
BeFree Community, “BeFree Community Church,” BeFree Community,
http://www.befreechurch.net/BeFree/BeFree.html (accessed November 11, 2009).
152
Clinch, Chris. Interview by author. Barrington, NH. February 17, 2009.
 95

and not simply information transfer. BeFree’s attendance multiplied and so did their

number of worship services. As time went on it became normative for members to be

involved in small groups and ministry became gift-driven. Out of necessity, when the

congregation grew so did the staff. There was a conscious move away from typical search

committees to allow the present elders to build a team with the right “chemistry and

competency.”153 The changes that were implemented were conscious and strategic but

some changes came about by hard lessons and conflict along the way. Foundational to

BeFree’s strategy is the dual focus of mentoring and multisite church planting. On a

practical level that means each church plant has its own homegrown teaching pastor.

Other multisite models often use video teaching from the main site. BeFree believes that

it is necessary for each site to have its own capable teaching pastor. A common document

in the church foyer states why: “We think that it is kingdom DNA and people: missional;

relational; residential; that is the essential factor in producing a viable church.”154 For

BeFree, the leadership must be part of the church and the community to which he

ministers. In fact, anyone who wishes to join the staff must commit to living in their

target community before they are officially hired.

153
Clinch, Chris. Interview by author. Barrington, NH. February 17, 2009.
154
Church Document. “BeFree Community: A Mentoring, Multi-Site Church.”
 96

BeFree’s multisite strategy and leadership development process are intertwined.

The present staff looks for individuals who have character, competency and the right

chemistry. These emerging leaders are mentored and trained while actually doing

ministry. These potential church planters lead various ministries, begin small groups and

teach in a variety of settings. The staff believes that:

Healthy DNA and effective ministry skills can’t be microwaved or classroom

taught. They take time, experience and mentorship to develop. The mentoring
relationship doesn’t end once the church planter launches a new church—it
continues as the BeFree staff meets regularly to hang out, pray and talk through
ministry decisions.155

BeFree’s first church plant was in Alton, a community 20 miles away. The

church’s teaching pastor was a former BeFree attender and homegrown leader. Pastor

Huggard joined the staff in 2003 and began services in 2006.

The newest church planting effort by BeFree is in Dover. The teaching pastor

was a former resident of the community and moved back to the area to specifically plant

a church. Pastor Hemphill spent one year in the community establishing relationships

and gaining employment before planting the church. Public events began in October of

2008 and regular services began in early 2009.

155
Church Document. “BeFree Community: A Mentoring, Multi-Site Church.”
 97

Leadership Development Process. BeFree develops leadership for the purpose of

planting churches. Though their process provides them with small group leaders and

other ministry leadership, the primary function is to develop pastoral leadership to

saturate their region. One staff member described his understanding:

I don’t know if the question will head this direction but I grew up here in this
church [and] was working in a youth ministry and I was looking into going into
seminary and that’s when you guys approached me about working part-time here
doing an internship process—potentially planting a church down the road. I saw
it as being a more effective process to get some boots on the ground training than
to go away to seminary. So I would say there was a high value for full-time
ministry development within the church as opposed to just outside of it.156

This staff member understood that BeFree’s process of leadership development

through apprenticeship was directed toward church planting. The high value on in-house

training (as opposed to seminary) is believed to prepare BeFree’s church planters far

better than traditional avenues. Pastor Clinch at one point stated, “one of our mantras

right here is trying to rescue people from seminary.”157 Though spoken tongue-in-cheek,

the statement betrays the underlying reasons for the primacy focus on in-house training:

Seminaries do not produce effective church planters. When the researcher asked, “What

156
Buck, Tim J. Interview by author. Barrington, NH. February 17, 2009.
157
Clinch, Chris. Interview by author. Barrington, NH. February 17, 2009.
 98

role do you see seminary playing in leadership development in the future?” the short

answer was “zero.”158

Although the church stresses church-based training, about half the staff have had

some seminary training. Pastor Huggard describes the problematic nature of the seminary

experience:

I think it [the seminary model] is in need of some kind of fix because most
seminaries are taking people from some setting, maybe a church or maybe their
home. Most seminaries are taking somebody with a pastoral affirmation letter and
some references and then they are basically sequestered for two to four years at a
school where they’re taken away from their home body. [They are taken away
from] their home church outside the community away to be in this kind of nesting
place. They’re probably working as well as going to school. Maybe they are
lightly involved in the church. From my experience, because it’s the best you can
have, you’re lightly involved until you get to a point where you need to be heavily
involved in order to get an internship so you can grab that degree.… You’ve had
education, some ministry experience, and now you’re launched. Your primary
focus now is getting a job because you have about 40 thousand dollars in debt.
You’re either married or were married going in.… And so you are getting very
practical—“I need a job.”159

BeFree’s staff made a distinction between ministry and having a ministry job.

There is a strong belief that seminary training puts pressures on the student to find a

ministry job in order to meet personal obligations. BeFree’s emphasis on church-based

158
Clinch, Chris. Interview by author. Barrington, NH. February 17, 2009.
159
Huggard, Sam. Interview by author. Barrington, NH. February 17, 2009.
 99

training relieves those pressures because the potential staff are call-driven. The call drives

the learning and not visa versa.

BeFree insists that those who want to plant a church first commit to move into a

community before they are even considered. This requirement emphasizes the call to the

community and not just acquiring a vocation. Pastor Clinch underscores that a

commitment to their team means, “Move to town, get a job, be in the community, start

serving.”160 Despite the passionate local church focus, Pastor Clinch does see a role for

the traditional seminary:

So I’d say the seminary at its best is coming along [side] someone already in
ministry to train and develop them whether it is through internet
modules,…weekly trainings. Training someone who’s already doing it [ministry]
not simply looking for the carrot in front of their nose so they can have a better
life.161

Trinity Community Church, Massachusetts

History. Trinity Community Church is over 100 years old and began as a Swedish

Baptist Mission. During the past century the church has moved locations and changed its

name. In the past ten years the church has experienced steady growth. Because of this,

160
Clinch, Chris. Interview by author. Barrington, NH. February 17, 2009.
161
Ibid.
 100

expansions to the facilities and additions to the staff have been made. Growing from a

church of less than 50 to its present congregation of 200 is largely due to its leadership

development process. As Trinity Community Church began to look inward and examine

their present ministry effectiveness, they noticed holes in their ministry model. Pastor

Peterson describes the thought process:

[We began to say] look there’s no way we can accomplish this vision of reaching
and disciplining people in our communities with our existing paid pastor and a
few existing leaders that have the skill, the character, the competencies, the
knowledge to lead…. So, we have to find a way to develop other people as more
mature disciples.162

Leadership Development Process. Trinity Community Church did not directly

seek to start a leadership development process. Instead the process grew out of its general

discipleship efforts. The simple need to fulfill the vision they had was the driving force

that resulted in the present process of leadership development. Pastor Peterson explains:

At the core of our leadership training strategy was our small group ministry and
that’s also at the core of our discipleship strategy. So what we did is say look, if
people are going to grow into leaders, two kinds of primary pieces we want to see
happening is that they are in a kind of a mentoring apprentice situation. Maybe
initially they are just helping somebody lead the group.163

162
Peterson, Bruce. Interview by author. Norwood, MA. July 11, 2009.
163
Ibid.
 101

Pastor Peterson believes that their small group structure was critical in the church’s

growth and key in developing leaders. As each new member was encouraged to join a

small group the need for small group leaders increased. Out of necessity a small group

leader program was implemented. Eventually, this small group leader program was

modified into a general leadership development process focusing on mentorship and

practical ministry experience. This two-fold emphasis of mentorship and practical

ministry experience link Trinity Community Church and BeFree's development processes

despite their stylistic differences.

Trinity Community Church recognizes that this process is ongoing. Pastor

Peterson points out, “I see that it is a part of discipleship in that to be a leader, you need

to be growing, you need to grow from where you’re at…”164 The idea that an effective

leader is a lifelong learner is central to their model of leadership development. Leaders

are encouraged to attend seminars, expand their reading and even attend seminary.

Consequently Pastor Peterson’s view of traditional seminary is much more

favorable than the view of BeFree. Pastor Peterson explains:

My seminary experience was integral to my leadership development. We’ve got a

Youth and Family Ministries guy and he hasn’t been to seminary even though I
think he has a lot of the character and gifts of leadership. So what do I say; you
didn’t go to seminary, we’ll help you, we’ll pay your tuition so you can go. So in

164
Peterson, Bruce. Interview by author. Norwood, MA. July 11, 2009.
 102

that respect, I guess there’s a part of me that knows seminary is almost a

requirement if you’re going to be in full-time pastoral ministry, missions ministry,
VBS, church planting and whatever. You need seminary. So check the box off,
get it done, however you do it.165

However, Pastor Peterson admits that he sees problems with the present seminary model:

Wouldn’t it be great if this [seminary] was dovetailed much more with the church
and you still were able to get the content you needed? You know biblical
languages, theology, church history, whatever, but it was so much more hands on.
I think one thing that happens in seminary and I’m not against academia, but I
think nine out of ten models you see in seminary are great models of Christian
academics, but there not great models of ministry in terms of church pastoral
ministry, discipleship ministry, evangelistic ministry.166

Pastor Peterson recognizes the benefits that traditional seminary education gives,

such as an in-depth understanding of biblical truth, but also sees gaps in the seminary’s

ability to train for practical ministry. He goes on to say,

I think we could do it a lot better if the role was not as seminary-centered but
more church-centered. You know that that doesn’t rule out seminary, but just
seminary has to think differently, church has got to think differently and I don’t
know how to do it. I’ll be honest.167

Trinity Community Church continues to experience growth. Its newest efforts

include support of various church plants in their local area. Though their leadership

development process has not produced any church planters, they are progressing towards

that goal.

165
Ibid.
166
Peterson, Bruce. Interview by author. Norwood, MA. July 11, 2009.
167
Ibid.
 103

Mill Pond Church, Connecticut

History. Mill Pond Church is a fairly new church but it began long ago as a dream

in the heart of its present pastor. Mill Pond Church began as a desire to plant a relevant,

contemporary church in Connecticut. Pastor Rissinger started the church in his home and

it immediately grew to about 30 attenders. However, the church was put on hold while

Pastor Rissinger assisted in the ministry of another church in nearby Meriden,

Connecticut. Seven years later, in March of 2007, Mill Pond Church was officially

reborn. As of 2009 Mill Pond Church has grown into three different worship sites.

From the very beginning, Pastor Rissinger envisioned a leadership development

process in the church. The goal was to be a multisite church plant and therefore the need

for leaders in each of the sites was paramount. Pastor Rissinger explains:

If we were going to do multisite, we got to have a constant stream of leaders.

Where is that going to come from? What are we going to do? We’re not going to
ship them off for four years somewhere; not sure what they’re going to come back
like.… If we’re going to multiply churches and multiply worship sites or
campuses we can’t wait three or four years each time. We got to have an ongoing
process in the life of the Church.168

168
Rissinger, Joel. Interview by author. Newington, CT. February 11, 2009.
 104

Leadership Development Process. Mill Pond Church adopted the Antioch School

program169 as the process to develop leaders. Pastor Rissinger likes the emphasis on

building competencies in both character and proficiency that are innate to the program.

Each student builds a portfolio of his work that could contain a written project, video,

outreach project or even testimonials from people he has have ministered to. To master a

particular content area students need to understand the theology and how that theology

works in the life of the local church. For Mill Pond Church, leadership development

consists of content, character, and practical application. Pastor Rissinger touches on this

as he describes what makes a leader,

A real leader is someone who has the capacity and the character to make disciples
of Christ. Paul said, “Follow me as I follow Christ.” So clearly that’s the criteria.
He has the ability to help people do that—to facilitate that process on a consistent
basis. I think it starts with character. I think it then moves to certain skills but the
goal is that image of Christ, becoming a disciple. An apprentice and a leader just
becomes a conduit to that.170

Pastor Rissinger has a very high view of the local church’s responsibility and of

leadership development. When asked what the local church’s role was in the

development of those called to full-time ministry, Pastor Rissinger said, “I think it is the

169
The Antioch School, “Antioch School of Church Planting and Leadership
Development,” The Antioch School, http://www.bild.org/antiochSchool/
Home.html;jsessionid=A35C67E549A2DBB5E98A0A0865EA1 3D7.node1 (accessed
January 1, 2010).
170
Rissinger.
 105

place it ought to happen. I’m not against seminary, in the sense of being a vendetta or

something, but I think if the church was doing her job seminaries would be irrelevant.

They would be unnecessary.”171

Pastor Rissinger does see an important role for seminaries in the future. However,

recognizing the difficulty in changing large institutions, he does not have much hope.

Pastor Rissinger explains:

You know the blissful, wishful answer is that they [seminaries] would simply be
resourcing centers of churches where they acknowledge that the church is in fact
the source of the foundation of theological education and leadership development.
As resource, I mean libraries, databases, centers that offer specialties or specialists
in certain areas that maybe a local church couldn’t or wouldn’t have but not
necessarily a place where you send people to get their education, to get their
cultural capital or a degree.172

The ability to give away leadership opportunities is key in Mill Pond’s

leadership development process. Pastor Rissinger admits that he struggles with this. He

comments that the idea that you have to present “the right package, the right structure, the

right organization”173 undermines leadership development. The attempt of churches to

script everything so that the church is presented as perfect is detrimental. He says,

When you live and do ministry that way, you’re really handicapped and afraid
when it comes to exposing new leaders to opportunities.… So you still have to
find ways to give opportunities and allow guys a chance to fail and you have to

171
Rissinger, Joel. Interview by author. Newington, CT. February 11, 2009.
172
Ibid.
173
Rissinger.
 106

recognize that a failure or two or three is not going to blow your church to
smithereens.174

It is an ongoing struggle for Pastor Rissinger and his congregation. Just prior to

the interview Pastor Rissinger was informed that a number of new visitors were coming

Sunday. Sunday’s message was due to be delivered by the worship pastor who is in the

Antioch program. Pastor Rissinger recognized the urge to jump in and preach. After all,

he is the face of Mill Pond. Others in the congregation agree and express the opinion that

if they do not hear the senior pastor they may not come back. Pastor Rissinger stands his

ground.

You know if they [visitors] leave because they don’t like his message that much
they weren’t going to stay with us anyway. Ultimately something else would trip
them up down the road. If it’s that easy to bump somebody, there will always be a
reason to bump somebody and we’ll never be able to equip and train leaders
because they won’t have opportunities to learn. I’ll always be doing it. I’d
recommend guys to let loose, let people take risks, make mistakes, cover your
eyes, pray, you know, take hot baths, cool off.175

The process is working. Two of the early students have quickly applied what

they learned. Both young men were mentored and in turn are mentoring others by leading

small groups with new believers and with not yet believers. Pastor Rissinger says that

they are ministering at a level far beyond their years:

They do not know that they are not supposed to do what they are doing. It is
because we haven’t told them not to, so they both think they can. And so they win

174
Rissinger, Joel. Interview by author. Newington, CT. February 11, 2009.
175
Ibid.
 107

friends to Christ, they form groups, they baptize. These guys are not handicapped
like I was, thinking “oh well, I just can’t do that yet. I’ll wait.” And they joke
about it. They’re too dumb to know what they are not supposed to do yet, so they
just do it and that’s the fruit – that’s what I love.176

Pastor Rissinger’s pride and excitement in the leadership potential of these two

young men is apparent when he says, “I would pit them up against pastors I served with

in church for understanding what is a church, the ecclesiology of a church, what is the

mission of the church, where is a biblical balance on gifts and talents, what constitutes

true biblical leadership and those kinds of things.”177

Unnamed Church, Maine

The researcher was unable to interview the fourth church that was chosen for this

project. Just one week prior to the interview, the researcher was informed that the pastor

had left the church. No indication was given to the researcher by the pastor when the

interview was arranged a month before. No one else was available to be interviewed

regarding the leadership development process in the church. This is partly due to the fact

that the leadership development process was in the planning stages.

176
Rissinger, Joel. Interview by author. Newington, CT. February 11, 2009.
177
Ibid.
 108

The very fact that the pastor left suddenly for sensitive reasons accentuates the

need for leadership development. Though the researcher does not know all the details, he

wonders if a mentor and a system of accountability could have remedied the situation.

NVivo Results

NVivo is a qualitative software product that aids in the organization of a

multiplicity of data. By organizing various pieces of data in the program, unstructured

information can be more effectively analyzed. Various tools within the program provide a

range of queries and output possibilities. The text of each interview was transcribed and

then coded with the assistance of the NVivo software. Eighty-six codes or nodes was

applied to the interviews and documents of each church. Analysis of the coding revealed

some common patterns in all three of the case studies (APPENDIX B).

Nodes that emphasized training in the local church scored high in each case

study. At BeFree Church the “provide training” node was number one. A similar node

“provide opportunities” scored sixth. Trinity scored the “provide training” node fifth

while a similar node “training by doing ministry” scored eighteenth. Mill Pond Church

placed the nodes for “training by doing ministry,” “local church training,” and “training
 109

events” in the top twenty. Theses nodes reflect the high value these churches place on

local church-based leadership development.

The nodes for “competency” and “character” consistently showed up in the top

twenty. Nodes that focused on spiritual giftedness also were in the top twenty. The

general node for “gifts” appeared in the BeFree and Mill Pond data while more specific

gifts nodes (“pastoral gifts,” “evangelism gifts,” “leadership gifts”) appeared in the

Trinity data. These nodes seem to reflect the foundational content of various leadership

development processes in these churches. “Skill set” nodes that appear in the top twenty

results of the Mill Pond and Trinity interviews suggest that the idea of competency is not

clearly defined. In some cases competency means various skill sets such as conflict

resolution or conducting a funeral. In other instances it indicates spiritual gifts or natural

abilities. In a few cases, these nodes denote that which was not learned in seminary.

Seminary-related nodes appeared frequently as well. “Seminary-negative view”

appeared more frequently than “seminary-positive view.” However, the “seminary-in

ministry” node appeared as well. These nodes reflect the conflicted views of seminary

training by those interviewed. The node “seminary-negative view” almost always

centered on what was lacking in the seminary experience, that is, everyone felt what was

learned was beneficial but not often practical. Pastor Peterson’s statement is an example:
 110

I think one thing that happens in seminary and I’m not against academia, but I
think nine out of ten models you see in seminary are great models of Christian
academics, but they are not great models of ministry in terms of church pastoral
ministry, discipleship ministry, evangelistic ministry, whatever, so seminary kind
of turned to and in a certain direction.178

In the Trinity interview these beneficial aspects of seminary are reflected in the

nodes “accurate understanding of God’s Word” and “academic or scholars.” The

“seminary-in ministry” node designated the desire for the training to be both theological

and practical.

The “visionary” and “role of vision” nodes appeared in the BeFree and Trinity

interviews within the top ten. These nodes did not appear in the Mill Pond interview at

all. However “the churches mission” emerged as number one in the Mill Pond interview.

This node is the vision by which Mill Pond Church aligns the leadership development

process. “Church planting” scored fifth at Mill Pond as a reflection of the churches

mission. Though the node did not appear high in the other interviews the term “planting”

appeared frequently in a word frequency query (APPENDIX B). In fact, other nodes such

as “ability to teach,” “multiplication,” and “to partner with others” exist only to enhance

church planting efforts or vision in the churches.

178
Peterson, Bruce. Interview by author. Norwood, MA. July 11, 2009.
 111

The node “failures” surfaced in two of the interviews. This node designates the

importance of failures in the leadership development process. Failures lead to learning. It

is linked to the frequency of “provide opportunities” and similar nodes. Failures are seen

as beneficial and almost a necessity in the development process. At BeFree the desire was

to provide “safe opportunities to fail so people can find out what they are good at.”179

A number of relationships were also discovered. There was a strong indication

that “discipleship leads to leadership.” Leadership development cannot be separated from

discipleship. Not everyone is a leader but the leadership gifts can often be discovered

through a discipleship process. There was also a high indication that “leadership

development is motivated by church planting.” Though not as strong, a similar node

showed a relationship that “leadership development is motivated by small groups.”

A key relationship uncovered is that the “local church’s role is connected to the

church’s mission.” These relationships, though subtle, show a strong connection between

local church leadership development efforts and those particular churches’ understanding

of their mission. Leadership development is not an add-on program in these churches but

an integral facet needed to complete the great commission.

179
Clinch, Chris. Interview by author. Barrington, NH. February 17, 2009.
 112

Surveys

Survey Analysis

The researcher contacted eight evangelical denominations and asked if they could

provide their pastors, who serve in small churches, with a link to complete an online

survey. The researcher also mailed or e-mailed 30 requests to other pastors to participate

in the survey. After three months the requests were repeated. At the end of the survey

period only seventeen responses were received (APPENDIX A). All of the responses

came from churches under 150 attenders. Seventy-six percent of these churches had

attendance levels over 51 persons. Eleven of the respondents had been pastors over 15

years (65%) with only one pastor having served less than five years (6%). The other five

respondents made up the middle ranges. Therefore, most of the respondents brought a

wealth of practical pastoral and practical experience to the survey.

When asked, “How effective do you think seminary education is in preparing

leaders for small local church ministry in New England?” most responses where

“effective” or “neutral.” One pastor thought seminary was “very effective.” (6%) while

18 percent thought seminary education was “ineffective.” No one thought it was “very

ineffective.”
 113

When asked, “How involved should the local church be in developing leaders that

will serve in small churches full-time?” almost all said “very involved” (71%) or

“involved” (24%). Only one respondent (6%) said ‘very uninvolved.”

The responses to “How involved should seminaries be in developing leaders that

will serve in small churches full-time?’ were consistent with the answers to question

three. Eighty-eight percent answered either “very involved” or “involved.” Only two

answers were “neutral” or “uninvolved.”

When the question was personalized to “How effective was your seminary

training for the ministry position you are now in?” the responses were slightly different

that in question three. Though the distribution of answers are similar, the “very effective”

response was higher (24% compared to 6%).

Overall the respondents value seminary education to varying degrees but highly

value the local church’s role in developing leaders. To ascertain what the difference

might be in the value of seminary versus local church-based leadership development,

questions seven through ten were asked.

Question seven asked, “How important are the following items in order to be an

effective leader in a small local church?” The question was followed by a list of ten items

that are both character and competency based. “Impeccable character and personal
 114

holiness,” “ongoing personal growth,” and “a sense of personal call” scored high (88%)

in the “very effective” range. All ten items scored “neutral” or above. No item was scored

in the “ineffective” or “very ineffective” ranges. The researcher believes question seven

was poorly worded and should have been revised to obtain more definitive responses.

Question eight took the same ten items and asked the respondents to choose the

top three. “Ongoing personal growth,”(48%) “a sense of personal call,” (47%) and

“impeccable character and personal holiness” (42%) were the top three overall. “Biblical

knowledge” was forth (31%). Issues of character and call scored the highest while

competency items scored low (with the exception of “biblical knowledge”). This is

interesting since in the next question items of competency were often mentioned.

Question nine asked, “What ministry issues or situations did you not feel prepared

for when you began your ministry?” Items of competency were mentioned most

frequently. “How to manage change in ministry,” “administration, board leadership,

systems management,” “dealing with conflict in the church,” and similar statements all

pointed to a lack of practical training. Issues of spiritual growth such as a “lack of a

personal spiritual development plan,” and issues of emotional struggles such as

“compassion fatigue” and “the particular struggles of individuals” were also mentioned.
 115

One pastor succinctly described the blessings and curses associated with the present

model of leadership development:

I was not prepared for the practical areas of ministry, like preparing a funeral
service, preparing a wedding, as well as the relational aspects of these
responsibilities, such as caring for a grieving family, how to handle premarital
counseling. That is why I believe that the local church is essential and training new
leaders and pastors, so that the biblical learning and theological instruction has
context and meaning for those in ministry and those they ministered to. My
undergraduate training taught me “what” while my seminary training better
addressed “so what?” But I have had to go beyond these to find what I needed to
be better prepared.180

Question ten asked, “What should be the local church’s role in developing leaders

for full-time service?” Responses were mixed. One respondent saw the local church’s

role as comprehensive: “It is 100% responsibility of the local church to develop these

leaders. It should be church-based.” No one saw the seminary’s role as comprehensive.

Most respondents understood the local church and seminary as being in a partnership.

One respondent said, “I believe the local church can and should partner with schools to

support, train and evaluate candidates for ministry.”181 Another said, “it [the local

church] should be a base of practical instruction and experience and it should participate

in sending its people to higher level training such as seminary.”182 However, in this

180
Online survey response. Question nine.
181
Online survey response. Question ten.
182
Online survey response. Question ten.
 116

partnership the local church’s role is paramount. One respondent put it this way: “The

church should be at the very center of developing leaders for full-time service. The

church should take the lead and make use of other programs, seminaries, internships,

mentoring, etc. to make it happen.”

Summary

The survey respondents had both a high view of the local church and of

seminary-based education. Most agreed that the local church should be at the center of

leadership development but should partner with seminaries in the training of ministers.

What that partnership consists of was unclear to the respondents. For some the

partnership meant that the seminary was a supplement to the local church’s efforts. To

others it meant a higher level of training that the local church could not provide.

This nebulous nature of the partnership between local churches and seminaries

accentuates some of the feelings of being unprepared for ministry. Respondents did not

feel that their seminary education prepared them on a practical level. This feeling did not

fluctuate much between new pastors and established pastors. One respondent

encapsulated that feeling when he said that he did not feel prepared for “pretty much
 117

everything except for understanding and teaching Scripture.”183 Despite these sentiments

few pastors have a handle on the mechanisms or processes needed to fill these gaps.

Items mentioned such as mentoring, small group ministry, and prayer support, though

important, are often seen as superfluous to the development process rather than

something that is proactive and strategic.

183
Online survey response. Question nine.
 118

CHAPTER FIVE: ANALYSIS

Case Study and Leadership Literature Integration

Biblical on the Job Training

The pattern of on-the-job training that is evident in the Scriptures is still relevant

today. The biblical record does not outline formal leadership development processes.

Similarly, in many small churches, leadership development takes on different forms

(small groups, mentoring, class work). The commonality of on-the-job training,

regardless of its different forms, is the common thread. The biblical record, leadership

literature and this project’s data, agree that on-the-job or contextualized ministry training

produces leadership who grow in competency and character. The similarities between the

case studies in providing ministry opportunities in order to integrate theology and Jesus’

development of the disciples are significant. Traditionally seminaries have tried to

provide this integration through practicum and internships. Unfortunately the bulk of

seminary courses are theology-heavy and practice-light. Local churches have swung the

pendulum in the opposite direction, becoming practice-heavy and theology-light. The

 119

researcher believes a more balanced approach is needed. A thoughtful review of present

paradigms coupled with a thorough review of biblical principles seems to be the starting

place.

Kingdom-Motivated Leadership Development

Throughout the New Testament the motivation for leadership development is

kingdom expansion. When Jesus trained his disciples, he was preparing them for

kingdom ministry. The expansion of the Gospel’s influence through the planting of local

churches in the Roman Empire was a direct result of Jesus’ command (Matthew 28:19-

20). Paul trained leaders so that his churches would be filled with capable leadership

(2 Timothy 2:2). The motivation at its foundational level was passion for kingdom

expansion.

Many other leadership development paradigms in place today have arisen apart

from that motivation. Developing leaders is driven by other factors. Many of the early

seminaries were started because denominations needed a place to effectively train leaders

for kingdom expansion. As the years passed that motivation became less focused. Weber

states, “Their goal was to produce spiritually mature religious professionals to lead strong
 120

and growing churches.”184 Witmer declares that the heart of the seminary’s mission is

“forming men for the ordained Gospel ministry.”185 While none of these statements are

inherently wrong or biblically unsound, they do indicate a subtle shift in focus. That

focus seems to be supplying leaders for established churches. The researcher understands

that established churches have leadership requirements and need to have them filled with

qualified people. However, if the church focuses only on filling slots instead of making

slots then the church has lost the passion for kingdom expansion.

In each of the case studies, the development of a leadership development process

was directly related to kingdom expansion whether that expansion is church planting or

the development of small groups to impact the local community. The nodes for “church

planting,” “vision,” “the churches’ mission,” “multiplication,” and “strategic”

consistently show up in each of the interviews as the impetus for their leadership

development processes. Tim Buck describes how the vision for impacting the community

works at BeFree. Buck explains that if a potential leader has the same vision and values

and a desire to join the team then that is enough. He goes on to say: “That is what we

offer people essentially nothing but the opportunity to be part of a vision.”186

184
Weber, The Seminaries and the Churches, 71.
185
Witmer, Seminary: A Place to Prepare Pastors, 238.
186
Buck, Tim. Interview by author. Barrington, NH. February 17, 2009.
 121

In these churches, acquisition of knowledge, development of the soul, and

formation of character are equal in importance. These churches believe that knowledge

alone does not sustain a kingdom-focused vision. Knowledge must be united with a soul

that is intimately connected with Jesus. That connection is what drives the vision for

kingdom expansion and ultimately leadership development.

Seminaries: The New Apostles

Old Testament prophets redirected leaders when they strayed and helped in the

management of God’s people. In the New Testament, itinerant apostles not only planted

churches but also counseled and rebuked those churches when they strayed from the

Gospel. These apostles were integral in placing qualified leaders in the churches they

planted. In many ways both prophets and apostles were the keepers of orthodoxy.

Through the Holy Spirit’s empowerment and the commissioning of Jesus, these early

apostles stabilized orthodox beliefs in a cultural context of plurality.

Throughout the leadership literature and in this project’s case studies and surveys

there is no doubt that most seminaries do an excellent job in giving students a

comprehensive grasp of the Scriptures. There is also a preponderance of opinion that

 122

seminaries do a poor job providing students with spiritual formation, character

development and practical ministry experience. The pure academic model of leadership

development does not seem to be meeting the needs of local churches. There is a strong

desire to return to a more Hebraic model.

Those interviewed had high praise for what the seminary did well, but in some

cases, they had a disdain for what they did not do well. Very often a desire for the local

church to partner with seminaries was expressed but what that partnership might look like

was unclear. The researcher believes that modern seminaries can choose two possible

paths.

Seminaries can choose to partner more fully with the local church. This means

that seminaries must recognize that they do not and cannot provide enough practical

ministry experience in their curriculum. The local church is the only place where this can

happen. Seminaries need to evaluate each course and redesign it so that there is a

practical connection between the theology or skill and real-life ministry. The present

practice of some seminaries to add “being” components as well as “doing” components to

every course is a positive step. Witmer put it well when he said that seminaries should
 123

“form a person, not a professional.”187 Unfortunately, this may not be possible for

seminaries to accomplish without a deep partnership with local churches.

This holistic approach to leadership development needs to go beyond mentored

ministry and four credit practica to a more comprehensive process of practice and

theological integration. In addition, this would require some collaboration, between

seminary and church, to assess whether or not a potential student has been called to

ministry. The criteria for acceptance into a program would not be a good transcript or an

ability to pay tuition costs. The criteria would be that the student has been called of God

to lead. How this would work out on a practical level is uncertain but a process similar to

ordination may be appropriate. This would also require a shift from residential students to

church-based students. This would shift the paradigm from training for-service to training

in-service. Frankly, this is massive paradigm shift for most institutions.

The second option for the seminary is to simply focus upon what they do well.

There is no better place become a biblical scholar than seminary. In this sense, seminaries

are well suited to train modern counterparts of the ancient prophets and apostles. This

choice implies that seminaries must recognize that they are not in the business of training

pastors or leaders, only scholars. The local church would be responsible for leadership

187
Witmer, Seminary: A Place to Prepare Pastors, 238.
 124

development. A local church would be required to provide basic and foundational

training for all leaders. The seminaries would become resource centers that would

provide scholars, libraries and even mentors.

Part of the uneasiness in small churches regarding the effectiveness of seminaries

and church-based training is due to the ambiguity in the express goals of the seminaries.

Many churches want their pastors to be seminary educated. Many pastors know that it is

not enough and are ill-prepared for the task at hand despite four or more years of training.

There is a great desire among small churches find a process where the gap between

theology and practice can be alleviated.

Preeminence of the Call

Christopherson says that a calling is “a task set by God with a sense of obligation

to work for purposes other than one’s own.”188 Sweet says, “Leaders are summoned.”189

The overall thrust of the literature and the biblical record is that leaders are not leaders

unless they are called of God. The call provides the leader’s identity and uniqueness. The

188
Christopherson, Calling and Career in Christian Ministry, 219.
189
Sweet, Summoned to Lead, 12.
 125

call provides a stabilizing point when ministry becomes difficult. The call is about God’s

agenda and not the leader’s vocational choice.

In the case study data, nodes pertaining to “vocational view of ministry” and

“paid versus volunteer” were referenced by two of the three churches. These nodes

underscore some of the perplexity in understanding the concept of being called. Part of

the confusion relates to what it means to be qualified for ministry. Does the call qualify

someone or is it some other certification such as being ordained or possessing a degree?

Most would agree that if God calls, then God empowers. God provides the necessary

spiritual gifts and resources. This does not minimize formal education. Formal education

may be one of the resources God provides. However, in practice, the church as a whole

believes something different. Formal education is the only resource. Very few seminaries

require much beyond a letter from the student’s pastor declaring confirmation of a call

from God. In addition, it is no surprise that some seminary graduates are required to get

a position at a church that will provide enough income to cover educational loans. Those

who have a strong sense of call to missions or to the inner city find it difficult to reconcile

their call and the high costs of education. There is no doubt in this researcher’s mind that

the high attrition rate of first-time pastors is likely due to lack of the stabilizing power of

a call from God.

 126

Local churches and seminaries need to regain an understanding of the

preeminence of the call and align their practices according to that understanding.

Leadership is not simply a set of practices and skills. Leadership is a spiritual endeavor

based in the call of God. If a local church is developing a leader or a seminary accepts a

student, the question of call must be asked. Otherwise, the church is setting up the next

generation of leaders to finish poorly. It may be worse. They may not finish at all.

Mentoring and the Role of the Pastor

Leadership development is a matter of multiplication. It is the pastor’s

responsibility to identify and target potential leaders in the local church context. Nauta

has shown that a large amount of congregational identity and passion is dependent upon

the leader and not based in structures, strategies and programs.190

Paul stressed the importance of modeling the Gospel. He took his own advice

and mentored Timothy, among others. In the same way, mentoring and life-

multiplication is a necessity in any leadership development effort. Clinton emphasizes

the importance of divine contacts in the early development of a leader. A more

190
Nauta, 45-52.
 127

experienced leader is often a tool in the hands of God as he knowingly or unknowingly

influences the development of another.191

God gives various leadership gifts for the expressed purpose of developing

disciples and even other leaders. Paul clearly states, “It was he who gave some to be

apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and

teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service [emphasis mine]” (Ephesians

4:11).

In each case study those interviewed placed a high value on “mentoring,”

“accountability,” and “team leadership.” Often leadership teams, though primarily for

strategic planning, took the form of mentoring partnerships or mutual accountability

groups. There is also a high value on helping each other prepare for service. In each case

study there was a sense of a strong ministry community. In each church, people were

working together, discovering new things and partnering with each other. In fact, the

node for “partner with others” appeared first and sixth in two of the case studies. In some

cases partnering with others meant ministering together with both those inside their own

local church and with outside entities. If those entities had a like-minded vision and

kingdom passion, stylistic differences and denominational allegiances were downplayed.

191
Clinton, Making of a Leader, 129.
 128

Any attempt to introduce an effective leadership development process to a local

church must include some form of mentorship. In New England this is especially

difficult. New Englanders are known to be “overly self-reliant”192 and therefore sharing

life at the deepest levels is particularly problematic. The necessity of mentoring in

leadership development and the problematic nature of New England culture may be why

the researcher had difficulty in finding many small churches with proactive leadership

development processes in place.

The Necessity of Community

In the first century, the Christian community was of utmost importance. Due to

the nature of that community culture, the early church spread its message not only

throughout the known world but also provided the context for character transformation

and the building of leaders. By sharing life, potential leaders were mentored and learned

by watching more experienced leaders. Spiritual gifts manifested themselves in the

framework of community. Without the sense of community the early church could not

have done so much in so little time.

192
New England Research Project, 1997.
 129

Clinton has demonstrated the importance of community. Many of the process

items that Clinton has identified can only take place in the context of community.193

Without these process items a potential leader’s development is stunted at best.

The case study data resonates with the significance of community. The node for

community and others related to it appear repeatedly in the interviews. The word

“community” appears 27 times in the interviews. This notable number is bolstered by the

fact that other nodes referred to “community” without actually using the word. In the

Trinity interview the dominance of the small group methodology in its leadership

development process highlights the importance of community in that church. Trinity’s

small groups are far more than educational programs. They are the center of church life

and leadership development. At BeFree the pastors from each church site meet regularly

for encouragement. These meetings go far beyond strategic planning. Even while the

researcher was conducting the interview, the camaraderie and sense of deep community

was apparent. Biblical community and the sharing of lives are indispensable for the

development of leaders.

193
Clinton, Making of a Leader, 77-124.
 130

Character Development of the Leader

A review of the Scriptures reveals a preponderance of evidence pointing to the

importance of character. God is most often concerned with the condition of the heart.

Throughout the biblical narratives, the rise and fall of a number of leaders are directly

related to the nature of their character. Jesus consistently told the Pharisees that doing

right things did not equal a right heart. The bulk of leadership literature reinforces the

importance of character in the life of a leader.

A cursory examination of a number of evangelical M.Div. programs reveals very

few courses that focus on the leader’s character. At first glance this is a glaring hole in

the curriculum. However, what this gap really shows is that the structure of a typical

seminary is not designed for character transformation nor is coursework the most

beneficial way to develop character. Community is a vital component in developing a

leader’s character. This is where the present paradigm breaks down. The structure of

most seminaries is not designed to holistically develop leaders. Only the local church can

provide the seed bed for holistic growth.

In each interview the importance of the leader’s character was highlighted. The

node for character emerged in the top ten in each interview. The word character appeared
 131

21 times. Other nodes that relate to character also appeared quite frequently. “Moving

towards maturity” and “ failures” also reflected the need for on going growth in the area

of Christian character. The failure node is linked to character development.

The development of character cannot be isolated from the development of

leadership competencies. Human beings cannot be compartmentalized. God designed us

as a holistic system. Character influences the practice of ministry competencies.

Conversely, how and why we perform ministry tasks shapes the leader’s character.

The Role of Struggle and Failure

A significant parallel surfaced between the case study data and McKenna’s study

on leadership development. McKenna’s study showed that transitions and even failures

far outweighed the impact of any formal education in the shaping of leaders. McKenna

states: “The pastors in this study said they grew the most through adversity and

recognizing their brokenness, but emerged on the other side stronger leaders and more

dependent on the grace of God.”194 McKenna’s study demonstrated that transitional

events such as personal traumas, failures and mistakes, and leadership setbacks were key

194
McKenna, Leadership Development and Clergy, 188.
 132

events in promoting spiritual and professional growth among the pastors studied. In fact,

the influence of failures and mistakes scored second in the list of key events.195

Clinton’s leadership emergence theory further substantiates the importance of

failures in the life of a leader.196 Process items such as faith checks and obedience checks

always carry the possibility that the leader could fail. The overall pattern of failures and

successful completion of a particular process item enables the leader to grow and expand

his circle of influence over the course of the leader’s life. Failing a process item

repeatedly is obviously not advantageous but the purpose of God in testing us can prove

his faithfulness even in the midst of minor setbacks.

In the case study data, the node “failure” occurred in the top ten in two of the

interviews. In addition, the potential for failure is inherent in other nodes such as

“provide opportunities,” “assessments,” “training by doing ministry,” and “seminary in-

ministry.”

This insight is of great consequence especially in the light of evangelical culture.

Evangelicals often look for stories and ministries of great success in order to model the

same in their specific ministry contexts. Stories of failure and unsuccessful ministries are

195
Good role models scored first at 10.5%. Followed by failures (8.8%) and
education/ training/seminars (8.2%).
196
Clinton, The Making of a Leader.
 133

not sought after despite the apparent critical nature of failures in the spiritual growth of

leaders. Evangelicals need to assess the importance of allowing and accepting failure

within local churches without the stigma it usually includes. If failures are always seen as

negative events then local churches are condemning their pastors to a path of minimal

growth. In addition, the fear of allowing failures will stifle the desire to provide ministry

opportunities and practical training to the potential leaders in that church. Often in God’s

economy what looks like an ultimate failure is often a great victory. To most, the

crucifixion of Jesus appeared as a complete failure. However, it was through that

apparent failure that Jesus’ greatest victory was produced. Evidently that pattern

continues as leaders fail but see God produce fruit in their lives.

Seminary Model Effectiveness

In most cases, the seminary or academic model lacks some key elements that are

needed to holistically develop leaders for full-time church ministry. Seminary curriculum

is primarily geared toward knowledge acquisition. In itself, this is not a bad goal. Many

seminaries produce pastors that have an excellent understanding of theology and the

biblical record. However, leadership development needs to be more comprehensive and

 134

holistic in nature. Though seminaries can provide a tight-knit community that

community is very different from a local church’s community. Seminaries rarely train

their students in conflict resolution, managing change, and systems thinking.197 These

things are essential in understanding and surviving ministry in a local church. Many

seminaries do not provide practical training as well. If covered at all, funeral preparation

and similar ministry tasks are studied in less than a semester but often take up the bulk of

a pastor’s daily ministry life. One or two counseling courses are inadequate in providing

the leader with an understanding of the depth and complexity of a typical congregation’s

emotional and spiritual needs. It has been shown that seminary training allows leaders to

excel in skills such as sermon preparation and social ministries but has a negative effect

in basic religious and community values.198 The very fact that non-seminary trained

pastors are more likely to be leading churches that are “vital and alive, growing and

members, using contemporary worship, clear about purpose and mission, and well

organized”199 should be alarming to most seminaries.

197
APPENDIX A. “What ministry situations did you not feel prepared for when
you began your ministry?”
198
Weber, The Seminaries and the Churches, 81.
199
Ibid.
 135

It is almost impossible for seminaries in their present state to provide enough

practical ministry opportunities and experience through traditional means. The good

news is that many seminaries are beginning to recognize the gap in their curriculum. In

ministry programs and mentored ministry opportunities that have requirements to apply

each course to a practical ministry experience are all steps in the right direction. Issues

such as personal holiness, spiritual growth and understanding personal dysfunction are

not typical courses in a seminary’s curriculum but rank high in some pastor’s expressed

needs.200 Some seminaries are addressing these things through an emphasis on formative

issues. In those seminaries each course has both doing and being components. However,

unless there is a radical transformation and greater cooperation with the local church the

present academic model will remain.

Small Church Leadership Development Effectiveness

A small church, like any church, can manifest problems that make it unhealthy.

Since small churches are small, issues such as conflict and poor leadership can have a

devastating impact. Bickers identifies other problems related to the small church

200
APPENDIX A. “How important are the following items in order to be an
effective leader in a small local church?”
 136

experience.201 Small churches tend to focus inward and become culturally indifferent.

Low self-esteem, because of their size, often manifests itself in an absence of vision and

purpose. The researcher would add another problem to the list—lack of leadership

development.

Many small churches struggle to fill the various ministry positions that they need

to run their programs. Small churches are always tempted to fill those positions with

people who are either untrained or not gifted for that particular position. The question of

how to proactively train leaders for those positions rarely comes to the mind of the

present leadership. The problem is intensified when pastoral leadership is required. For

most small churches the only training option is seminary. That very attitude reduces the

effectiveness of many churches in the training of potential leaders. This researcher

searched for small churches that had an active leadership development process in place.

From a potential pool of hundreds of churches, the researcher could find only four that fit

his criteria. Apparently, at least in New England, church-based leadership development

processes are few and far between. This is surprising since the pastors surveyed had a

high regard for the church and believed that the local church should be very involved in

201
Bickers, The Healthy Small Church, 20.
 137

developing leaders that will serve full-time. Church-based leadership development

processes are not only ineffective in New England but also virtually nonexistent.

To increase their effectiveness local churches must recapture the vision that Jesus

had for them. Local churches should be the place where leaders are developed. It seems

appropriate to revisit Stevens’ passion on this subject:

The best structure for equipping every Christian is already in place. It predates the
seminary and the weekend seminar and will outlast both. In the New Testament
no other nurturing and equipping is offered other than in the local church. In the
New Testament Church, as in the ministry of Jesus, people learned in the furnace
of life, in a relational, living, working and ministering context.202

Stevens’ quote is in agreement with the Scriptures, with much of the literature

and with many pastors. A question remains. How can this passion to return to church-

based leadership development be effectively carried out in our present cultural context?

Toward a New Model

This paper has attempted to solve the problem regarding the lack of leadership

development leading to full-time ministry in small evangelical New England churches. In

addressing this problem the research showed that very little church-based proactive

202
Stevens, Liberating the Laity, 46.
 138

leadership development is taking place in New England. Instead small churches have

relied on traditional seminaries to fill that role. It has also been shown that both

traditional seminary and local churches lack holistic programs to develop leaders in the

church. In many cases the seminary and local church have different motivations and goals

in their leadership development efforts. The present paradigm is not working. However,

some seminaries are moving forward to develop greater partnerships with local churches.

Some local churches have taken the task of developing leaders to heart and have

developed purely church-based processes. Both these trends are encouraging but more

must be done.

Clearly Define Purpose

Leadership development is directly linked to the mission of the church. Therefore

both churches and seminaries must clearly define their purpose as it relates to the Great

Commission. As the early disciples carried out the Great Commission, they did it

primarily through the multiplication of churches. The Great Commission fueled church

planting and church planting fueled leadership development. Modern churches and

seminaries have lost that connection to the Great Commission. Local churches, even
 139

small ones, must return to the primacy of developing leaders in-house. Leadership

development is not an add-on program. It is a necessity.

Likewise, seminaries must be clear in their purpose. If the seminary’s purpose is

to train scholars, they must do it well. If the seminary’s purpose is to train pastoral

leadership then it must partner with the local church in some fashion. If the seminary’s

purpose is not clearly defined then the default purpose of filling pulpits will take

precedence over completing the Great Commission.

Seminary as Apostle

Some seminaries will find it difficult to switch gears and admit their

shortcomings. Some seminaries are totally staffed by resident scholars to the exclusion of

those who have had recent pastoral experience in a local church. These types of

seminaries are well-suited to become the modern counterpart of the ancient itinerant

apostles. How this can be done on a practical level will have to be worked out. Various

methodologies, levels of accountability and denominational red tape will have to be dealt

with but there is no better place to find high-level biblical scholarship than in the nation’s

evangelical seminaries.
 140

This new apostleship could take a variety of forms. Like the ancient academy,

seminaries would be centers of information where vast libraries exist and in-depth study

could occur. Rather than teaching the same courses year after year, resident professors

could provide those courses in an online database and free up time for further

scholarship, thus increasing the level of knowledge available to local churches and

ministries. A paradigm shift of this scale can only be maintained by ongoing innovation

and patience.

Partnering in Assessment

The criteria for judging whether a person is a suitable candidate for leadership

development depends on the institution. In the case of the local church, the criteria are

most often a history of ministry in the church or some form of ordination. In the case of

seminaries the criteria is often the ability to pay tuition. For seminaries and local

churches to successfully partner in the leadership development endeavor, criteria for

admission must include some assessment of the call of God. If a potential leader is not

called of God then both the church and the seminary are not developing true spiritual

leadership but something entirely different, something secular. Once again the mechanics
 141

of how this would work on a practical level are complicated especially when it involves

various denominational affiliations. However, if the local church is serious about

developing true spiritual leaders it cannot abdicate the assessment to a few simple

enrollment forms. Christian leaders are called in the context of community.

Community Centered Learning

The research has continually shown the necessity of community in the

development of leaders. Potential leaders develop their skills, character and spiritual

giftedness within the context of a church community. The ministry of Jesus and the

emphasis of Paul’s teachings continually emphasize the importance of community in the

healthy growth of Christ followers. The process is not different when it comes to leaders.

The local church must become a safe place for potential leaders to experiment, take risks,

and potentially fail in order to grow. Artificial communities, whether they are the ivory

towers of a seminary or the false masks of a local church, do not promote healthy

leadership development nor the cause of the Gospel. Classroom and lecture hall

presentations have their place and are immensely important in a leader’s life but they do
 142

not replace the magnitude of influence that a vibrant community can bring into a leader’s

life.

Mentors or Team Leadership

A high value placed on modeling in the Scriptures. Believers are encouraged to

imitate the attitude of Jesus (Phil 2:5). Paul instructed the Corinthians to follow him as

he followed Christ (1 Cor.11:1). Followers of Jesus are constantly asked to embody the

Gospel by modeling its precepts. In the New England church surveys, mentoring was

highly valued but rarely carried out. This is partly due to the cultural self-reliance of

New Englanders but mainly due to the unwillingness of many to share life with another at

a deep level. Evangelicals often focus on the “personal relationship with Jesus” aspect of

Christianity. Jesus is a personal Savior but he saves people in order to be part of a family.

This corporate nature of salvation is often neglected to the detriment of an intimate

community. Additionally, the practical mechanisms to begin a mentoring program in the

church are elusive. This must be overcome. Mentoring, modeling and self-multiplication

are key components to a successful leadership development process.

 143

These mentoring relationships can also take various forms. Traditional one-on-

one mentoring is advantageous. Some churches find that leaders can be mentored in

concert with team leadership meetings. Whatever the format, in order for leaders to be

developed life experience must be shared and an emotional connection must be made

with others.

Provide Frequent Ministry Opportunities

Guilt is often the motivation to fill ministry positions in small churches. Churches

constantly plead for volunteers to fill the gaps in various church programs. The problems

grow when those volunteers fail due to a lack of passion or giftedness. The cycle repeats

itself as the pool of volunteers grows smaller and smaller. Eventually the church

environment becomes hostile to steps of faith rather than the safe place God designed it

to be. If local churches want to develop effective leadership at every level, they must

become safe places to experiment and take risks. Guilt derived from failures may be

relieved if the church culture is accustomed to experimentation in ministry. Failures can

be processed in a healthy manner in the context of understanding one’s self and one’s gift

mix. It is relatively easy to discover one’s spiritual gift. It is almost impossible to figure
 144

out where an individual’s gift mix fits into a church’s overall ministry without the

freedom to experiment, fail, and learn. According to research, if providing practical

ministry opportunities with the potential of failure is key in the development of

leadership, the church must not shy away.

This is especially difficult for small churches. Typically, churches staffed by a

single pastor find it easier to do ministry and tasks themselves than to give away

responsibility to others. The tendency is to maintain control and minimize damage.

Present leadership must be willing to take a step of faith and entrust the church to Jesus.

If seminaries do their job educationally, the local church must be prepared provide a

place to make theology practical.

Summary

These findings bring to light a holistic model of leadership development that can

be implemented in any church. The following chart illustrates the components of this

model:
 145

TABLE 5.1 Holistic Leadership Development

All of these components are necessary in order to provide a comprehensive

process of leadership development. These components are essential whether the

leadership development process is in partnership with a seminary or whether it is

completely church-based. The following chart illustrates a leadership development

process that is partnership based:

 146

TABLE 5.2 Leadership Development Partnership-Based Model

In this model, both the local church and seminary are equally responsible for the

assessment of a leader’s call and development of his/her character and competencies. In a

local church-based model, all responsibility rests on the local church. In either model the
 147

catalyst is the Great Commission and the result is kingdom impact. The following chart

illustrates the local church-based model.

TABLE 5.3 Leadership Development Local Church-Based Model

 148

CHAPTER SIX: EVALUATION

Project Weaknesses

A Larger Sample Size

A larger sampling of church interviews and a greater return of surveys would

have enhanced the project. The project criterion was narrow and the researcher assumed

that suitable case study subjects would be plentiful. This was so. Though a number of

churches were doing leadership development in a programmatic fashion, these churches

were not intentional or systematic in their leadership development processes. Usually the

programs were limited to Sunday school teacher training, or assisting with new programs.

The four churches chosen for this study were the only ones known to the researcher to

have a more comprehensive and strategic approach to developing leaders. The paucity of

suitable case study candidates could have been alleviated by either expanding the project

criteria or by choosing churches that were small but grew larger through their leadership

development efforts. The additional data gleaned from such churches may have provided

additional details regarding the effectiveness of leadership development after the fact.
 149

Furthermore, a greater return on the surveys could have possibly permitted some

statistical analysis. The small sample size, though helpful, hindered the project. This

result disappointed the researcher. Only one out of eight denominational district

representatives responded. The greater part of the 17 responses to the survey were

received from pastors in the researcher’s own networks.

Seminary Interviews

Interviews of key New England seminaries could have provided insight into the

seminary’s view on the leadership development problem. This project often considered

the local church’s analysis of the seminary’s role in leadership development. The project

did not consider the seminary’s analysis of the local church’s role. The results could have

been significant especially considering the preliminary suggestion that a deeper

partnership should exist between the seminary and the local church. Any attempt at

developing a mutual partnership would require each side to have an understanding of the

expectations and presuppositions held by both parties. Interviews of various seminaries

could have yielded some first steps in that direction.

 150

Follow-up Interviews

Some of the data was unclear or not significant enough to draw conclusions.

This may have been remedied by follow-up interviews of the original churches. One

interview catches a snapshot in time. This can be problematic. A subsequent interview

may have captured a process. During the interviews, programs were mentioned that the

researcher was unable to observe. More targeted field observations may have also helped

in gaining an understanding of the processes behind the leadership development systems.

Project Strengths

Dynamic Case Studies

Though the number of case studies was restrictive, the quality and dynamism of

those studies enabled the researcher to come to some preliminary conclusions. Even with

the shortage of data, those interviewed provided crucial information as to the potential

inherent in church-based leadership development.

 151

Suggestions for Improvement

The Role of the Pastor’s Influence

Nauta’s examination of the link between congregational identity and its pastor’s

influence203 has relevance in view of McKenna’s study of leadership development.204

Among McKenna’s taxonomy are “key lessons” representing “good role models” and

“bad role models.” The influence of good role models (10.5%) far outweighed the

influence of bad role models (2.0%) in the formation of leaders. In Clinton’s leadership

development theory, ministry affirmation and mentoring process items205 as well as the

concept of divine appointments function similar to McKenna’s key lessons.

In light of this, a further study of the importance of the pastor’s influence in the

development of potential leaders under his care is warranted. The possibility exists that if

the pastor is not passionate about the development of potential leaders, then no church-

based program has a chance of succeeding.

All of the pastors in this project were fully committed to leadership development

processes in their churches. Nauta, McKenna and Clinton’s research indicates that there

203
Nauta, People Make the Place.
204
McKenna, Leadership Development and Clergy.
205
Clinton, The Making of a Leader, 118-120.
 152

is a possibility those processes would not succeed without strong involvement and

commitment from the senior pastor.

 153

CHAPTER SEVEN: REFLECTION

Researcher’s Personal Insights

On Leadership

The primary reason the researcher decided to pursue a Doctor of Ministry degree

in the area of leadership was because he felt he lacked the necessary skills to adequately

develop leaders in his own congregation. The researcher experienced the yearly struggle

to fill ministry positions with adequate leadership within the confines of a small church’s

resources. Upon completion of this project many, though not all, of the researcher’s

questions were answered.

Within the evangelical tradition assumptions about leadership are plentiful. If you

are a pastor, you are a leader. While this is true, the researcher struggled with the fact that

his primary spiritual gifts (teaching and evangelism) and skill sets were not overly-

imbued with leadership expertise. If leadership is innate then maybe the researcher was

in the wrong place. If leadership is learned, at least in part, then there is hope that the

researcher could be used of God in his present ministry context.

 154

The researcher was also known for casting vision without the benefit of

pragmatic footing. These visions and plans were encouraged by some and lamented by

others. The researcher struggled with the role of leadership as it pertains to casting vision

and providing the pathway to move towards that vision. Casting vision was not

problematic but practical steps oftentimes were elusive.

During this project the researcher was greatly encouraged. This encouragement

came in a variety of manners. After reviewing the biblical record and existing literature

on the subject, the researcher found that many of his thoughts had been expressed by

others struggling with the same questions. The researcher began to see himself in the

larger story of God’s kingdom. It was not about whether the researcher was a leader but

whether he was a servant. Lawrence’s statement on leadership resonated with his soul:

“Leadership in the kingdom of God is not an end in itself. It exists to serve a greater

end—the mission of God. It is about service, not self-development.”206

During the interviews it was refreshing to hear other leaders in similar church

situations who struggle with similar issues. Many of them do not feel like leaders but

simply recognize that they are. Their focus was not on who they are but what were called

to do. The researcher discovered that trying to figure out if you have what it takes to be a

206
Lawrence, Growing Leaders, 232.
 155

leader could be a quest that leads to nowhere. A better response is to simply serve where

you are. Jesus spoke to the root of leadership when he said,

You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials
exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become
great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be
your slave—just as the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve, and to
give his life as a ransom for many (Matthew 20:25-28).

On the Church

Often small churches do not see themselves the way Jesus does. The perception

is that small churches are short on resources, influence and even spiritual power. The

researcher believes that in New England that perception is intensified. The view that

small churches can do very little because of the post-Christian culture that exists in New

England is almost set in stone. The need to maintain the status quo and not stretch the

church’s resources too far reveals a lack of deep trust in God. Though that may be the

feeling among some churches, the researcher has seen that that assessment of the small

New England Church is categorically false.

The researcher has seen that a little risk goes a long way in the local church. God

has blessed some of these small churches that have gone the extra mile to develop
 156

leaders. These churches have no more resources, influence or spiritual power than any

other church. What they do have is a passion to attain the vision. Churches must take

steps of great faith in order for God to act out of the ordinary. If churches do not take

risks to develop leaders, they may have good programs and a relatively successful

ministry but they may miss the miraculous that God intended to bring into their

community. This hope rests primarily upon existing leadership. If the leaders of New

England churches do not begin to take radical steps, in all areas of ministry, then the

researcher fears that the small church will continue it’s spiral into dormancy. The church

must break free of its tendency to isolate itself from other local ministries, in the name of

autonomy, so that these stories of God’s faithfulness and power can get out to the street

where they can contagiously infect others.

On Personal Bias and Growth

The researcher is highly opinionated. Having been in full-time Christian ministry

for over 25 years, stylistic preferences, life experiences, and personal wounds have

produced strong biases in certain areas. The researcher’s spiritual gifts are oftentimes

projected upon others causing him to wonder why other people do not do things in
 157

similar fashion. At the beginning of this project, the researcher was aware of the potential

biases that could enter into the project just as easily as they enter into his practice of

ministry. This project afforded one difference. The researcher would have to confront his

biases directly.

As a result of the researcher’s seminary experience, there was a strong bias

toward traditional seminary education. The researcher concedes that his seminary

education afforded him a strong theological background, skills in biblical interpretation, a

solid biblical language foundation, and other abilities related to an academic

understanding of the Scriptures. This experience allowed the researcher to do well in

ministries that were education-centered. However, when the researcher became the sole

pastor of a small church, he found that his training in practical church ministry was

mediocre. The researcher recognizes that often we look at what we do not possess in our

lives while ignoring that which we have gained. This is the case with this particular bias.

Through the course of this project, the positive aspects of traditional seminary

education countered some of the bias of the researcher providing him with a more

balanced view of the resources God has made available to the his kingdom.

Another variety of bias is where someone knows what is true but neglects to act

on that truth because in reality they believe something totally different in practice. This
 158

researcher believes that the local church is the center of God’s plan for bringing salvation

to the world. If the local church is the center of God’s plan, then every local church is

important no matter what size. However, in practice the researcher often believed that the

small church is limited in what it can do despite the infinite resources of God.

Interviewing three churches that attempted things far beyond their own resources has

challenged the researcher to do the same.

Further Questions to Be Considered

Regarding the Link Between Mission and Leadership Development

Questions are raised by the strong link between a church’s passion for mission

and leadership development. Are churches with a less developed sense of mission or

church planting passion less likely to have a leadership development process? Obviously

churches with a diminished view of the urgency of the Great Commission tend to be

ingrown and insular. Often, in the case of small churches, the inclination is to go into

survival mode. The assumption is that any leadership development process would focus

on survival or not exist at all. If that is the case, what are the mechanisms involved? How
 159

does this relate to the lifecycle of a church? Is the situation different depending on the

size of the church in question?

Vocational and Non-vocational View of Ministry

This project’s interviews revealed some confusion regarding the nature of

ministry. Is pastoral or church leadership a vocational or non-vocational venture? Is it

both? Where does the sense of call fit in if ministry is seen as a job? Does receiving a

check change how ministry is the perceived? Is there a marked difference in ministry

perceptions in bi-vocational pastors?

Perceptions of who we are and of our self-worth influence the nature of our

ministry. It is no secret that personal dysfunction can lead a pastor to ruin. Dysfunctional

thinking can also have a profound effect on a leader. How does a leader’s confusion

about the nature of his call affect the quality of his ministry? Obviously the scope of

questions related to this problem are plentiful. The answers would not only impact how

the pastor sees his ministry but would also affect congregational opinions on the role of

pastoral ministry.
 160

Process Focus and Programmatic Solutions

Biblically, discipleship is a lifelong process. Leadership development is part of

that process. The difficulty arises when local churches take what is by nature a process

and try to implement it as a program in a local church. Processes tend to degenerate into

programs. Unfortunately programs do not usually stand the test of time whereas

processes do. Is process thinking difficult for the modern church? If that is true, then why

is it difficult?

Part of the dilemma is the apparent inability to contextualize the Bible’s teachings

into western cultural paradigms. Evangelical churches are usually accused of doing the

opposite, that is, adapting the Bible’s teachings to western culture. Can we do better? Is

there a better way to retain a process-focused orientation of discipleship in our culture?

The Link Between Competencies, Character and Giftedness

Throughout this project competencies, character and giftedness were often

identified as being crucial to leadership but this project did not explore how these three

factors work together. For example, if a leader has an extensive ministry skill set but
 161

lacks a spiritual gift related to leadership, how is his ministry effectiveness affected?

Similar questions could be asked regarding issues of character. For instance, if a pastor

has a weak character or a strong personal dysfunction yet possesses a strong spiritual gift

mix, how does that affect his ministry? The interplay of these three factors may help

churches in selecting pastoral leadership beyond the criteria of a resume and the ability to

preach.
 162

APPENDIX A: INSTRUMENTS AND SURVEY RESULTS

 163

Interview Questions

1. Initial Questions

In your opinion, what makes an effective leader?

What is the local church’s role in leadership development?

What about in the development of those called to full time ministry?

2. Intermediate Questions

Tell me what prompted you to start this Leadership process/program?

What was it like when you first started the program/process?

How do you measure the process/program’s effectiveness?

Are there any specific events that happened that stand out in your mind as it relates to the

program/process?

What are the most important lessons you have learned during this time?

Do you plan to expand the process/program? If so, Why? How?

How does this process/program relate to the overall discipleship process in the church?

What role do you see seminaries playing in leadership development in the future?
 164

3. Ending Questions

After starting this program/process, what advice would you give someone wanting to do

the same?

Is there anything else you think I should understand?

Is there anything you would like to ask me?

Survey Questions

1. General Questions

How long have you been in full time church ministry?

What is the average Sunday attendance at your church?

2. Likert Style Questions

How effective do you think seminary education is in preparing leaders for small local

church ministry in New England?

How involved should the local church be in developing leaders that will serve in small

churches full time?

 165

How involved should seminaries be in developing leaders that will serve in small

churches full time?

How effective was your seminary training for the ministry position you are now in?

In your opinion how important are the following items in order to be an effective leader

in a small local church?

Impeccable Character and Personal Holiness

Ongoing Personal Spiritual Formation/Growth

Biblical Knowledge

Understanding Church Systems

Handling Conflict

Managing Change

Understanding Personal Dysfunction

Administrative Skills

Other

3. Short Answer Questions

What was lacking in your seminary training?

What should be the local church’s role in developing leaders for full-time service?
 166

Survey Responses

Question 1: How long have you been in full-time church ministry?

0-5 Years 1 6%

6-10 Years 2 12%

11-15 Years 3 18%
Over 15 Years 11 65%

Question 2: What is the average Sunday attendance at your church?

0-25 2 12%
26-50 2 12%
51-100 6 35%
101-150 7 41%
Over 150 0 0%

Question 3: How effective do you think seminary education is in preparing leaders for
small local church ministry in New England?

Very Effective Neutral Ineffective Very Responses Total

Effective Ineffective
1 9 4 3 0 17
6% 53% 24% 18% 0% 100%
 167

Question 4: How involved should the local church be in developing leaders that will
serve in small churches full-time?

Very Involved Neutral Uninvolved Very Responses Total

Involved Uninvolved
12 4 0 0 1 17
71% 24% 0% 0% 6% 100%

Question 5: How involved should seminaries be in developing leaders that will serve in
small churches full-time?

Very Involved Neutral Uninvolved Very Responses Total

Involved Uninvolved
9 6 1 1 0 17
53% 35% 6% 6% 0% 100%

Question 6: How effective what is your seminary training for the ministry position you
are now in?

Very Effective Neutral Ineffective Very Responses Total

Effective Ineffective
4 8 3 2 0 17
24% 47% 18% 12% 0% 100%
 168

Question 7: In your opinion, how important of the following items in order to be an

effective leader in a small local church?

Very Effective Neutral Ineffective Very

Effective Ineffective
Impeccable character 88% 12% 0% 0% 0%
and personal holiness
Ongoing personal 88% 12% 0% 0% 0%
spiritual
formation/growth
Biblical knowledge 71% 29% 0% 0% 0%
Understanding church 24% 59% 18% 0% 0%
systems
Handling conflict 71% 24% 6% 0% 0%
Managing change 65% 35% 0% 0% 0%
Understanding 59% 35% 6% 0% 0%
personal dysfunction
Administrative skills 35% 53% 12% 0% 0%
Faithfulness (living out 82% 12% 6% 0% 0%
as well as living by
faith)
A sense of a personal 88% 12% 0% 0% 0%
call
 169

Question 8: Of the following items, which would you consider the top three?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Impeccable 18% 12% 12% 29% 6% 0% 12 0% 6% 6%
character and %
personal
holiness
Ongoing 24% 24% 6% 18% 18% 0% 0% 6% 0% 6%
personal
spiritual
formation or
growth
Biblical 18% 18% 12% 6% 18% 12 6% 6% 0% 6%
knowledge % It’s
Understanding 0% 0% 18% 0% 6% 24 18 6% 24 6%
church systems % % %
Handling 6% 0% 6% 0% 18% 28 18 24 0% 0%
conflict % % %
Managing 0% 18% 12% 0% 6% 6% 29 18 12 0%
change % % %
Understanding 0% 6% 0% 6% 12% 12 6% 29 24 6%
personal % % %
dysfunction
Administrative 0% 6% 12% 0% 0% 12 0% 6% 24 41
skills % % %
Faithfulness 6% 6% 18% 24% 12% 0% 6% 6% 12 12
(living out as % %
well as living
by faith)
A sense of a 29% 12% 6% 18% 6% 6% 6% 0% 0% 18
personal call %
 170

Question 9: What ministry issues or situations did you not feel prepared for when you
began your ministry?

14 Total Responses
How to manage change in ministry.
Administration, Board leadership, systems management
Pretty much everything except for understanding and teaching Scripture.
Administration of a small church
The ruling family within the church
I was not prepared for the depth of personal problems that people would bring, nor
their resistance to plain biblical teachings.
I came to ministry believing and hoping that others in leadership had the same
values. As an associate pastor I was not prepared for the second-class status I was
given. Therefore I was not prepared for conflict.
Counseling, leadership/management issues
I was not prepared for the practical areas of ministry, like preparing a funeral
service, preparing a wedding, as well as the relational aspects of these
responsibilities, such as caring for a grieving family, how to handle premarital
counseling. That is why I believe that the local church is essential in training new
leaders and pastors, so that the biblical learning and theological instruction has
context and meaning for those in ministry and those they minister to. My
undergraduate training taught me “what” while my seminary training better
addressed “so what?” But I have had to go beyond these to find what I needed to be
better prepared and I am now able to competently need and humble dependence on
Christ. My academic training taught me how to do tasks… in the church context I
have learned to do relationship building with Christ and brothers and sisters in Christ.
When we that done [sic] well we will have something to share with those who need
to know Christ.
1) I had no training whatsoever in a matter of dealing with conflict in the church. 2) I
had no training for the changing styles of worship and ministry in the church in terms
of things like worship bands and the development of small group ministries etc.
All the administration stuff. Spiritual warfare
How to deal with ‘ compassion fatigue.’ Apathy and indifference of congregation
bureaucracy of church government. Bureaucracy of district government.
 171

There have been the interesting personal situations of those in the church that come
to bear on the pastor who counsels and guides. There is no way any seminary or other
program can prepare for those. However, a solid grounding a word [sic] and the
opportunity to be in ministry helped the pastor to work these things out. Seeking
God’s guidance through prayer is of utmost importance. To answer the question, it
has been the particular struggles of individuals in the church that I was not prepared
for when I began in ministry.
Congregational conflict, lack of a personal spiritual development plan.

Question 10: What should be the local church’s role in developing leaders for full-time
service?
15 Total Reponses
Ministry development should be as seamless as possible. Those who feel called and
who seem to have ministry aptitude should be given more and more responsibility
and resources. They can develop into part-time paid positions and then full time if
necessary. It need not be done through a distant seminary experience. If it is,
however, that can be later in the process, when the Minister can integrate their new
understandings with actual ministry experience.
Recruit, disciple, train, send to college, seminary
Need to develop a much more regular and effective whole-person mentoring system
for leaders at all levels. Pastor has to make developing leaders a personal priority.
Providing as best it can continuing education
Developing leaders should be high on the list of priorities. It is the one in the local
church who should let us know the ministry [sic]. To know something about the
ministry is one learning curve ahead. Yes, the local churches' role in developing
leaders for full-time service is of utmost importance. The local church should not shy
away from helping up and coming leaders go to seminary.
It should be a base of practical instruction and experience, and it should participate
in sending its people to higher-level training such as seminary.
I believe the local church can and should partner with schools to support, train and
evaluate candidates for ministry.
It is 100% responsibility of the local church to develop these leaders. It should be
church-based.
 172

Prayer, support, openness to education

The local church needs to re-emphasize discipleship in small groups (2-3 people).
Focus on leadership training that emphasizes relationships, not business concepts.
Learn servant leadership. Develop leaders who practice spiritual disciplines. Remind
leaders that it is not what they do for God, but what God has done for them in Christ
that should move them to serve others.
I believe it is very important to pray and ask God to raise up people in the small
church who can come on board in key areas of ministry. For a long time we
recognize the need for a second staff person, but there was no way that we could
afford it when you think of salary, housing and medical insurance. But we prayed
about it and got provided the perfect person. We had a man in a church [sic] had a
BA in Christian counseling when he first came to our church. Then over the years he
also went on to get his MA in Christian counseling as well. All the while he was
working for the state. This past year he completed his 20 years. He receives half of us
pay as retirement income, he has a home which he and his wife just paid off, and he
receives lifetime health benefits through the state as well. Right now he is working
part-time, but in 4 ½ years I’ve will be retiring. The deacons and I are looking at
these last 4 ½ years as a time of training for him to perhaps be the next head pastor of
our church.
Mentoring scholarships to help with college and seminary costs.
Salvation through the blood of Christ, discipleship in the word, identification of
God’s call, helping educational choices, providing supervised internships, ongoing
prayer support.
The church should be at the very center of developing leaders for full-time service.
The church should take the lead and make use of other programs, seminaries,
internships, mentoring, etc. to make it happen.
There are some things a pastor can’t learn except in the local congregation: handling
competing demands and priorities, conflict, and how to nurture the congregation in
its specific context. A thoughtful congregation could learn to see itself, and be aware
of its effect on a pastor.
 173

APPENDIX B: NVIVO REPORTS AND DATA

174
175
176
 177

Word Frequency Report: All Sources

Word Length Count Percentage (%)

ministry 8 112 0.65
leadership 10 70 0.41
churches 8 46 0.27
seminary 8 43 0.25
somebody 8 32 0.19
training 8 32 0.19
question 8 31 0.18
development 11 30 0.18
something 9 29 0.17
community 9 27 0.16
probably 8 26 0.15
effective 9 24 0.14
teaching 8 24 0.14
character 9 21 0.12
different 9 20 0.12
planting 8 19 0.11
seminaries 10 19 0.11
developing 10 18 0.11
competency 10 17 0.10
everything 10 17 0.10
experience 10 17 0.10
understanding 13 17 0.10
whatever 8 17 0.10
anything 8 16 0.09
discipleship 12 16 0.09
personal 8 16 0.09
strategic 9 16 0.09
together 8 16 0.09
inaudible 9 14 0.08
involved 8 14 0.08
 178

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alan J. Roxburgh, Fred Romanuk, and Leadership Network. The Missional Leader:
Equipping Your Church to Reach a Changing World. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
2006.

Anderson, Kristin M. “A Case Narrative of Bethel Seminary's InMinistry Program.”

Theological Education 42, no. 2 (2007): 67-78.

Anderson, Leith. Leadership That Works. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1999.

Anderson, Shawna, Jessica Martinez, Catherine Hoegeman, Gary Adler, and Mark
Chaves. “Dearly Departed: How Often Do Congregations Close?” Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion 47, no. 2 (2008): 321-328.

Arvey, Richard D., Bruce J. Avolio, Zhen Zhang, and Robert F. Krueger.
“Developmental and Genetic Determinants of Leadership Role Occupancy
Among Women.” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 3 (2007): 693-706.

Arvey, Richard D., Maria Rotundo, Wendy Johnson, Zhen Zhang, and Matt McGue.
“The Determinants of Leadership Role Occupancy: Genetic and Personality
Factors.” Leadership Quarterly 17, no. 1 (2006): 1-20.

Ball, Roger. “Returning Ministry Preparation to the Local Church.” D.Min diss., Western
Conservative Baptist Seminary, 1994.

Banks, Robert J. and Bernice M. Ledbetter. Reviewing Leadership: A Christian

Evaluation of Current Approaches. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2004.

Barker, Lance R. and B. Edmon Martin, eds. Multiple Paths to Ministry: New Models for
Theological Education. Cleveland, OH: The Pilgrim Press, 2004.
 179

The Barna Group. “Born Again Christians.” The Barna Group.

http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx ?Page=Topic&TopicID=8 (accessed
October 14, 2008).

———. “Survey Explores Who Qualifies As an Evangelical.” The Barna Group.

http://www.barna.org /FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrowPreview&Barna
UpdateID=263 (accessed February 22, 2009).

Barnes, M. Craig. “Parish-Based Education.” Christian Century 123, no. 4 (2006): 22-23.

Bass, Bernard M. and Ronald E. Riggio. Transformational Leadership, 2nd ed. Mahwah,
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 2006.

Beardsall, Sandra. “The Church/Theological School Relationship in Canada: A

Reflection on Historical and Recent Trends.” Theological Education 44, no. 1
(2008): 42-64.

Benefiel, Ron. “The Ecology of Evangelical Seminaries.” Theological Education 44, no.1
(2008): 21-27.

Bennis, Warren. “Managing the Dream: Leadership in the 21st Century.” The Antioch
Review 49, no. 1 (1991): 22-28.

———. “The Leadership Advantage.” Leader to Leader, 12 (Spring 1999): 18-23.

Bennis, Warren G. and Burt Nanus. Leaders: Strategies for Taking Charge. New York:
HarperCollins Publishers, 1997.

Bennis, Warren G. and Robert Townsend. Reinventing Leadership: Strategies to

Empower the Organization. New York: Morrow, 1995.

Bickers, Dennis W. The Healthy Small Church: Diagnosis and Treatment for the Big
Issues. Kansas City, Mo: Beacon Hill Press, 2005.

BILD International. “Ministry Philosophy.” BILD International. http://www.bild.org/

philosophy/Overview.htm (accessed September 15, 2008).
 180

———. “The Paradigm Papers.” BILD International. http://www.bild.org/

philosophy/ParadigmPapers.htm (accessed September 15, 2008).

Blackaby, Henry and Richard Blackaby. Spiritual Leadership: Moving People on to

God's Agenda. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2001.

Blanchard, Ken. Servant Leader. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2003.

Boyd, William. The History of Western Education. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1967.

Brown, Colin. “Scholasticism.” in Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity,

ed. Tim Dowley, 279. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdman’s Publishing Co., 1977.

Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of
the Old Testament. Oxford, England: Clarendon, 1907.

Burnett, Amy Nelson. Teaching the Reformation: Ministers and Their Message in Basel,
1529-1629. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Burns, James MacGregor. Leadership. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1978.

Burt, Steve. Activating Leadership in the Small Church: Clergy and Laity Working
Together 3rd ed. Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1988.

Callahan, Kennon L. Effective Church Leadership: Building on the Twelve Keys. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.

Campbell, R. Alastair. The Elders: Seniority within Earliest Christianity. Edinburg,

Scotland: T&T Clark, 1994.

Carlyle, Thomas. On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History. Lincoln, NE:
University of Nebraska Press, 1966.

Charmaz, Kathy. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative

Research. London, England: Sage Publications, 2006.

Christopherson, Richard W. “Calling and Career in Christian Ministry.” Review of

Religious Research 35, no. 3 (1994): 219.
 181

Clemmons, William P. “Spiritual Formation in Seminary Education.” Review &

Expositor 101, no. 1 (2004): 41-66.

Clinton, J. Robert. Leadership Emergence Theory: A Self-Study Manual for Analyzing the
Development of a Christian Leader. Altadena, CA: Barnabas Resources, 1989.

———. The Making of a Leader. Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1988.

Cook, Clyde, Timothy George, Walter C. Kaiser, R. Albert Mohler, Richard J. Mouw,
Craig Williford, and Randall L. Frame. “Fifty Years of Seminary Education:
Celebrating the Past, Assessing the Present, Envisioning the Future.” Christianity
Today 50, no. 10 (2006): S4-S18.

Coptic Orthodox Church Network. “Lectures in Patrology: The School of Alexandria,

Book One. Before Origen.” Coptic Orthodox Church Network.
http://www.copticchurch.net/topics /patrology/schoolofalex/index.html (accessed
October 9, 2009).

Danker, Frederick William. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other
Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Depree, Max. Leadership is an Art. New York: Doubleday Business, 2004.

Dietterich, Inagrace T. “Discerning and Participating in God's Mission: The Relationship

Between Seminaries and Congregations.” Theological Education 40 (2005): 93-
99.

Dobbins, Gaines S. “What is the Biblical Pattern of Church Training?” Church Training
5, no. 5 (1975): 48-50.

Doehring, Carrie. “Bridging the Gap: Connecting What You Learned in Seminary with
What You Find in the Congregation.” Journal of Pastoral Theology 13, no. 2
(2003): 93-97.

Dowson, Martin and Dennis M. McInerney. “For What Should Theological Colleges
Educate? A Systematic Investigation of Ministry Education Perceptions and
Priorities.” Review of Religious Research 46, no. 4 (2005): 403-421.
 182

Dudley, Carl S. Effective Small Churches in the Twenty-First Century. Revised.

Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2003.

———. Developing Your Small Church's Potential. Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press,
1988.

Eims, Leroy. Be the Leader You Were Meant to Be. Wheaton, IL: Cook Communications
Ministries, 1996.

Ford, Leighton. Transforming Leadership: Jesus' Way of Creating Vision, Shaping

Values & Empowering Change. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Furlong, Kathy. “Serving a Changing Student Population: The End of the "Typical"
Seminary Student. Christianity Today 50, no. 10 (2006): S26-S31.

Garland, D. E. “The Absence of an Ordained Ministry in the Churches of Paul.”

Perspectives in Religious Studies 29, (2002): 183-195.

Gibbs, Eddie. LeadershipNext: Changing Leaders in a Changing Culture. Downers

Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005.

———. ChurchNext: Quantum Changes in How We Do Ministry. Downers Grove, IL:

InterVarsity Press, 2000.

Glasscock, Ed. “The Biblical Concept of Elder.” Bibliotheca Sacra 144, no. 573 (1987):
66-78.

Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity, Volume 1: The Early Church to the Dawn of
the Reformation. New York: Harper and Row, 1984.

Gordon, T. David. ““Equipping” Ministry in Ephesians 4.” Journal of the Evangelical

Theological Society 37, no. 1 (1994): 69-78.

Hendrix, Olan. Three Dimensions of Leadership. St. Charles, IL: ChurchSmart

Resources, 2000.

Hinnant, Greg. “Growing in Kingdom Greatness.” Ministry Today, (January/February

2009): 42.
 183

Hirsch, Alan. The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church. Grand Rapids,
MI: Brazos Press, 2007.

Hoge, Dean R. and Jacqueline E. Wenger. Pastors in Transition: Why Clergy Leave
Local Church Ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 2005.

Horrell, David. “Leadership Patterns and the Development of Ideology in Early

Christianity.” Sociology of Religion 58, no. 4 (1997): 323-341.

Irving, Justin A. “Servant Leadership and the Effectiveness of Teams.” Ph.D. diss.,
Regent University, 2005.

Jackson, Jerran D. “Constructing a Leadership Development Model for Small, Rural

Congregations.” D.Min. diss., Bethel theological Seminary, 1999.

Johns, Loretta and Janice Watson. “Leadership Development of Women Preparing for
Ministry.” Journal of Research on Christian Education 15, (2006): 111-142.

Johnson, Bob I. “The Nature and Characteristics of the Small Membership Church.”
Review & Expositor 93, no.3 (1996): 369-376.

Kee, Howard Clark. “Changing Modes of Leadership in the New Testament Period.”
Social Compass 39, no. 2 (1992): 241-254.

Kinnaman, David and Gabe Lyons. Unchristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks
About Christianity and Why it Matters. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing
Group, 2008.

Kohl, Manfred W. “Radical Change is Required for the Leadership of the Church Today
'Let's Get Back to Basics'.” International Congregational Journal 6, no. 2 (2007):
113-118.

———. “Radical Transformation in Preparation for the Ministry.” International

Congregational Journal 6, no. 1 (2006): 39-51.

Kouzes, James M. and Barry Z. Posner. The Leadership Challenge, 4th ed. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007.
 184

———. Christian Reflections on the Leadership Challenge 1st ed. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 2004.

Larson, William C. “An Investigation of the Importance of an Effective Lay Leadership

Team for the Growth of Smaller Churches.” D.Min. diss., Bethel Theological
Seminary, 1981.

Lawrence, James. Growing Leaders: Cultivating Discipleship For Yourself and Others.
Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004.

Mappes, David A. “Moral Virtues Associated with Eldership.” Bibliotheca Sacra 160,
no. 638 (2003): 202-218.

———. “The “Elder” in the Old and New Testaments.” Bibliotheca Sacra 154 (1997):
80-92.

———. “The New Testament Elder, Overseer, and Pastor.” Bibliotheca Sacra 154
(1997): 162-174.

Marsden, George. The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment
to Established Nonbelief. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Maryland Association of CPAs. “What are the most trusted professions for 2008?”
Maryland Association of CPAs. http://www.cpasuccess.com/2008/11/who-are-
the-mos.html (accessed January 12, 2009).

Maxwell, John C. Developing the Leaders Around You: How to Help Others Reach Their
Full Potential 1st ed. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2005.

———. Leadership 101: What Every Leader Needs to Know. Nashville, TN: Thomas
Nelson, 2002.

———. The Winning Attitude: Your Pathway to Personal Success. Nashville, TN:
Thomas Nelson, 1996.

———. The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership: Follow Them and People Will Follow
You. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998.
 185

———. and Jim Dornan. Becoming a Person of Influence: How to Positively Impact the
Lives of Others. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2006.

McKenna, Robert B., Paul R. Yost, and Tanya N. Boyd. “Leadership Development and
Clergy: Understanding the Events and Lessons that Shape Pastoral Leaders.”
Journal of Psychology & Theology 35, no. 3 (2007): 179-189.

McNeal, Reggie. The Present Future: Six Tough Questions for the Church. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003.

———. Revolution in Leadership: Training Apostles for Tomorrow's Church. Nashville,

TN: Abingdon Press, 1998.

Meindl, James R. “The Romance of Leadership as Follower-Centric Theory: A Social

Construction Approach.” Leadership Quarterly 6 (1995): 331.

Miller, Glenn T. “Why the Seminary? A Historical Inquiry.” In Multiple Paths to

Ministry, ed. Lance R. Barker and B. Edmon Martin, 117-137. Ithaca, NY:
Pilgrim Press, 2004.

Mounce, William D. “Pastoral Epistles.” Word Biblical Commentary. Nashville: Nelson

Publishers, 2000.

Munson, Daniel. An Identification of Leadership Characteristics of Leaders in Vital and

Non-Vital Churches, D.Min. diss., Bethel Theological Seminary, 1995.

Nauta, Reinard. “People Make the Place: Religious Leadership and the Identity of the
Local Congregation.” Pastoral Psychology 56, no. 1 (2007): 45-52.

Nelson, Leroy M. “Effective Leadership: A Study Examining the Relationship Between

Pastoral Characteristics and Church Growth.” D.Min. diss., Bethel Theological
Seminary, 1997.

Nelson, Randy A. “Learning Congregational Leadership in Context: A Case Study in

Contextualizing Theological Education.” Theological Education 40 (2005): 75-
86.
 186

Nessan, Craig L. and David A. Roozen. “Rethinking Pastoral Formation at Wartburg

Theological Seminary: Using Graduates' Experiences in Parish Leadership.”
Theological Education 40 (2005): 1-24.

New England Research Project, “What Are the Unique Traits of New Englanders? A
Preliminary Study of New England Culture. ”Available from Vision New
England (1997).

Noll, Mark A., Nathan O. Hatch, George M. Marsden, David F. Wells, and John D.
Woodbridge, eds., Eerdmans Handbook to Christianity in America. Grand
Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1983.

Phelps, Vergil V. “The Pastor and Teacher in New England.” The Harvard Theological
Review 4, no. 3 (1911): 388-399.

Poe, Harry L. “The Revolution in Ministry Training,” Theological Education 33 (1996):

23-30.

Popper, Micha. “The Development of Charismatic Leaders.” Political Psychology 21, no.
4 (2000): 729-744.

Porter, Charles D. “Four Cornerstones of Leadership Development: A Practical Model

for Developing Leaders.” M.A. project, Bethel University, 2006.

Ramey, Robert H. Growing Church Leaders. Pittsburgh: Vital Faith Resources, 2001.

Riggio, Ronald E. “Leaders: Born or Made?” Psychology Today Online. http://www.

psychologytoday.com/node/3915 (accessed July 1, 2009).

Rolle, Keith E. “Mentoring: Jesus' Model for Developing Church Leaders.” D.Min. diss.,
Bethel Theological seminary, 2002.

Root, Michael. “Called to the Office of Ministry: The New Testament and Today.”
Currents in Theology and Mission 12, no. 3 (1985): 157-166.

Rowold, Jens. “Effects of Transactional and Transformational Leadership of Pastors.”

Pastoral Psychology 56 (2008): 403-411.
 187

Roxburgh, Alan J, and Leadership Network. The Missional Leader: Equipping Your
Church to Reach a Changing World. 1st ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 2006.

Savage, Jeffery Lynn. “A Design for Developing Spiritual Leaders Through the First
Baptist Church of Springfield, Oregon.” D.Min. diss., Fuller Theological
Seminary, 2001.

Shawchuck, Norman, L. What It Means to Be A Church Leader, A Biblical Point of View.

Indianapolis: Spiritual Growth Resources, 1984.

Shawchuck, Norman and Roger Heuser. Managing the Congregation: Building Effective
Systems to Serve People. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1996.

Shurden, Walter B. “Seven Things They Don't Teach You in Seminary.” Baptist History
and Heritage 41, no. 3 (2006): 6-7.

Spears, Larry C. “Practicing Servant-Leadership.” Leader to Leader 2004, no. 34 (2004):

7-11.

Stevens, R. Paul. Liberating the Laity. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1985.

Stevens, R. Paul and Phil Collins. The Equipping Pastor: A Systems Approach to
Congregational Leadership. Washington, DC: Alban Institute, 1993.

Sweet, Leonard I. Summoned to Lead. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2004.

The New York Times. “Luther’s Table Talk and the Forgeries.” The New York Times.
http://query.nytimes .com/mem/archivefree/pdf?_r=1&res=
9E07EFD71330E333A25754C2A9679D94669ED7CF (accessed October 9,
2009).

The Association of Religion Data Archives. “U.S. Congregational Membership Reports.”

The ARDA. http://www.thearda.com/mapsReports/ reports/advancedRCMSstate.
asp?p2000=&c=09&c=23&c=25&c=33&c=44&c=50 (accessed October 7, 2009).

Trail, Frank Christopher. “Spiritual Formation, Corporate Spirituality and the Leadership
Team: Seeking the Voice of God on the Deacon Board of a Baptist Church.”
D.Min. diss., Bethel Theological Seminary, 2005.
 188

Trammel, Madison. “Retooling Seminary: Northern Baptist's New Strategy: To Reach

More Students with Less.” Christianity Today 51, no. 9 (2007): 19-20.

Viola, Frank. Reimagining Church: Pursuing the Dream of Organic Christianity.

Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2008.

Viola, Frank and George Barna. Pagan Christianity. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House
Publishers, 2008.

Vision New England. “Vision New England Recent Convert Study - Vision New
England.” Vision New England. http://sites.silaspartners.com/partner/
Article_Display_Page/ 0,,PTID14438|CHID114781|CIID2314274,00.html
(accessed October 23, 2008).

Vooys, J. “No Clergy or Laity: All Christians are Ministers in the Body of Christ,
Ephesians 4:11-13.” Direction 20, no. 1 (1991): 87-95.

Walton, Steve. “Leadership and Lifestyle: Luke's Paul, Luke's Jesus and the Paul of 1
Thessalonians.” Tyndale Bulletin 48, no. 2 (1997): 377-380.

Weber, Timothy P. “The Seminaries and the Churches: Looking for New Relationships.”
Theological Education 44, no. 1 (2008): 65-91.

Webber, Malcolm. “Ministry Leadership Culture.” Ministry Today.

http://bluetoad.com/publication/index.php?i=9061&m=&l=&p=34 (accessed
December 3, 2008).

———. “Church-Integrated Leader Development.” Leadership Letters.

http://www.leadershipletters.com/2008/12/29/church-integrated-leader-
development/ (accessed February 22, 2009).

Westley, Frances and Henry Mintzberg. “Visionary Leadership and Strategic

Management.” Strategic Management Journal 10 (1989): 17-32.

Witmer, Timothy Z. “Seminary: A Place to Prepare Pastors?” Westminster Theological

Journal 69, no. 2 (2007): 229-246.
 189

Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, 2003.