All Scripture quotations are taken from the New American Standard Bible 1995 Ed. (NASB95)

As we make plans for the rest of the year, and look forward to a new American presidential administration, this is a good time to evaluate who our leaders are. We all follow someone, so who are you following? Sadly, in western Christianity, there is a distortion and lack of biblically-founded, masculinely-exercised, and Christ-focused leadership among Christian fellowships. This is a dire problem for us, and it must be fixed, since countless Christian homes, children, schools, organizations, and assemblies are languishing under the bondage of corrupted leadership, or none at all.

American Bible-believing Christians in particular have great cause to be concerned about our church leaders, since we live in a society that collectively chose to appoint such a man as Donald Trump as the President. Further, this year promises to be one of increased social upheaval, political intrigue, and religious persecution. In calamitous and trying times such as ours, it’s imperative that we have wise, godly, and sacrificial men serving as our leaders, overseers, and shepherds.

One of the profound problems facing us as western believers is that there is a fundamental and systemic misunderstanding and misapplication of the Bible’s teachings about assembly leaders, which are usually called “elders” in Scripture. The horrible fact is that most men in pastoral positions are either unqualified to hold that office, or doing it in an unbiblical way.

In light of our need to examine the pastors/elders in our lives, and what role they fill in our assemblies, I want to critique several common forms of church pastorates based on Scripture, and explain how the biblical model contrasts with them. These will include:

  1. “The Pastor” leadership type
  2. Business executive leadership type
  3. Domineering leadership type
  4. Motivational leadership type
  5. Seeker-sensitive leadership type

As a preface to this evaluation, let me just give you a short summary of the biblical description of assembly leadership. I would define biblical elders like this:

“Biblical elders are experientially and spiritually mature men who are esteemed as such by their home congregation, gifted to teach Scriptural truths, and carefully accepted by long-standing elders as those who have publicly agreed to share the responsibility of overseeing, guiding, leading, and teaching said congregation as decided on by said elders.”

Given such a definition of assembly leaders, we can easily determine which aspects of the above common pastoral models are unbiblical, and which are biblical.

“The Pastor” Model

The first most prevalent form of pastoral leadership that is practiced by Bible-believing assemblies is the office of the Pastor. When I put it that way, the emphasis is on the Pastor. In many cases, when congregants of assemblies following this form refer to him, they literally call him “the Pastor” or simply “Pastor”, as if that’s his name. One of the most foolish things about this view of assembly leaders is that such assemblies are tacitly proclaiming these men as the shepherd of the rest of the assembly, and completely ignoring the fact that it’s Jesus who is the Shepherd of His people, wherever they are.

The way this form of leadership works is that there’s one man who, if not the only recognized overseer of the congregation, is the chief one. That is, such a man has most of the responsibility of directing, administrating over, preaching to, teaching, and counseling the congregation. The first biblical principle of leadership that this denies is the principle that every congregation ought to be led by multiple men with equal respect and authority. All throughout the New Testament, assembly leaders are mentioned in plural terms. For example, when Paul came to Miletus on his last journey to Jerusalem, he “called for the elders of the church” (Acts 20:17); he instructed Titus to “appoint elders in every city” (Tit. 1:5); and he addressed his Philippian letter to “the saints in Christ Jesus who in Philippi, including the overseers [called elders in Acts 20 and 1 Peter 5] and deacons” (Phil. 1:1). In every case in which church leaders are mentioned, the elders involved are always spoken of as being more than one. Furthermore, there’s no instance in the New Testament where any elder or overseer is described as having more esteem, authority, or status than any other elder.

What a single recognized “Pastor” amounts to in most cases is a man with too much authority, esteem, and responsibility. He in effect serves as a direct representative of Jesus for the congregation, and thereby promotes the idea that he has a special status in God’s kingdom (as clergy), as opposed to every member of the congregation (as laity). Further, such a setup often leads to idolizing him, putting too much confidence in his views and teachings, and putting too much responsibility on his shoulders. Many, many pastors in this position are unnecessarily weighed down by undue stress, guilt, and even pride. They’ve simply taken on more responsibility than the Lord ever intended assembly leaders to have.

So, if your assembly functions with such a setup, then I urge you to do what you can to promote the equipping and motivating of mature men in the congregation who are gifted to teach and lead. By giving such men more opportunity to do these things, both the congregation and “the Pastor” can eventually come to see that this collaborative model of leadership is more effective at meeting the needs of the whole body, and allows the official pastor to take care of things that he’s usually been neglecting since he started serving as the sole lead shepherd of the congregation. There likely will be resistance from him and some in the congregation, but they should be patiently encouraged to learn that more than one leader is the ideal structure for an assembly.

The Business Executive Leadership Type

This is much like the “Pastor” situation for many assemblies, but with the added defect of running the assembly as if it’s a business. In such situations, the lead pastor sees himself as comparable to the CEO of a business. This is especially the case in large or mega-churches. Instead of viewing the assembly as his spiritual family, an executive-type pastor will often see the church membership as a sort of spiritual organization, and neatly structure it with various components. This often includes different committees, different departments that are headed by the deacons or elders, and a carefully thought-out series of regular programs. At the head of such a system stands the head pastor, who functions as the main administrator, planner, organizer, and decision-maker.

This leadership plan neglects two integral facets of the body of Christ. First of all, it contradicts the truth that Christ’s body is a spiritual and organic family, rather than a formally structured and run organization. Hence, the local Christian fellowship shouldn’t be viewed as a network of exactly-defined organizations and programs. Instead, all the members of the community should be allowed to use their gifts as the Spirit leads them, and then the resulting programs and groups of the assembly should be allowed to function as the various parts of the body work together to accomplish common goals. The second principle that a business executive model ignores is that Scripture nowhere promotes the practice of a single man having most of the responsibility of decision-making for the entire Christian congregation. Rather, over and over again, especially in Acts, the picture is painted of a community that is overseen and led by several elders, who consult with each other on big decisions, but bring such plans before the assembly to attempt to persuade them of its excellence. It’s only after the congregation at large has been convinced that major courses of action are best, that elders are said to go ahead with decisions (see Acts 6, 13, and 15). In other words, the whole idea of making decisions for a congregation is based on collaborative persuasion, not authoritative policy-making by a single man.

The Domineering Leadership Type

The executive model of leadership leads us directly to the tendency of many pastors or elders to exert more authority over their congregation than the Scriptures allow. By this, I mean that a lead pastor may order around church members that he views as subordinate, and even use manipulation tactics to assert his will over the wills of the rest of the members. If either of the two previous setups are in operation, then this state of things is very likely to come about.

Think about it – if a single man is viewed as the most qualified member to understand the situation of the assembly, and think of big decisions and plans to make; and if he’s also the most respected man in the congregation with regards to his knowledge of biblical truth, and his ability to apply it; then many avenues of temptation to pride and self-will will assault him. And most men in such situations lack enough spiritual strength by themselves to resist the temptation to assert themselves as the most knowledgeable rulers of the assembly. In this case, it’s often true that power corrupts.

What this often looks like is a man who started by confessing to and acting as a humble servant of others increasingly becomes obsessed with the authority that he’s been delegated by the rest of the congregation. And since these men are usually esteemed as the greatest Bible students and teachers of the community, their teachings, beliefs, and attitudes are increasingly accepted as being on par with Scriptural truth itself. And such is the case with their opinions on matters of conscience, or on matters of planning and policy. The more the rest of the fellowship concedes to their control, the more everyone will be comfortable with it, and eventually such a man becomes an egotistical and arrogant despot who orders people around. This is what happened with such men as Mark Driscoll and James MacDonald. Be on guard against men who have a disproportionate amount of esteem and authority over the rest of the congregation, and promote a division of leadership, respect, and responsibility to prevent such disastrous outcomes.

The Motivational Leadership Type

The fourth main erroneous type of common leadership in the western world is what I’d call the “motivational” type. These leaders manifest themselves in men whose primary focus for leading their congregation is to deliver them at least one motivational-type speech per week, in the hopes that this will spur them on to living fruitful and godly lives. Whereas the previous leadership styles have had more to do with organizing and decision-making, this one emphasizes the ability of a man to give rousing, logical, and eloquent addresses or talks, to the neglect of the careful and plain teaching of the Bible.

One of the most well-respected evangelical pastors I’d put in this category is Chip Ingraham. While he usually makes ample use of Scripture in his teaching, the main purpose in his teaching isn’t to enable people to understand plain Scriptural passages in their contexts, but to motivate them to take specific actions to improve their lives. At best, his teaching style is unbalanced, since he focuses more on his ideas for getting people to do things, than on getting them to understand the most important truths. If you listen to enough of his lessons, you’ll realize that most of them are motivational speeches making heavy use of the Bible to support his points.

Another type of pastor that falls into this category are those who have often been termed “vision-casters.” These are pastors that obsess over the missions, goals, and programs of their churches so much, that they’re constantly using their addresses to push people to make specific efforts to fulfill their stated goals for the church.

Regardless of what specific flavor motivational leaders have, a lack of rich, deep, and careful Bible teaching that applies to specific areas of life, in favor of speeches like pep talks or how-to lessons is not what the New Testament writers intended when they gave the expectations for assembly leaders.

Seeker-Sensitive Leaders

The last kind of pastor I want to warn against is the kind that has been described as “seeker-sensitive”. There’s a movement associated with them called by the same name, and it’s a plague in American evangelical circles. The focus of such churches and leaders is to tailor most of what they do and say to entice unbelievers to engage in the church’s activities, and eventually become a member. As any biblically astute believer will understand, this confuses the New Testament’s priorities for local assemblies. The local community of God’s family is not to design their public persona, meeting place, or weekend activities for the primary purpose of attracting unbelievers. Instead, almost everywhere, the New Testament prioritizes the needs of believers. For example, Galatians 6:10 says, “. . . let us do good to all people, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith”. And whenever an assembly is instructed in what it should be doing during its weekly gathering, the instruction is always about how believers are to build each other up, and not unbelievers. Even where evangelism is mentioned explicitly, except in one place, the context is always speaking of believer’s individual lives, and not their interactions as weekly assemblies.

Thus, it’s a blatant denial or misunderstanding of clear Scriptural instruction to make a weekly gathering about attracting unbelievers, rather than about attracting and teaching believers. Any church leader that is gearing most of the assembly’s activities toward non-Christians is simply failing to fulfill his appointed leadership role. As Ephesians 4 states, the work of shepherd-teachers is to “equip the saints for the work of ministry, to the building up of the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:11-12, emphasis added).

Who are You Allowing to Shepherd You?

If you’re an American or a citizen of a republic, you have little choice in who serves as the primary leader of your nation (aside from voting). However, you do have a choice in who you allow to guide you spiritually and morally. So, along the lines of thinking about the leaders of churches, what other men or women have a spiritual influence over you? Whether you think you’re affected or not, all the people that you put any confidence in, or attentively learn from on a regular basis, shape the kind of person you’re becoming. Hence, you need to pay careful attention to who is leading you either through teaching or example, regardless of their leadership position.

So, I would urge you to take a spiritual and intellectual inventory of who teaches you the most. First of all, if you’re not allowing the Lord Jesus Himself to directly shepherd you through the holy Scriptures on a daily basis, then you’re already being led astray. Beyond that, consider who do you listen to through podcasts, video’s, and radio? Whose blogs or books do you read? And which more mature people do you regularly talk to, or work alongside? It’s crucial that you deliberately choose the best people to lead and teach you in the various ways in which you’re learning information and advice. You must always keep in mind that you are imitating who you learn from the most. So choose your shepherds and teachers wisely.

How are the Leaders of Your Church?

Finally, I want to again impress upon you the vital importance of keeping your church’s leaders accountable. Are they following the New Testament model, examples, and instructions for elders and pastors? Or are they following non-biblical novelties that should have no place in the lives of the overseers of the Lord’s flock? Are your leaders biblically qualified by meeting the standards outlined in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1? Are they humbly working together with every other leader of the assembly, and striving to serve every group among the congregation? Are they faithfully and diligently teaching God’s Word with love, passion, and urgency? Are they intimately involved in the lives of many of the non-leaders of the assembly? Are they keeping each other accountable?

Most importantly, are your leaders endeavoring to teach the assembly how to become more conformed into the character of Jesus, and more obedient to His teachings? And are the bulk of the assembly gradually growing in love, faithfulness, kindness, gentleness, patience, kindness, self-control, humility, and the like? The more Christlike love that is being exercised among a congregation, the more evidence there is that the leadership of the elders is following the instructions given by the apostles in the New Testament. This year, make encouraging, holding accountable, and following godly and growing leaders one of your top priorities.