Comments on: Is leadership passé? http://www.undertheiceberg.com/2006/02/27/is-leadership-passe/ Sam Metcalf's blog about a new generation of leaders for the global church. Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:13:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: Tim Jeffries http://www.undertheiceberg.com/2006/02/27/is-leadership-passe/#comment-25 Tim Jeffries Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:59:32 +0000 http://www.undertheiceberg.com/2006/02/27/is-leadership-passe/#comment-25 I'm with you on this Sam. I'm convinced that people are throwing the baby out with the bathwater when they seek to have a leaderless church. I can't understand it from a biblical or sociological perspective. I my context I have sought to remove the clergy/laity divide and focus on a flatter structure where everyone uses their gifts. I've done this by not being paid and going the tentmaking route. It's clear that I'm leading the group, but it's also clear that others have responsibility to use their gifts to build the body and reach out to others as well. I'm finding that not being paid gives me the right to call others to self sacrifice for the sake of God's Kingdom (whereas there was always the 'well you get paid for it' comeback previously). Of course this also frees up financial resources to be used on serving the poor and sharing the gospel. It's early days for us in this approach, but it appears to be working so far. I’m with you on this Sam. I’m convinced that people are throwing the baby out with the bathwater when they seek to have a leaderless church. I can’t understand it from a biblical or sociological perspective.

I my context I have sought to remove the clergy/laity divide and focus on a flatter structure where everyone uses their gifts. I’ve done this by not being paid and going the tentmaking route. It’s clear that I’m leading the group, but it’s also clear that others have responsibility to use their gifts to build the body and reach out to others as well. I’m finding that not being paid gives me the right to call others to self sacrifice for the sake of God’s Kingdom (whereas there was always the ‘well you get paid for it’ comeback previously). Of course this also frees up financial resources to be used on serving the poor and sharing the gospel. It’s early days for us in this approach, but it appears to be working so far.

]]> By: Andy Gray http://www.undertheiceberg.com/2006/02/27/is-leadership-passe/#comment-24 Andy Gray Mon, 27 Feb 2006 06:28:59 +0000 http://www.undertheiceberg.com/2006/02/27/is-leadership-passe/#comment-24 I think that "leaderless church" is a straw man that's easy to criticize, but the trend toward unpaid leadership is more compelling and important to consider. Of course, there is evidence in scripture that Jesus, Paul, etc. received SOME income, it's never presented as normative (and Paul says that he intentionally thought it best NOT to invoke this privelege). When considering the issue of paid roles in "living out" church/mission, I think we (paid missionaries, clergy, etc.) should be clear about our stake in the results. It's apparent that many of the people in the "emergant conversation" and other online discussions are paid clergy or seminary students (who want/need employment). In general (and I say this in all seriousness and trepidation), such a group has an inherent bias to pursue change -- to a degree. (For example, I was in the Fuller bookstore looking at books about the nature of church. I didn't see any books on the shelf that would call into question the pastor/church/seminary sembiosis.) I think that “leaderless church” is a straw man that’s easy to criticize, but the trend toward unpaid leadership is more compelling and important to consider. Of course, there is evidence in scripture that Jesus, Paul, etc. received SOME income, it’s never presented as normative (and Paul says that he intentionally thought it best NOT to invoke this privelege).

When considering the issue of paid roles in “living out” church/mission, I think we (paid missionaries, clergy, etc.) should be clear about our stake in the results. It’s apparent that many of the people in the “emergant conversation” and other online discussions are paid clergy or seminary students (who want/need employment). In general (and I say this in all seriousness and trepidation), such a group has an inherent bias to pursue change—to a degree. (For example, I was in the Fuller bookstore looking at books about the nature of church. I didn’t see any books on the shelf that would call into question the pastor/church/seminary sembiosis.)

]]>