Triperspectival Leadership Essentials

The church is a Cause (normative), Corporation (situational), and Community (existential) in which Gospel Proclamation (prophet), Gospel Renewal (priest), and Gospel Mission (king) are exercised. We’ve been saying that all three of these are essential for the church to be who she is called to be.

So what leadership qualities are essential for a church to flow in the movement of God’s mission, to the praise of His glory, and the joy and renewal of the saints? I believe there are three things for elders and leaders to consider when looking to develop leaders. We’re going to look at competency, character, and compatibility.

1) Competency

It is essential that the leader has the appropriate competency for the task before them. Someone that is leading hospitality will probably not need to be an academic theologian to be suited for the task, however, there will be necessary skills required for them to do this work well. An introvert with little or no interpersonal skills, who is extremely shy, may not be best suited for this task.

As it relates to those who will teach/preach the Gospel it becomes clear that depending upon their particular role (from Missional Community leader to Elder) they will need to possess a greater degree of theological/normative Gospel truth than the average believer. A person who lacks the competency for the task will always feel like they are struggling because they do not yet possess the tools to do the job well. You can see how this works out in each role.

The questions to ask here are “does the person know what to do?” “Do we believe they can do the job?”

2) Character

It is essential that the character of the individual is not significantly less that their competency. A perfect balance is rarely achieved so grace is important as the person is shaped into the image of Christ in both knowledge and character.

Character is the living proof that the gospel has broken in and is working in their life. To place someone in a position of leadership without considering their character is not only harmful others it is also harmful for them. We may find someone has all the knowledge (normative) necessary for the task but with a suspect character. This will demonstrate to the church that it is perfectly reasonable to think one way and yet live another.

In order for character to be formed and shaped a person must be gospeled by others as well as by themselves. Without the dynamic of gospel renewal at work in their life, they will not be equipped or qualified to lead others in any deep gospel transformation.

The questions to ask here are “is the person living like the goal of the ministry?” or in other words, “do they exhibit what we are praying will be benefit for those involved in the ministry?” “Does their life match the need of the ministry?”

3) Compatibility

When Kaleo first planted 4 years ago we believed that each leader needed to possess the above two. We focused on finding individuals who had the competency and character for the role we were calling them to. This is far more beneficial than not concerning ourselves with competency and character, but we’ve found that the last of the three is as significant as the first two.

Compatibility assures that the person is right for the context in which they will be ministering. Compatibility seeks to place the person in a role in which they can exercise their leadership in such a way that they are not unnecessarily foreigners to the situation in which they’ll be working.

It is important to consider this quality since an individual may possess the necessary knowledge/skill and have a tremendous heart and love for Christ but not be appropriate for a particular context. For instance, we recently assessed someone who was looking to plant a church in the near-east (Greece). This person had the competency theologically, the heart in character, but was simply not a good fit for the context in which they would be moving. He didn’t speak the language, didn’t know the culture, and would be starting at such a disadvantage that we couldn’t in good conscience recommend him to plant a church there. This doesn’t mean he couldn’t some day but at that moment his compatibility would not have fit.

This can also play out in the context of the local church. For instance, if a person agrees to the doctrine of the church, has a heart in line with this doctrine, but finds that they disagree with the philsophy of ministry, the direction of ministry, the vision and values of that particular local church expression, they may not be called to that particular context.

We’ve had individuals come to Kaleo who wanted to eventually get into leadership and even become church planters and their life (existential) and knowledge (normative) were fine but they simply didn’t agree with how we were doing (situational) the work of the ministry. They wanted to change it to fit their comfort. In other words, they wanted our ministry to become compatible to them rather than they to it.

You can see how this creates an environment of friction as the person is not “sold” on how the ministry is exercising its mission to the world. A person who believes in church planting but doesn’t think the way we are doing it (multi-site, multi-congregational) will find themselves frustrated and in subtle ways fighting against church planting, the very thing they agree should be done. Or, a person might believe that all things should be shaped by the Gospel story yet fight against our desire to engage culture. In principle (normative) they agree, but in practice (situational) they disagree.

There are a number of things to disagree about in the ministry and I believe it is perfectly healthy to do so. What is not being advocated here is a yes-man/woman mentality. However, when it comes to the vision, values and mission of the ministry and the ways in which that local church has chosen to exercise her call, a person who does not believe in your philosophy of ministry will constantly need to be talked into what you’re doing in your specific context rather than moving forward together.

The questions to ask here are “is the person right for this context?” “Are they a fit for this specific and particular ministry rather than just ministry in general?”

Lastly, I believe we should seek unity and charity on these matters as much as possible. If the gospel is truly at work in a church there should be a sense of humility and grace. However, the gospel will also bring great courage and confidence that Christ has called this local church to love Him, the world, and each other the way He’s called them as the One Senior Pastor.

None of us have all three (competency, character, compatibility) in perfect and equal measure. We will be a little heavier on one more so than the others. This means that we need to go back to the gospel continuously to ensure that if it is a competency issue we are not being lazy and unwilling to learn and develop. If it is a character issue we are not being sinful and refusing to repent and believe we are flawed and in need of change. If it is compatibility issue we are not being unnecessarily stubborn or inflexible.

The gospel shows us that Christ was perfectly competent as our great prophet to teach us about God. He had perfect character as our priest that satisfied God’s demands for a perfect righteousness and sacrifice. He was perfectly compatible as our king to the situation in which He was called to usher in His Kingdom culture. We look to His success not our failures for our security and this should grow in us not only in our desires to change but give us the power to do so.