Comments on: Is The Senior Pastor Really the CEO?

By: BC

BC — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:26:34 +0000

roo said, “… but I am questioning it’s ability to truly lead to a passionate church committed to radically following Jesus.”

I, too, recently (fall of last year) left a similar position as part of a CEO led church staff. And I, too, came up hard against the same paradox; i.e., can a large ‘corporate’ style church truly attain to its NT calling?

Having come from both a theology and management background, I quickly plumeted into cognitive disonance as I realized the MANY issues endemic to such ecclesial cultures: excessive reliance on by-laws instead of Scripture, the insistance on growth (in terms of both nickles and noses)and the use of ‘business’ ‘marketing’ techniques to promote such growth, contemporary music (and the whole scary trip down that dark path to heavy beats and kumbayatic meditation experiences ), bloated facilities, astronomical budgets and expenses, programs designed to satiate the insatiable ’self’ appetite, the onset of the ‘doctrine is divisive’ philosophy, and on and on.

I struggled and continue to do so. Can the modern church, ecumbered by the vast accoutraments of business logic, including the CEO pastor model, “truly lead to a passionate church committed to radically following Jesus”? Given time to more thoroughly digest the problem and examine it from within and without, I am weighing heavily to the negative.

In my studies on the matter, I am constantly reminded that God does not count nickles or noses but is concerned rather with a remnant. And now the question in my mind has become, “does He save that remnant or does He choose it?”

By: Pastor and CEO

Pastor and CEO — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:48:00 +0000

[...] http://www.backyardmissionary.com/2008/02/is-the-senior-pastor-really-the-ceo.html [...]

By: roo

roo — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:10:21 +0000

lol, I thought we were the Rebel Alliance. Anyway, perhaps I am doing others an injustice, but I know my salary contributed to the extreme slowness of my decision to finally be honest with myself and walk away, but maybe thats just me, so i shouldn’t tar others with my own brush.

By: otherendup

otherendup — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:10:21 +0000

welcome to the dark side roo

By: roo

roo — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 06:28:09 +0000

I think Barna’s findings illustrate the quote earlier from Al Gore, and whilst it is those big salary, big church guys who have the loudest voice we are faced with a situation that the ‘power brokers’ are shooting themselves in the foot if they truly open up and explore some of these ideas.

My personal struggle with the staff led model, regardless of titles, is that in my experience it turns pastors in shop assistants and parishoners into consumers of spiritual goods and services, and to be a stand out provider of said goods and services (quality child,youth,music ministry) requires a top notch CEO, who can provide returns on the investments of the share holders (tithers) or suffer the consequences.

After saying that, up until last month I was a part of that system, and i still attend a church that works that way, but I am questioning it’s ability to truly lead to a passionate church committed to radically following Jesus.

By: Mark E

Mark E — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:06:58 +0000

I imagine if you interviewed leaders of house churches, they might have something to say about the legitimacy of Mega churches…so what? we are all going to be able to find support for what we do….and distance ourselves from what we dont do…that does not prove anything.

My litmus test, are people coming to Christ?

By: Lance Mac

Lance Mac — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:17:19 +0000

Barna just released a survey on how the US conventional church embrace alternative forms of church as fully Biblical.

In the article, Barna claims, “Among the pastors least likely to support the legitimacy of house churches were pastors who earn more than $75,000 annually…”

Most, if not all, pastors who earn that kind of salary probably do see themselves as CEOs rather than shepherds or teachers. So I thought this survey finding was interesting given this topic thread.

By: Rob

Rob — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:36:53 +0000

To me the issue is whether the leader is seeking to help people to connect with Jesus who is the head of the church or if he or she is simply trying to manage a corporation or, worse still, to influence people with his or her great management skills. While every organisation needs some level of leadership the church should be about something more than protecting its own survival and certainly should not be about building the power base of the leader.

By: Lesley

Lesley — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 04:24:52 +0000

Well!! you’ve all lost me , maybe I need to find a blog thats a bit more for the average joe in the street. Its all abit over my head, sounds like politics.

By: mikeb

mikeb — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 01:00:29 +0000

hey andrew
i think i’ve learnt a lot about language from these discussions. I hadn’t perceived just how the term “CEO” would be understood. I didn’t have in mind the business edge of win-at-all-costs being transferred into the church. That certainly isn’t what I’d advocate.
I still think a carefully nuanced single-point-of-delegation can be a good thing for Christian leadership, as a sort of underneath skeletal thing. I don’t see it as necessarily undermining the concept of the “body.” But again, it’s about who is that single point, and how big their heart is to see others involved and released. If the person in that role operates in an empowering and releasing way toward those in their team, the model can work. If the person seeks to control and dominate, it won’t work, and people will feel frustrated.
I get a sense that some people have been frustrated along the way.