Category: Ministry

Leadership

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Ministry

–October of 2007

Leadership

The rise and fall of societies and of institutions has depended almost exclusively upon the quality of its leadership. George Barna, who has spent years researching the Church in America, claims that the most serious weakness he has found within the Church in the last fifteen years is the lack of leadership.  Few would disagree that strong, bold, innovative, and godly leadership is in short supply.

During the Civil War General Robert E. Lee said, “I believe our Army would be invincible, if it could be properly organized and officered.  These men will go anywhere and do anything if properly led.  There is the difficulty of proper commanders.”  Lee knew that ultimate victory rested on the quality of leaders that led the troops.  He wanted men with: administrative skills and diligence, imagination, initiative, resourcefulness, and the ability to elicit the best in other men. Like Lee, people everywhere are looking for leaders.  So, what does one look for in a leader?

Don’t put too much stock in outward appearance.  Externally, leaders often appear very different.  Hitler and Gandhi or Mother Teresa and General George Patton would be excellent subjects for a study in contrast except for the one thing they had in common — they were all leaders.  God has used uncultured farmers, crude fishermen, and simple shepherds, as well as gifted scholars, astute politicians, and military tacticians to lead his causes.  While most of us look at the outward appearance, God looks at the core of the person’s character.  He looks for certain inner traits that will turn a lad into a leader.  As a matter of fact, research shows that internally, leaders have certain characteristics in common.  Let me list them for you:

Leaders have clear cut objectives.  Leaders know what they what to achieve, why they want to achieve it, and how they are going to achieve it.  They know that you will only achieve what you aim for so they keep focused on their goals and objectives.

  1. Leaders know themselves.  Leaders know their strengths and weaknesses.  They lead from their strengths and bring the right people around them to help where they know they have weaknesses.
  2. Leaders are persistent.  They have staying power.  They will sometimes give a lifetime of dedicated service just to seeing their objectives fulfilled.
  3. Leaders are learners.  They never stop learning and growing.  They have an insatiable appetite to expand their knowledge and learn how to lead more effectively.
  4. Leaders have the ability to attract and energize people.  Leadership is influence.  Leaders have the ability to influence others to accomplish a common goal.
  5. Leaders are risk takers.  They don’t fear failure.  They are willing to fail if they can learn something from it.  They aren’t afraid to take risk with resources, ideas, and change if they believe good can come from it.
  6. Leaders are followers. No true Christian leader is a law unto himself.  He asks others to follow him only as he follows Christ.  He lives in obedience to the Word and those to whom he is accountable.

Some who are reading this right now are looking for a leader to lead your church or organization.  Look for these core traits.  Don’t be too caught up in outward appearance or you may miss a David, Israel’s greatest King.  Don’t be deceived by a hesitant speaker, or you may miss a Moses, Israel’s greatest leader.  Don’t be turned off by a “thorn in the flesh” or you may miss a Paul, the church’s greatest missionary. But look inside.  Look for the right kind of heart.  That’s where you will find a true leader.

The Least of These My Brethren

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Ministry

–May of 2007

The Least of These My Brethren

If you have ever walked through the dark slums of Cairo or Calcutta, then you know the deep inner pain of beholding some of the most destitute people in the world.   Maybe you have visited a hospice in South Africa where AIDS babies lay dying, or an orphanage in Romania where “touch starved” babies appear almost inhuman.  If so, you know that inner ache that defies language.  For most Americans, the closest contact to anything remotely similar to this is passing a homeless person on the street or looking into the empty eyes of a nursing-home patient who has been abandoned by his family, or coming into contact with someone who is severely retarded.   The emotions you feel are only a small reflection of how our Heavenly Father must feel when He looks down upon those He calls the “least of these my brethren….”  He describes who they are in Matthew 25:34-40,

“Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, and fed thee? Or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? Or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”

God reserves a special place in His heart for the socially disenfranchised, the economically disadvantaged, and the physically disabled.  As a matter of fact, this group is so close to His heart that to serve them is to serve Him, a service that brings the reward of eternal life.  On the other hand, a failure to serve Him by serving them carries the sentence of eternal wrath.  This should not surprise us.   In the book of Deuteronomy we see a God that, “executes justice for the orphan and widow, and…loves the strangers, providing them food and clothing.”  God also institutionalized a system of compassionate justice for Jewish civil life through such things as the law of gleaning and the Year of Jubilee.  He became angry with Judah when she failed to “share your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into your house” (Isa.58:5-7).

Jesus made it very clear in Matthew 22:37-40 that love for God compels us into compassionate love for our neighbor, and then carefully defined who our neighbor was in the story of the Good Samaritan.   Social compassion is extremely high on God’s agenda.

Historically the holiness movement has had a very clear understanding that true holiness had a strong social dimension. Wesley said, “All holiness is social holiness”; that is, we cannot think that we are holy in our personal lives if that holiness does not motivate us to practice justice, mercy, and compassion.  In the holiness tradition, social compassion is where the central issue of holiness—love—meets the road.  The power to live a virtuous life doesn’t stop within ourselves, but extends outward into our relationships with others. We feed the hungry.  We help the helpless.  We reach out to the orphan, the widow, the weak and the shoved aside.  We look for those who are excluded or neglected because of their social status, or their race, or their background, or their age, or any number of other things, and do all we can to bring them into the social and spiritual network of the community and the Church.

Our civilization will be judged by how we have treated our most helpless citizens.  If we turn away from them, we will extinguish our own light.  If we fail to understand that loving and serving Jesus means loving and serving them, we will be destined to hear these words, “Depart from Me, you cursed, into everlasting fire…for inasmuch as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not unto me.”

I’ve Had It!

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Church, Ministry, Theology

–September of 2006

I’ve Had It!

I’ve had it! I’ve had it with articles and poll results in religious and secular magazines needling the Church by claiming that Christians today are watching X-rated movies, are addicted to pornography, commit immorality, and lie and steal at the same rate as non-Christians.  I’ve had it with these people who blame the Church for not accepting them with open arms and unconditional love so they can continue to practice their perverted lifestyles without any sense of shame, or worst yet, ordain them as ministers of the gospel.  I’ve had it with these preachers who seek to be so accepting that when they finish a sermon, they have made the Christian life so broad and inclusive that your average pagan feels right at home.   I’ve had it with all of this because this is not how the Bible portrays a Christian.  The New Testament teaches that the behavior listed above falls below the line of authentic Christian faith and is clearly sub-Christian.  Christians aren’t slaves to any sin nor do they entertain themselves with the very things the Bible condemns as sinful.  A person who has experienced a true Biblical conversion has implanted within him a desire to do right and be morally good.  If that is not the case, then any pretense of conversion is just that – a pretense.

I’ve had it!  I’ve had it with Christian leaders who are determined to make the unconverted so comfortable in church that they have turned Sunday-morning worship into an experience that is no different from a trip to a local entertainment club.  Sanctuaries look like theaters.  The attendees are encouraged to “dress casual,” bring their favorite beverage, and rock to the same rhythms you would expect to hear at a university frat party.  Sermons are preached from a lawn chair or a barstool.  Surprisingly, some of them are good.  What is not surprising is that few take them seriously.  Why should they, when everything around them is screaming “do as you please”?  Church bookstores, coffee shops, and restaurants do a thriving business before and after service as they violate the sanctity of the Lord’s Day.  Why have I had it?  Because the fundamental principles of Biblical worship are thrown out to create an atmosphere that satisfies the creature rather than glorifies the Creator.

I’ve had it!  I’ve had it with this new gospel and its false prophets who constantly reassure their flock that they can have “peace with God and a home in heaven” without making any fundamental changes to the way they live and the values they hold.  This “come in Savior and stay out Lord” brand of religion that ignores the claims of the Bible and remains plugged in to this present world is a false gospel.  At the very heart of what it means to be Christian is that the Christian is a unique and special kind of person.  He has experienced a radical change that separates him from those who are not Christian.  It is a difference that makes him like Christ and can only be explained in terms of his relationship to Christ.

I’ve had it!  I’ve had it with the fact that the only alternative that too many churches are offering to the above dilemma is just criticism.  Far too few are preaching a biblically balanced message and providing a real worship experience for serious saints and hungry sinners. Too few congregants have lives that are marked by the presence of God and noted for their radical abandonment to Him.

I’ve had it!  And that’s good!  For it is often in these times of such desperation that God is able to sow in our hearts the seeds for renewal and revival.  I long for His transforming power and life-giving presence to mark the lives of His children again.

Subtle Shifts

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Church, Ministry, Theology

–May of 2006

Subtle Shifts

In a recent revival meeting, a 50-year veteran of pastoral ministry asked me a question that is on the minds of a lot of older saints.  He said, “Are people really being converted anymore?”  This man is not just an elderly pastor asking questions with a nostalgic glance over his shoulder to the “good old days.”  He is a well-loved, highly respected man of God whose ministry has been marked by hundreds of souls finding Christ.  Frankly, his concern is valid.  Yet the answer to his question is not just a simple yes or no, it is a rather complex yes and no.

There is a tendency for American Christians to interpret what is happening in the Church through local or western eyes.  This bias has often skewed our view of what God is doing in His world particularly in the area of evangelism, revival and end-time events.  The spiritual dearth in the western church is not a reflection of what is happening in the rest of the Church.  Stories of radical, life-changing conversions are flowing out of the Orient, South America and Eastern Europe.  GBSC Missions Professor, Dan Glick, spent six weeks last summer doing a study of conversions in the Ukraine.  His report sounds like something taken right out of the pages of the book of Acts.  People are responding to the Gospel and experiencing true conversion in every part of the world.  I don’t mean to exclude America.  I witness every year many whose life has been radically changed by saving grace.  God’s kingdom is marching forward and all the armies of hell have not been able to withstand it.

However, there is some cause for concern as it relates to the American church.  I honestly believe that because of a number of subtle shifts in the presentation of today’s gospel message, there are many people who have undergone a religious transaction rather than experiencing a radical transformation.  The first of these shifts took place at the beginning of the 20th Century when the 19th Century emphasis on pursuing holiness shifted to a desire for uplifting ecstatic experiences.  The second shift took place following World War II as prosperity fueled the American economy and spilled over into the church.  There was a shift from a call to total surrender to a more general call to commitment.  (The difference is more than subtle.  Surrender tells God that I belong to Him and He can dispose of me any way He pleases.  In commitment there is no transfer of ownership.  One may or may not do what God has asked, depending on the level he wishes to be committed.)  The third shift came in the late 60s and early 70s when we started “deciding for Christ.”  Salvation was simplified to little more than signing a card.  These shifts had brought so many unconverted people into the church, that by 1980 a new battle began among religious leaders as to what it really meant to be a Christian.  At the heart of this war was the controversy over Lordship salvation.

As the 20th Century began to wind down, the church shifted again and became consumer oriented.  The gospel was stripped of its biblical vocabulary and was offered in the language of the culture.  The concepts of repentance, dying to self, and submission were abandoned and the gospel was cast in terms of benefits.  This ushered in a new round of self-help seminars and made the major selling point of the gospel what it could do for those who tried it.

Sadly, many churches have been left with what C.S. Lewis called a “truncated gospel.”  Simple assent to the gospel divorced from repentance, surrender, and a supernatural eagerness to obey is by biblical standards less than saving.  To illicit only a sense of this kind would be to secure only false conversions. And a false conversion, even by the most sincere, is still sincerely wrong.

The Future of the Local Church – Revival or Revolution?

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Church, Ministry

–April of 2006

The Future of the Local Church – Revival or Revolution?

For over half a century men and women all over America have been praying for revival.  But it looks like we are having a revolution instead.  At least that’s the findings of America’s religious pulse-taker, George Barna, Jr.  You can read all about it in his latest book, Revolution.  The upshot of Barna’s book is that a “quiet revolution” is taking place in America. These revolutionaries are a growing sub-nation of Christians, already over 20 million strong, who are set on doing whatever it takes to get closer to God and help others do the same.  They are committed to a radical, Biblical faith that is transforming and authentic.

The unique part of this revolution is that it is largely taking place outside the local church.  (The revolutionaries  are careful to differentiate between the church and the Church.) They  believe the local church has failed to fulfill its mission.  They see most local churches as irrelevant and ineffective in equipping believers to be Christlike and advancing God’s kingdom in a Biblical way.  They believe the church has become so hidebound by tradition and so focused on its own agenda that true worship, radical commitment, spiritual growth, servanthood and authentic community have become secondary issues. They strongly believe that “we are not called to go to church; we are called to be the Church.”

Many of the revolutionaries are still involved in a local church, but millions of them have left the church and developed a new model of church called alternative faith-based communities.  Barna predicts the alternative groups will continue to see significant growth while the traditional local church will shrink by over 40 percent in the next twenty years.

 Problems with the Revolution

I want to be very careful that I do not curse what God has blessed, but I do have concerns with what I see taking place.  Barna’s research indicates that the revolution is being embraced by the most serious-minded Christians.  Nevertheless, sincerity and zeal alone do not mean that a thing is right or problem free. My first concern grows out of the very nature of the Church itself. The Church is Christ’s Body, the members are inseparably linked one to another, and anytime small segments pull away there is the danger of cultivating a “Lone Ranger” mentality.  The intent may be right and the immediate results seem good, but in the long term there is the danger of becoming exclusive and even cultish.

I’m also concerned that these small groups lack the accountability and discipline that is provided by some form of church authority such as a board of elders.  One of Paul’s first concerns in each of the New Testament churches was to appoint a group of elders and deacons to provide leadership and structure.

The most serious concern I have comes from the fact that separation from a local church can disconnect this small body from a theological and historical framework for interpreting scripture.  Most of these revolutionaries grew up in a postmodern world and are strongly influenced by postmodern thinking.  Couple that fact with their separation from a system of theological thought or the historical continuity of the Church and it can simply lead to every man doing what is right in his own eyes. Heresy can blossom in such settings.

Can we learn from the Revolution?

Yes!  I believe there are a number of things the local church and church leaders can learn from this revolution. Let me share with you four things that I believe we need to learn.

 We should guard against being inflexible and too resistant to change.

Change is not bad.  Change is a natural, positive and irreplaceable part of normal, healthy growth. When change means a compromise of Biblical truth or core values, then change is bad and should be avoided.  But when change serves as the catalyst for positive spiritual growth, it is good, normative and should be welcomed.  The local church, far too often, stiff-arms change simply because the members are comfortable with what they are doing and had rather not be inconvenienced by change.

 We should guard against elevating what is traditional to the plane of what is Biblical.

In the average Christian church, almost everything we do is based on tradition.  The times and places we meet, the ministries we offer, the structure we follow and the music and instruments we use are all largely dictated by tradition.  Traditions are helpful and at times even important, but they must not be confused with God-given commands.  Traditions should never have the same authority as scripture.  Tradition can become such a mechanical part of who we are and what we do that over time the distinction between a tradition and Biblical truth can become blurred.  Worse yet, there may be a tendency to think that faithful obedience to our tradition is well pleasing to God, when in all reality, we may be doing things He neither commands nor cares about, while the things for which He sent His Son we regard as of little or no importance.

 We should guard against the church’s being member driven rather than mission driven.

The local church is not a club, society or an organization that exists for the pleasure of its members.  It is not a democracy where everybody has his or her say.  It is the body of Christ where believers are matured toward Christlikeness and equipped for ministry and where the lost are evangelized.  Far too many local churches exist only for the pleasure and edification of their membership and have totally forgotten and inadvertently abandoned the mission that God has given them to accomplish.  A church that doesn’t exist for redemptive activity has no reason to exist.

 We should guard against becoming denominationally focused

rather than community impacting.

The local church is not just another branch office to collect revenue and promote the company brand for some denomination.   The local church must focus on and be engaged with the community in which it lives.  History has proven that a focus on what the denomination is doing rather than what the local church is doing is a clear sign of death for both.

Barna may be right about the revolution, but I hope he is wrong about the local church. I am aware that God can get His work done with or without the local church, at least as we know it.  But if the local church experiences revival, it can yet be a powerful force for God.  So while the revolution unfolds, I will rejoice in whatever good it is doing and continue to pray for and work toward revival and renewal in the local church.