Ministry

When Ambition Masquerades as Calling

/ pastorlynnmalone / Leave a comment

Age is a humbling thing. It brings aches in new places, but it also brings old decisions into sharper focus. One uncomfortable truth I have come to see is this: Not every decision made for questionable reasons ends badly.

That may be one reason some of them are so difficult to recognize. Sometimes the opportunity works out. Sometimes the new position goes well. Sometimes everyone involved flourishes. The outcome becomes evidence we use to reassure ourselves that we made the right decision. But good outcomes do not always justify the reasons behind our decisions. Sometimes we succeed for the wrong reason.

You’re wondering about that questionable decision, aren’t you? One in particular has returned to my thoughts recently. It happened in 2011. At the time, I was serving as pastor of Benton United Methodist Church. A few years earlier, in 2008, I had taken a clergy renewal leave. When I returned that December, I stood before the congregation and made a commitment: I would stay as their pastor as long as they would have me.

And I meant it when I said it.

At least, I thought I did.

Then, in February 2011, the bishop called. He invited me to serve on the Cabinet as a district superintendent. It was an honor—a significant opportunity and the kind of invitation a pastor does not receive every day.

Vanessa and I talked about it. I said I would pray about it. Looking back, however, I’m not sure I really did. If I prayed at all, my prayer was probably more “Thank you” than “What do you want me to do?”

The truth is, I had already made up my mind.

The invitation felt like the next rung on the ecclesiastical ladder I had been climbing for a long time. It carried recognition, greater responsibility and the possibility of broader influence. I could easily describe it as an opportunity to serve the Church in a new way—and it was.

But it was also something I wanted.

There is nothing necessarily wrong with accepting a new responsibility or pursuing an opportunity. There is also nothing necessarily wrong with ambition. The danger comes when ambition becomes so entangled with our sense of calling that we can no longer tell them apart.

That is what happened to me.

I accepted the position without fully wrestling with the commitment I had made to the congregation. A promise that had sounded firm in 2008 suddenly became negotiable when a sufficiently attractive opportunity appeared in 2011.

Perhaps it was a promise I should never have made. In the United Methodist system, pastors do not ultimately control how long they remain in an appointment. But I had made it. The people had heard it. They had every reason to believe I meant it.

And then I set it aside. At the time, I had plenty of ways to justify my decision. It was a good opportunity. It was a larger role. It offered the possibility of broader impact. I could tell myself that the bishop had called, the Church needed me, and God had opened the door. All those things may have been true.

But they were not the whole truth. The rest of the truth was that my ambition spoke louder than my commitment.

I wish I could point to a particular moment when that realization struck me, but I can’t. It emerged gradually. As I have grown older and looked back across the years of my ministry, I have begun to see things I could not—or would not—see when I was living them.

Faithfulness has certainly been part of my story. I have loved the Church. I have wanted to serve Christ. I have tried to follow where I believed God was leading. But faithfulness was not the only thing driving me. Ambition was there too.

That is difficult for me to admit because ambition rarely announces itself honestly, especially in the Church. It does not usually say, “I want a more important position,” or “I want people to recognize me.” It learns to speak the language of calling, opportunity, influence and impact.

We tell ourselves we are expanding our ministry. We are accepting a new challenge. We will be able to influence more people. We may even interpret the opportunity itself as proof that God wants us to take it.

I did not have to choose between faithfulness and ambition because I had learned how to call my ambition faithfulness. Only with the passage of time have I become more capable of separating the two.

Leading a small congregation has been part of that process. Small-church ministry has brought a level of humility into my life that I did not know I needed. It has forced me to reconsider some of the assumptions I once carried about success, influence and significance.

There are fewer people in the room. There is little institutional prestige. Most of what happens will never be noticed beyond our congregation. There are no impressive statistics to report and few opportunities to convince myself that the size of my platform is evidence of the importance of my ministry. There are simply people to love, Scripture to teach, burdens to help carry, prayers to pray and a congregation to serve. And perhaps that is closer to faithfulness than much of what I once imagined.

Small-church ministry has not removed every trace of ambition from me. I am not sure anything short of complete sanctification could accomplish that. But it has exposed ambition in ways that success often concealed it. It has reminded me that a larger assignment is not necessarily a more important one, and that faithfulness cannot always be measured by the size of the room, the prominence of the title or the reach of the ministry.

Sometimes faithfulness looks like staying.

That is what makes the promise I made to the Benton congregation difficult to remember. I told them I would remain as long as they would have me. A little more than two years later, when an attractive opportunity appeared, that commitment became negotiable.

I never went back and acknowledged that to the congregation. There was no moment when I stood before them and admitted how much ambition had influenced my decision. I cannot go back and change what I did, but I can look back honestly and name what I now see.

Some things can be corrected. Other things can only be confessed.

I do believe God was at work in ways I could not see at the time. The Benton congregation has flourished, and so have Vanessa and I. God brought good from the years that followed, and I remain grateful for them.

But good outcomes do not make every motive good.

God’s ability to redeem a decision does not relieve me of the responsibility to examine why I made it. Grace does not require me to rewrite the past so that I was right all along. Grace gives me the freedom to admit that I was not fully honest about what was driving me—with the congregation, with God or perhaps even with myself.

That may be one of the most difficult forms of repentance. Failure forces us to examine ourselves. Success often allows us to avoid it.

Sometimes the hardest thing to face is not realizing that we failed.

It is realizing that we succeeded—and still need to repent.

Until next time, keep looking up…

If any of my reflections encouraged or challenged you, follow Not the Perfect Pastor on Facebook for more conversations about faith, ministry, and becoming faithful disciples of Jesus.

Who Leads the Church?

/ pastorlynnmalone / Leave a comment

Questions About Senior Pastors, Denominational Hierarchy, and Professional Ministry

In my last post, I shared eleven questions I have been asking myself about the contemporary church. Today, I want to dig deeper into three of them:

  1. Is the senior pastor a truly biblical role?
  2. Is denominational hierarchy a biblical concept?
  3. Is professionalized ministry the biblical model?

These questions belong together because they all concern leadership—who leads the church, how that leadership is structured, and what leaders are supposed to do.

Once again, I need to acknowledge my complicity. I have been a senior pastor. I have been a district superintendent. I have worked for a denomination. I have received my living from the gospel for most of my adult life. I have not merely participated in these systems. I have benefited from them.

That doesn’t necessarily make the systems wrong. It does mean that I am not casting aspersions. I am questioning structures in which I have spent more than thirty-five years of my life.

Is the Senior Pastor a Truly Biblical Role?

The New Testament certainly recognizes leaders in the church. It speaks of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers, elders, overseers, and deacons.

What I have trouble finding is anything that looks quite like the modern senior pastor.

In many churches, the senior pastor is the primary preacher, chief executive, vision-caster, staff supervisor, fundraiser, institutional manager, public face, and central spiritual authority. That is a lot to place on one person. I know. I have been that person (and I still am).

I have also helped create churches in which too much revolved around me. I was the primary preacher. I was expected to cast the vision. I was the one people called when they needed prayer, counsel, a hospital visit, a decision, or an answer.

Some of that came with the calling. Some of it came with the structure. Some of it probably came from my own need to feel important. That last one is difficult to admit.

The New Testament seems to picture leadership as more shared. Elders are generally spoken of in the plural. Spiritual gifts are distributed throughout the body. Every member has a function. No part can say to another, “I don’t need you.”

Does that mean having a senior pastor is inherently unbiblical? I’m not prepared to say that. But I am prepared to ask what happens when so much authority, visibility, and responsibility become concentrated in one person.

The pastor begins to carry expectations no human can fulfill. Preach well. Lead decisively. Counsel wisely. Visit faithfully. Manage effectively. Grow the church. Resolve conflict. Be available. Keep everyone happy. When the church grows, the pastor receives too much credit. When it declines, the pastor receives too much blame.

The congregation can also become dependent upon the pastor. The pastor prays. The pastor teaches. The pastor visits. The pastor evangelizes. The pastor hears from God and tells everyone else where the church is going. That may create an efficient institution, but does it create a healthy body?

Perhaps the problem is not that churches have senior pastors. Perhaps the problem is that the senior pastor has become the center of gravity around which the congregation revolves. Christ—not the pastor—is the head of the church.

Is Denominational Hierarchy a Biblical Concept?

This question gets even more personal because I have seen denominational connection at its best, and at its worst.

Denominations can provide accountability, theological identity, shared resources, clergy standards, mission partnerships, and opportunities that individual congregations could never provide on their own. I have benefited from all of those things.

And accountability matters to me. When I left one denomination I joined another for that very reason. I suppose that’s why this question causes so much cognitive dissonance for me.

The New Testament church was not simply a loose collection of congregations with no connection or responsibility to one another. Churches shared resources. Leaders traveled among them. The apostles provided instruction and correction. Acts 15 describes leaders gathering to address an issue affecting the wider church.

Connection is biblical. Accountability is biblical. Shared discernment is biblical. But is everything our denominational systems have become biblical?

Boards create agencies. Agencies create offices. Offices develop policies. Policies require administrators. Administrators require budgets. Before long, a structure created to support ministry requires enormous energy simply to support itself.

I understand why many of those structures developed. Heck, I helped administer some of them. They were usually created to solve real problems or accomplish something worthwhile. But every institution eventually develops an instinct for self-preservation.

When does connection become control? When does accountability become bureaucracy? When does theological oversight become institutional gatekeeping? When does preserving the denomination become more important than serving its congregations and advancing the mission?

Denominational structures are not necessarily wrong because we cannot find them outlined in the New Testament. Neither are they sacred simply because we inherited them. They are tools. Tools should be evaluated by whether they still serve their intended purpose.

The local church does not exist to maintain the denomination. The denomination exists to help the church follow Christ and participate in His mission. When that order becomes reversed, something has gone wrong.

The problem? Those on the inside don’t always see the issue. They see themselves as “helping” the church and “fulfilling” the mission. I know because I was one who saw it that way.

Is Professionalized Ministry the Biblical Model?

Let me be clear: Scripture provides for the financial support of those who devote themselves to preaching and teaching.

I am grateful for the churches that have supported my family and me through the years. Their generosity allowed me to devote time and attention to ministry that I could not have given otherwise.

The problem is not that we pay pastors. The problem is that ministry can gradually become something performed primarily by the people who are paid to do it.

We call pastors “ministers,” which can subtly imply that everyone else is something other than a minister. We hire staff to teach, visit, disciple, organize, lead worship, conduct outreach, and administer the church. Eventually, the pastor and staff perform the ministry while everyone else attends, gives, and occasionally volunteers.

Pastors become religious service providers. Church members become their customers. Members expect the professionals to provide good preaching, meaningful worship, pastoral care, children’s ministry, student ministry, and opportunities for the family. If one church does not provide what they want, they can usually find another one that does.

That arrangement may keep the institution operating, but is it the biblical vision of the body of Christ?

Paul wrote that Christ gave apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers “to equip God’s people to do his work and build up the church.” The leaders are not given to do all the ministry for God’s people. They are given to equip God’s people for ministry. There is a significant difference.

Perhaps the measure of a pastor’s ministry is not how much the pastor personally accomplishes. Perhaps it is how effectively the pastor helps people become more like Christ and participate in His mission.

A church can have excellent preaching, polished worship, strong programs, and a large staff while its members remain mostly passive. They can be well served without ever being equipped to serve.

Professional ministry should not relieve the saints of ministry. It should prepare the saints for ministry.

Giving Ministry Away

I am not calling for churches to eliminate senior pastors, dismantle denominations, or stop paying ministry leaders. I am asking whether our structures are accomplishing what they were intended to accomplish.

Does the pastor help people depend more deeply upon Christ, or does the congregation become increasingly dependent upon the pastor? Does the denomination strengthen local churches for mission, or do local churches increasingly exist to maintain the denomination? Does professional ministry equip God’s people to do the work of ministry, or does it quietly teach them to leave ministry to the professionals?

Perhaps faithful Christian leadership can be measured, at least in part, by how willingly it gives ministry away.

Jesus did not gather disciples merely to watch Him work. He taught them, formed them, corrected them, empowered them, and sent them. He gave them real responsibility and invited them to participate in His mission.

The church will always need leaders. But it needs leaders who understand that the goal is not to build ministry around themselves. The goal is to equip the whole body to become more like Christ for the sake of others.

Once again, it appears that my questions only lead to more questions—questions for which I really don’t have answers. I suppose that’s another reason I’m not the perfect pastor.

But that doesn’t keep me from trying…or asking more questions.

Until next time, keep looking up…

If any of my reflections encouraged or challenged you, follow Not the Perfect Pastor on Facebook for more conversations about faith, ministry, and becoming faithful disciples of Jesus.

Five Shifts Hurting the Church…

/ pastorlynnmalone / Leave a comment

I’ve been doing ministry as a calling for over 35 years now. That doesn’t make me an expert, but it does make me one who has seen a lot. One of the things I’ve seen a lot of is change…and not all of it for the better.

I try mostly to be positive in my blog posts. Unfortunately, that positivity doesn’t always come through because my cynical nature manages to bleed through. I write this post to share a little of the wisdom I’ve picked up over the 35 years of ministry. 

It was coming back into an “official” ministry role (after a brief time away) that I began to notice some subtle shifts in the Church. The shifts were happening before I left full time ministry, but I think I may have been blind to them, and I may have played a role in fostering some of those shifts (I probably did, truth be known). This blog post is my attempt to unpack those shifts, and to say that I believe they are hurting the church. 

So, let’s call this blog post Five Shifts that are Hurting the Church. I won’t belabor them, but I do mention them as a means of starting the conversation with church leaders (if there are any who read my blog) to call us all back to faithfulness in our leadership and our discipleship. Perhaps I offer them as a prophetic word, not sounding an alarm, but simply speaking as one who was deeply engaged, stepped away and returned to notice the shifts.

Brokenness or Sin

The first shift hurting the Church is the Church talks more about “brokenness” than it does about sin. I can’t honestly tell you how many times I’ve personally used the words “broken” and “brokenness” in my sermons when I could have (should have) used the word sin.

Yes, we’re all broken in some manner or another. But, we are also all sinners. When we focus on the brokenness of our humanity, we might too easily overlook the sinfulness of our humanity, and if we overlook the sinfulness of our humanity we might miss the Savior who gave Himself for us. And, if we miss the Savior we miss everything.

See, when something is broken, the most likelihood is that it didn’t break itself. Take a vase, for instance. Vases don’t just jump off shelves and break themselves. The brokenness is the result of something that happened to it. The vase carries no guilt.

In the same way, by constantly referring to ourselves as broken, we fail to acknowledge our own complicity in anything that is wrong with us. Our brokenness, more times than not, is the result of our own sinful choices. There are times when we are broken through no fault of our own. Still, we are guilty.

Here’s why it matters: If I’m simply broken, then I need a therapist or a doctor to mend the brokenness. That might be one reason the philosophy of Moral Therapeutic Deism (MTD) has gained a foothold in the Church. What is that? Basically, God becomes my therapist and the cross becomes a self-help tool.

God exists to help me fix my problems so that I can feel happy about my life and myself. Being a nice person is the only requirement of faith and being good gets one into heaven. The need for repentance is non-existent. We just need the self-help section from the local bookstore. It is a very self-centered religion, but it fits oh, so nicely in American culture.

This is more than a subtle shift in language. It is a total shift in our theology. We are sinners. Sinners need a Savior and the Gospel reminds us that Jesus died for our sins so that we might be reconciled to God through His blood. That’s not to say we don’t all need a little therapy from time to time (I’ve been to therapy myself), but the root problem underlying all the “brokenness” of humanity is sin. The Church must name it and call sinners to repentance so that we might discover the only cure for what really ails us. Let me say it again—sinners need a Savior!

Self-Improvement or Self-Denial

The second shift hurting the Church is we talk too much about self-improvement and not enough about self-denial. Jesus said, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me” (Mark 8:34). When we come to church seeking self-improvement, we still have self as the focus. Our gathering as the body of Christ puts Him at the center. We are there to worship Him.

We want to come to church to learn how to be a better spouse, or a better parent, or a better whatever. When Christ is at the center, we’ll be better. Basic discipleship begins with self-denial. Jesus doesn’t want a better version of ourselves. He wants a crucified version of ourselves. Self-improvement refines the self. Self-denial replaces the self. Improvement makes us better, but the cross—well, that makes us new.

Comfort or Conviction

The third shift hurting the Church is we’ve chosen comfort over conviction. We live in a culture where comfort is king. We want to be comfortable, and by comfortable, I mean comfortable in our beliefs. We want to come to church to have our beliefs and our behavior affirmed, not challenged. 

And, we in the church have, too often, been willing to oblige. We have, too often, embraced the philosophy that the only thing we can’t tolerate is intolerance. We don’t want to come across as “toxic” because if someone feels convicted, they might feel judged and go to another church down the street. Our problem might be that we don’t understand what conviction is. Conviction isn’t judgement. Conviction is invitation—an invitation to holiness.

Christianity without conviction cannot produce holy people, and a holy people is what we’re called to be. Holy literally means “set apart,” and we are to be set apart from the world. We are not called to reflect the world’s values, but rather the values that are embodied in Jesus Christ and recorded in the pages of the Bible. 

Comfort does not call us to holiness. Comfort keeps us chained to brokenness. Conviction breaks the chains. Sin kills us. Conviction calls us out of our sin. Conviction leads us to repentance. Conviction claims us for the holy life to which we’ve been called. Conviction clarifies the values and behaviors that set us apart from the world.

Atmosphere or Formation

The fourth shift hurting the Church is we chose atmosphere over formation. In our effort to be sensitive to those outside the Church, we made Christianity a commodity to be consumed rather than a lifestyle to be embraced. I’ve confessed my own complicity in this shift in other places.

In my own defense, we had the best of intentions. We used evangelism as the reason. It was an attempt to reach the un-churched so that they would feel “comfortable” hearing the Gospel. What we accomplished was to communicate a false understanding of the purpose of the Church. In this shift we created consumer Christians instead of forming faithful disciples. Atmosphere creates consumers. Worship shapes disciples.

Worship is at the heart of spiritual formation. When the focus is atmosphere, people experience church but are never formed by it. We gather to worship a Holy God as the center and focus. We gather, not to feel good, but to be in the presence of God. Sometimes we feel good because we have been in His presence, but we should leave with a sense of awe and wonder because we have been in His presence.

Worship that is faithful to scripture is God-centered and moves us away from ourselves and reminds us that God is God and we are not. It is meant to remind us of His omnipotence, His omniscience and His omnipresence. In worship, we bring an offering to God, not to receive something from Him. Worship is not entertainment. Worship is formation.

Belonging or Believing

The fifth shift hurting the Church is that we prioritized belonging over believing. We all want to “belong” somewhere. That is human nature. But, when the Church believes, unbelievers encounter Christ in their belonging. We can belong for twenty years and never believe. Belonging provides a comfortable entryway, but believing (transformation) is the goal.

Again, in our defense, we want to practice hospitality. Hospitality is a Christian virtue, and unbelievers should feel welcomed and loved in church. But, our intent is ultimately to love them into a relationship with Jesus Christ, not simply to want them to feel welcomed. 

We can belong to the Rotary Club and the Book Club. We join those clubs because we support their goals and want to participate in the projects that support those goals. We have a common aim in our belonging. Do we belong to those clubs before we understand their purpose? Sometimes, yes, but we soon embrace the goals of the club or we move on.

Why do we expect less in the church? The church is more than a group of warm and open people. It is the community of saints in the world. The believing church functions as a witness to the truth of Jesus Christ when its members are united in that truth. If we simply belong regardless of our belief, the witness of Christ and the church is weakened.

     The Church, as biblically defined, is a supernatural body of believers. Belonging can lead to belief, but when belonging becomes the priority, belief takes a backseat, and the Church ceases to fulfill its purpose in the world—which is to make disciples of Jesus Christ. Discipleship happens through spiritual formation, and Christians are formed through the Church. Belonging matters. Belief is essential.     

These five shifts have influenced the way the Church engaged in ministry over the last 35 years. I’ve written these shifts down as a guide to my own faithfulness in leading the body of Christ. They will also serve as a means of holding my congregation accountable to the purpose for which we’ve been called.

There is much for which we must repent. We, as the Church, must return to faithful discipleship that is rooted in our understanding of our purpose. I spent a lot of years in ministry desiring to be successful. My only desire now is to spend the rest of my years being faithful.

Until next time, keep looking up…

The Empty Pulpit…

/ pastorlynnmalone / Leave a comment

I had another conversation this week with a member whose church was going through conflict. The member spoke of conflict the congregation was having with the pastor and about conflict the congregation is having within itself on the future direction of the congregation.

The conflict centered around a looming vote by the congregation on remaining independent or aligning with a denomination. The member stated, “If we stay independent, we’ll lose 3/4 of the congregation and if we align with the denomination, we’ll lose 1/4 of the congregation and the pastor.”

Where the church member I had the conversation with came down in the conflict is immaterial. Either way, the congregation is headed toward a split and that’s rarely a good thing, especially in a small church.

First, it sounds like the decision is already made. I mean, if that member thinks 3/4 of the congregation will leave if it chooses to remain independent, the likelihood of a vote to remain independent is between slim and none (if everyone shows up to vote, anyway). That only means there will be another small church whose pulpit will be empty.

Of course, the congregation is counting on affiliating with a new denomination to help with the pastoral search. Yes, it will help, but methinks the congregation is not being very realistic. The denomination cannot send what it does not have.

An Empty Pipeline

The ministerial pipeline is not full enough to provide pastoral leadership to all the congregations that are searching. There are not enough people entering vocational ministry to fill the gaps.

Seminary attendance is declining. Yes, people are still attending seminary, but fewer and fewer are doing so to fill a pulpit. Seriously? Why would they? An entry level salary for a full-time clergy is between $35,000 – 45,000 a year. That’s at a good church! It doesn’t make financial sense for a person to invest $70,000 in a seminary education for that entry level salary.

I graduated from seminary with $28,000 in debt (from undergrad and grad school). It took us ten years to pay off that debt on what were basically entry level wages. School tuitions have skyrocketed since I was in seminary. If I were a young(er) person contemplating a ministry calling, I’d be hard pressed to consider seminary.

One interesting thing that is happening is that of those who are attending seminary, 40% of them are not doing so to fill the pulpit. They’re looking at other ways of serving in ministry through non-profits or other specialized ministries.

I heard the story of one seminary graduate who applied for an open youth pastor position at a church who was offered $42,000/year with no benefits. When she asked for more money so she could afford to pay her student loans and still manage living expenses, the board got offended. The candidate eventually took a position as a school counselor making $55,000/year with full benefits.

More money and she still gets to engage with youth on a daily basis. She also has most weekends off, and the school doesn’t expect her to work 60 hours a week.

I know of another congregation that wanted its pastor to lead Sunday worship, mid-week Bible study, teach a Sunday school class, visit the shut-ins and attend monthly business meetings (where they would have no vote), and all for the hefty sum of $18,000/year. By my estimation, that’s about 40 hours/week between preparation and presentation. That doesn’t calculate drive time if the pastor doesn’t actually live in the community he/she serves.

Yes, I’m saying congregations (generally) expect too much for what they’re willing to pay. And, don’t come at me with the “Ministry shouldn’t be about money” retort. You’re right. It shouldn’t be, and for most clergy it isn’t. But, it is about being able to feed a family and meet basic living expenses.

I know the examples I offered are only anecdotal but they do reflect the reality of vocational ministry in the contemporary church. Local congregations who pay living wages are far more likely to attract viable candidates for their empty pulpits. Unfortunately, most congregations can’t (or won’t) afford full-time clergy going forward.

Like the congregation in the conversation I had this week, either way their congregation is going to be diminished. They will lose members. That means less money. Good luck finding that pastor willing to move across the state (or the country) to pastor a small congregation that has suffered deep conflict. That’s a special calling indeed.

Signs of Hope

Lest you think I’m being overly grim, I do want to offer what I see as two opportunities on the horizon (obstacles are only opportunities, right?).

First, is the shift to bivocational ministry. Yes, it’s what I’m doing. Honestly, I’m finding much more fulfillment as a bivocational pastor than I ever did in full-time ministry. That’s not a knock on full-time ministry. If you’re called to full-time ministry, go for it! I’m just saying there is a freedom in ministry when one’s livelihood isn’t dependent on the congregation.

Bivocational ministry will open doors to congregations to fill their empty pulpits. Of course, it means those congregations will have to adjust their expectations of what pastoral leadership looks like. Congregations can’t expect full-time ministry on part-time pay. It’s selfish and immoral. There, I said it. Deal with it.

Bivocational ministry also means denominations will have to adjust its “qualifications” for ministry credentials, seeing bivocational pastors as equals to “Elders in full-connection” (to use my current denomination’s terminology–my former one, too). Denominations will be seeing more bivocational clergy and fewer full-time clergy if current trends continue. Denominations must level that playing field going forward.

Bivocational clergy are not any less called than vocational clergy. The only difference is the way in which we are living out God’s call. And, I’m not thoroughly convinced that bivocational ministry isn’t closer to the biblical model. I’m thinking about Paul here who supported his ministry by making tents and Peter who went back to fishing after the resurrection.

The future looks much brighter for congregations who are willing to embrace the opportunities bivocational ministry affords them.

Second, is the opportunity for congregations to raise up their own pastoral leadership. Now this…this…is biblical in the strictest sense. For small congregations, the reality is that their next pastoral leader is sitting in the pew right now. I’m reminded of what the Apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesian church:

11 So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. (Ephesians 4:11-13 NIV)

Also, read Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12 where Paul reminds the local churches of the gifts of the Spirit and Peter, who reminds the local congregation of the priesthood of all believers in 1 Peter 2, and Jesus, Himself in Revelation calls the church a kingdom of priests. We are all ministers of the Gospel meant to live out our spiritual gifts in the body of Christ in the local congregation.

Small congregations must embrace the blessing of the ones sitting in their own pews. The church model of the past with paid ministry staff lulled most congregations to sleep, and made them willing to “pay” the professional to do ministry. That model is no longer sustainable. Here’s your chance to fill your empty pulpit internally and thus fulfill the first century image for the local congregation.

I know I’ve chewed this same dirt in blogs before, but the conversations I keep having keep me coming back to these realities.

I’m absolutely convinced the future for the Church/church is bright and secure. It’s just that the future I see isn’t going to look very much like the recent past. I think that’s a good thing. I also believe the Holy Spirit is in it.

Until next time, keep looking up…

Reflection and Realignment, Part 2: The Advantages of Bi-vocational Ministry

/ pastorlynnmalone / Leave a comment

I shared in last week’s blog the challenges I’ve faced after a year in this new season of bi-vocational ministry. Lest you think the past year has been nothing but challenges, I will share some positive aspects I’ve experienced as a bi-vocational pastor.

There are some personal advantages I’ve noted, but also some advantages for the congregation (or at least I see them as advantages). As I started writing my list, I thought I might divide them into personal and congregational, but I discovered they really work in tandem, so I’ll just make one list.

Many years ago, while I was serving as a District Superintendent with the United Methodist Church, I wrote a blog praising the efforts of bi-vocational pastors (read it here). Having now served a year in that same capacity, little did I know just what a sacrifice those guys and girls were making. That’s not to pat myself on the back, but to acknowledge my own failure to give proper respect and gratitude to those who paved the way before me.

Freedom

The first advantage I’ve noted personally is freedom. What do I mean? I mean when I’m dealing with a difficult passage that challenges the congregation, I feel a particular freedom to be more direct in my preaching–to say the hard thing, the challenging thing, to question their assumptions–because my livelihood is not dependent on the paycheck I receive from the congregation.

I’m not saying that I’ve pulled my punches in the past, but I am confessing that I might not have always been as challenging in every aspect of preaching (or leadership) because of who I might offend. Knowing that my livelihood was dependent on the congregation was always in the back of my mind. Call me a coward, but I know I’m not the only pastor who may or may not have done likewise.

I can tell you, personally, I’ve experienced a greater freedom in my preaching as a bi-vocational pastor. I believe that to be an advantage for the congregation as well.

Perspective

I certainly view my role with a new perspective. I get to see more of what the laity see week-in and week-out. The laity get up and go to work every day and we (and by “we” I mean clergy) expect them to have a devotional life and volunteer at the church. I never knew how challenging that was, and I see that challenge as a positive outcome of bi-vocational ministry. As a pastor, laity and clergy are now on the same playing field.

You mean you want me to work 40 – 50 (or sometimes 60) hours a week, raise a family, keep a home, volunteer in the community AND lead a bible study, teach a Sunday school and serve on the church board in addition to attending worship every Sunday and reading the Bible for 30 minutes a day? Well, yes, as a matter of fact, I do. But, I’m doing it, too, so…

Mission Engagement

This one is a no-brainer. Going to a “real” job every day puts me smack dab in the middle of the mission field. It affords me a very unique opportunity to engage the mission field and evangelize every day. I see people in my secular job that I might likely never see if I were in full-time ministry.

Now, do I always take advantage of the opportunity? Well, that’s a conversation for another blog post, but the opportunity exists, nonetheless.

Avoids Isolation

Let me make another confession: When I was in full-time ministry, I tended to isolate myself from the secular world. It was actually fairly easy to do. Always in the office. Making hospital calls. Going to church meetings. Attending denominational functions. Traveling to Christian conferences. Hanging out with other clergy. There was no (or very little) contact with the “real” world. We clergy could easily develop our own “ivory tower” syndrome, just from a religious perspective instead of an academic one.

Secular employment gets me out of the religious bubble that clergy can sometimes live in, and that’s an advantage for both clergy and the congregation.

Financial Freedom

Okay, so I don’t know if “freedom” is the correct word for what I’m trying to communicate. I didn’t take the pastoral position because I needed the money. The Lord has blessed us in our business, so I’m not talking about that aspect of it, but I will say that a part-time salary for many bi-vocational clergy serves as a means to financial security.

I know many retired pastors who supplement their retirement income by serving a congregation. I also know some bi-vocational pastors who use their church income to increase their generosity.

For the congregation as well, a bi-vocational pastor allows them to have a pastor when they otherwise might not be able to afford it. Technically, one might argue that if a congregation can’t afford a pastor, are they legitimately a congregation, but I would argue that the early church couldn’t afford clergy either. There are many, many small congregations that are making a significant Kingdom impact. I pray Haughton Methodist is one of them. Having a bi-vocational pastor frees congregational resources to be directed toward evangelism and outreach.

Leadership

Being a bi-vocational pastor has forced me to rely on laity for getting things done in the congregation. This is an advantage for me and for the congregation. I have had to “let go” of some aspects of congregational leadership, and as a former full-time clergy, this has forced me to deal with my own control issues. Of course, I now have control issues as a small-business owner, so am I really dealing with it on a spiritual level? That notwithstanding, it has definitely been an advantage in ministry.

Likewise, the laity has, of necessity, had to embrace leadership responsibility in the life of the congregation that having a full-time pastor may not have allowed. A healthier and more biblical leadership structure is developing in the life of our congregation as a result. That can only be a positive thing.

Strategic Conversations

By my count, that’s twice as many advantages to the challenges I noted last week. I guess that means I’m doubly blessed by serving in a bi-vocational role. Seriously though, I honestly believe the advantages far outweigh the challenges of bi-vocational ministry. I also believe more clergy and more congregations should explore God’s call to see where He might be leading them. Might bi-vocational ministry become an intentional strategy to enhance ministry and build the Kingdom?

I’d love to hear your answer to that question. Hit me in the comments with your thoughts.

Until next time, keep looking up…

Preaching in the Storefront…

/ pastorlynnmalone / 2 Comments

Yup! I preach in a storefront every week. Who would have thought after over 30 years in ministry that I’d end up in a storefront church? Well, apparently the Lord thought it because here I am.

Haughton Methodist Church (the church I began pastoring late last year) meets in a rented storefront. Well, actually the building was originally a church that outgrew the facility. It was converted to an office building and was used as such for the last couple of decades.

I must say the rented storefront is much better than the rented hotel room the congregation used for the better part of nine months. I gotta give props to the faithful in the congregation who were committed enough to set up and tear down that hotel room week in and week out. That’s a lot of work and a lot of commitment.

Of course, Haughton Methodist Church was meeting in the hotel room (and now the rented storefront) due to its disaffiliation from the United Methodist Church. Well, not really disaffiliation. They missed that boat for reasons I won’t go into, but suffice it to say, they walked away from their property…just threw the Louisiana Annual Conference the keys…and began the journey as nomads. I applaud the congregation’s faith and faithfulness. It’s one reason I’m blessed to serve them as pastor.

Preaching in a storefront has really had me thinking and praying about a strategy for the congregation moving forward. That part of being a pastor hasn’t left me. In my contemplation, research and prayer, I’ve discovered there are a few advantages to meeting in a rented storefront. I thought I’d share a few of those with you today.

Financial Flexibility

The first (and perhaps major) benefit of renting a storefront for church meetings is the financial flexibility it provides. Establishing a permanent church building requires significant upfront capital for purchase or construction, not to mention ongoing maintenance, utilities, and other operational costs.

I did a little investigating and discovered the congregation’s old facility is listed for sale by the Annual Conference for $445,000.00 (you can check it out here). That’s a lot of money to a small congregation like ours! If someone wanted to purchase it and gift it back to the congregation, now that’s a conversation we’d be open to!

For a small or growing church, this financial burden can be overwhelming and will divert resources from ministry programs, outreach, or other crucial areas. Renting a storefront, on the other hand, often provides a more affordable alternative. The monthly rental cost is predictable and easier to manage, allowing us to allocate our resources to other vital areas such as outreach efforts or mission work.

Additionally, renting avoids the long-term financial commitment and debt associated with owning property, offering us the flexibility to adjust as our needs evolve. Hey? We’ve got a one-year lease. That gives us time to discern God’s next steps for the congregation.

Visibility and Accessibility

Another benefit that a storefront location can offer is significantly more visibility and accessibility than a traditional church building, particularly if the church is situated in a busy commercial area like ours. There’s not a lot of foot traffic where we’re located, but we get great exposure to passing drivers, and our proximity to local businesses makes our storefront church a visible part of the community.

We’re located right next door to an oil change shop, which I find incredibly ironic, but that’s for another blog.

I’m praying this increased visibility can attract new visitors who might not have otherwise considered attending church, whether due to curiosity or the convenience of being located near their place of work, shopping, or living.

Community Engagement

A third advantage (should we choose to capitalize on it) to renting a storefront can be an intentional decision to engage with the surrounding community. Unlike churches housed in large, traditional buildings that may be tucked away in suburban areas, a storefront church is situated in the heart of the local community.

This proximity offers numerous opportunities for interaction with people who may not otherwise step foot inside a traditional church building. Church members can become familiar faces in the neighborhood, and the church itself can become known for its commitment to the well-being of the community.

I’ve already made several visits to the neighboring oil change facility to carry left over treats from our fellowship time. I hope to build an on-going relationship with those guys.

Additionally, I can see our storefront offering opportunities to host events, activities, and programs that reach a wide array of people. Whether it’s offering after-school programs, hosting community events, or providing social services like food banks or job training, a storefront church can effectively serve as a community hub.

Because of its location in a commercial area, a storefront church is more likely to attract people who are not actively seeking a church but may be drawn to the church’s services or outreach activities. This creates a sense of accessibility and relevance, positioning the church as an integral part of the community rather than as a separate entity.

Adaptability

Renting a storefront gives our congregations the ability to remain adaptable and flexible in our growth and development. As we grow, our needs will change, and our storefront offers us the flexibility to move to a larger or different location when necessary.

Unlike a permanent building, a storefront will allow us to scale up or down based on attendance, financial health, and ministry priorities. This adaptability is especially beneficial for us in what I’m calling “our formative years.” It will allow us to respond quickly to changing circumstances without being tied to a long-term commitment.

Furthermore, our storefront landlord has given us some flexibility in changing our layout as growth and needs dictate. Our storefront can be customized to suit the needs of the congregation and community. Unlike traditional church buildings, which often have fixed architectural features such as pews, stained glass windows, or large sanctuaries, storefront spaces are usually more neutral and open.

This gives us the freedom to design our space according to our unique vision and style. Whether it’s creating an inviting, contemporary worship space or setting up an area for fellowship and community gatherings, a storefront can be easily adapted to accommodate various church activities.

A Final Thought

As I’ve had time to pray and reflect on our situation at Haughton Methodist Church, I’ve discerned that being in a storefront is both practical and strategic. It’s a choice that can support our long-term growth and success (even more than getting our old property back).

Ultimately, the success of our congregation will not be defined by the building we meet in, but by the relationships we foster, the ministries we engage in, and the impact we have on our community.

So, if you’re in Bossier Parish, Caddo Parish or Webster Parish, and you’ve never considered the possibility of worshipping in a storefront, why don’t you join us at Haughton Methodist Church. We’d love to have you on this incredible journey!

Until next time, keep looking up…

To Eat and Live Indoors…

/ pastorlynnmalone / Leave a comment

I didn’t get paid. And, really…I’m okay with that fact. There have been a couple of instances recently when I was invited to minister in settings and I was offered no remuneration. Can you believe that? Yeah! Me either! Geesh! What are people thinking?

No Complaints

Please, if any of you are reading this and I’ve been in ministry with you recently, don’t wrack your brain wondering if you “paid” me for the ministry. It’s 100% okay. I’m not complaining. I’m not in ministry for the money…though I do like to eat and live indoors.

Why am I 100% okay with not getting paid for ministry? Because I’ve learned the freedom that comes from not being dependent on the “church” for a living. Oh! There is freedom in that independence.

It’s been five years since I stepped away from vocational ministry. We stepped away from ministry totally trusting the Lord to provide for our needs (and He has). Yes, I had a job lined up, but even that job meant we had to adjust our lifestyle if we were going to make it, and I figured I would pick up some extra dough on the side by “filling the pulpit” to cover some gaps in the budget.

For twenty-eight years the “church” provided a good living (a very good living the last few years, I might add). I’ll be honest. It was hard to walk away from that security. Great salary. Great benefits. Great retirement plan (both in this world and the next!). What’s not to like? And, hey? Didn’t Jesus say that a “worker is worthy of his wage” (Matthew 10:10)?

I’m not indicting the model of vocational ministry that developed through the centuries. It serves its purpose to the Church (the institution) and to the church (the local congregation). Nor, am I indicting those who continue to serve full-time in vocational ministry. That’s your calling. You have to walk in that calling to be obedient. Good for you!

Paul’s Ministry

I am, however, going to espouse the freedom and the virtue of bi-vocational ministry. When someone hears the word bi-vocational, it is generally taken to mean a person who serves a congregation but also maintains secular employment–generally because the congregation can’t afford a full-time pastor.

What I mean when I say bi-vocational is a person who maintains secular employment as a means to support his/her ministry. I believe that’s what the Apostle Paul meant when he wrote:

4 On the contrary, we speak as those approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel. We are not trying to please people but God, who tests our hearts. 5 You know we never used flattery, nor did we put on a mask to cover up greed—God is our witness. 6 We were not looking for praise from people, not from you or anyone else, even though as apostles of Christ we could have asserted our authority. 7 Instead, we were like young children among you. Just as a nursing mother cares for her children, 8 so we cared for you. Because we loved you so much, we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well. 9 Surely you remember, brothers and sisters, our toil and hardship; we worked night and day in order not to be a burden to anyone while we preached the gospel of God to you (1 Thessalonians 2:4-9 NIV).

The Apostle Paul was a tent-maker and he plied his trade wherever he went in order to support the ministry to which he was called. Yes, he could have asserted his right to be compensated by those to whom he ministered, but he chose otherwise. He was a traveling evangelist, but he wasn’t expecting a love offering wherever he went.

Advantages of Bi-Vocational Ministry

As I reflect on Paul’s life and my own experience over the past five years, I want to point out three advantages of bi-vocational ministry.

Don’t Compromise the Gospel

First, there is the freedom of not compromising the message of the Gospel. Paul says that he is “not trying to please people, but God, who tests our hearts.” I’m not saying that pastors in full-time ministry compromise the Gospel. Please don’t hear that. I’m saying in bi-vocational ministry, the temptation to compromise the Gospel is not present because one is not dependent on the congregation to eat and live indoors.

Let me offer an example, if I may. When I served as a District Superintendent, it was a common task to meet with congregational leadership to discuss pastoral leadership. More than once (a lot more than once) I heard church leadership say, “the pastor works for us.”

Too many congregations see the pastor as an employee. As an employee, he/she is supposed to do what the leadership says. As an employee, the pastor is dependent on the congregation for a livelihood. As an employee, the pastor can be fired. With that in mind, there is the temptation to “give the people what they want” so that I can maintain the security of my position.

I’m sorry, but no! The pastor is not an employee. Congregations need to hear that. Pastor, you are called to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the Truth of God’s Word. That means we have to tell people what they don’t want to hear sometimes. We need the freedom to do so to be faithful to the call. Bi-vocational ministry provides the means to that end.

Role-Model

Second, bi-vocational ministry provides the opportunity for the minister to be a role-model for others on a daily basis. I love how Paul says that he did not “put on a mask to cover up…” It becomes really easy for a pastor to put on the pastor mask every day to go out into the secular world. It’s like putting on a clergy collar for the world to see (nothing wrong with a clergy collar), but It can too easily become a role we play instead a definition of who we are. Believe me, this one hits very close to home!

Being in the marketplace in secular employment every day challenges the believer (and especially the pastor) to model the faith in ever more faithful ways. You can’t hide behind the clergy collar when you’re around 8 co-workers who know your short-comings and see them five or six days a week. As Paul told the Thessalonians, “we were delighted with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well.”

Evangelism in Truest Sense

Third, bi-vocational ministry puts the minister in the secular world where secular people live. If we want to reach the world with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, we have to be where the people are. That is evangelism in its truest sense.

As a full-time vocational pastor, I spent more time with church people than I did with secular people. Between worship services, staff meetings, board meetings and bible studies, it left little time for engaging with un-churched and de-churched people. There was no time to share the Gospel with the lost (unless one considers folks in the church lost) because most of one’s time is already spoken for (you’re an employee, remember?).

Additionally, because a bi-vocational minister is in the secular world on a daily basis, living where secular people live, it becomes easier to interpret secular thinking and to stay abreast of shifting cultural values and mores. One gets the opportunity to understand why people think like they do and believe what they believe. It helps the minister make the Gospel relevant when the minister understands the mindset of the society and secular people.

A Final Thought

There are probably more advantages to being bi-vocational as a minister of the Gospel. These are just three I’ve thought about this morning reflecting on Paul and my own experience.

I never really saw myself as a bi-vocational minister in this regard. I’ve considered being bi-vocational in the traditional sense. Lord knows there is ample opportunity. I’ve said in recent years that I don’t have time for that. It’s not fair to the congregation because I couldn’t devote enough time to “grow” a church. After all, there’s no such thing as part-time ministry, only part-time pay.

But, I am bi-vocational in that I can work to support the work of the ministry to which I’m called. Right now, I’m called to be in the oil change business and preach in local congregations when asked. That’s what I’ll do for now. You can pay me, or not. I don’t care. If you do, I’ll be grateful and accept your blessing. If you don’t, I’ll thank God for His provision and that I had the chance to share the Gospel so as not “to be a burden to anyone.” That, and I like to eat and live indoors…

Perhaps the Lord is prompting you, Pastor, to reflect on His calling in your life. Is it time for you to become bi-vocational, too?

Until next time, keep looking up…

Don’t Be Insane…

/ pastorlynnmalone / Leave a comment

You know the definition of insanity, right? Insanity is doing the same things over and over and expecting a different result. The definition has been attributed to Albert Einstein. No one really knows if Einstein said it, but regardless, it is still true.

I bring up insanity only as a follow-up to my previous blog (here) dealing with the pastoral supply shortage in the church world (particularly among Methodists). Many congregations are searching for pastors and they are doing so with a mentality that is either dying or already dead.

Many congregations want a pastor like the pastors from the “good old days”–one who visits the sick, comforts the grieving, preaches good sermons, leads great bible studies, attends all the church functions, opens and closes the church on Sunday, etc. Many congregations are looking for a pastor “Who can meet our needs.” They are looking for Pastor Fetch.

If you’re a congregation that is searching for a leader, and you’re looking for a Pastor Fetch, you’re being insane. The reason for your insanity is because you’re trying to do ministry in a world that no longer exists. The world (the culture) has changed and your congregation is not changing with it. My counsel to you is “Don’t be insane!”

The 21st century and the dawn of the Information Age (call it the rise of the internet), along with the introduction of social media, has changed the landscape for EVERYTHING in our world. The church, as per usual, is one of the last institutions to adapt to that changing landscape (although the Covid pandemic did speed up the process for some). The tectonic shifts in culture have rendered the “old” models of ministry (and ministers) dead, or at the very least, on life support.

The “Old” Models

What are the “old” models of ministry I’m referencing? First, there is what I will call the “priest” model. This model has the leader who has been “trained” in all the rites of the faith tradition, and has the credentials to prove it. This person “stands apart” from the lay persons in the congregation and is the go-between for God and the people.

Another model of “old” ministry is that of “chaplain.” Yes, this model has the congregational leader as a “shepherd” of souls. You need a “pastor” with counseling skills and psychological insight who can visit the sick and care for the needy.

Another “old” model of ministry is that of “preacher-teacher.” The leader has to be trained in Greek and Hebrew in order to interpret the ancient texts. This leader is the resident scholar and theologian, and the sermon is the centerpiece of this model of ministry. An entire industry of theological education grew up to support this model of ministry, and the reality is that industry depends on the survival of this model for its continuation.

A more recent “old” model of ministry is that of “CEO-Manager.” This model has a leader who manages budgets, recruits and manages people for tasks, develops programs for ministry, gains new “customers” (converts) and casts vision for the congregation. This model is pretty much a singular reason we have so many “megachurches” these days.

None of these models has been ineffective. None of these models are necessarily un-biblical (with the exception of the CEO-Manager model). Unfortunately, each of these models have been rolled into the job description for one person, thus the leader who became “Pastor Fetch.”

A “Pre-Christian” World

The parallels between the first and twenty-first centuries is striking. I guess we might say is “there is nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9). The parallels include globalism, religious pluralism along with a new focus on “spirituality” (people are “spiritual but not religious), and the collapse of institutions (including religious institution) are but a few of the most obvious ones.

The re-emergence of a pre-Christian world (culture) necessitates a new model of leadership in the church. It is called the “Apostolic” leadership model, and it harkens back to the days of the first apostles. I believe God is calling congregations and Christian leaders to re-learn and re-engage in this model of ministry to be effective in this new “old” world.

The “Apostolic” Model of Leadership

So, what does it mean to engage in this new “Apostolic” leadership model? First, this model is “missional.” The congregation (and its leaders) must be on mission–the Great Commission.

19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age” (Matthew 28: 19-20 NIV).

Evangelism and sharing the Gospel must be at the heart of every congregation. We must be prepared to tell the story of Jesus to a world that increasingly has not heard the Word, and we must do it with creativity–taking the church to the street, or the amusement park, or the ball park, or the concert venue–well, you get the point. One congregation actually leases an amusement park once a year and invites the community free of charge to come as a means of promoting the Gospel.

Next, the new “old” model is “kingdom focused.” To be kingdom focused means that we believe Jesus’ kingdom does not fit the model of this world, and that it actually extends past the walls of church building programming. This does not mean we are pursuing political power, but are looking for collegial relationships that are community based and community focused. It is not about “how do we get people to come to our church,” but more about, “how do we take church to the people.”

Thirdly, the new “old” model is “team-oriented.” Pastor Fetch cannot and will not do it all in the apostolic model. Jesus had a team of twelve (probably more) that he taught and commissioned to begin the work of ministry. The Apostle Paul had Barnabas, Silas, Timothy and Luke as helpers for the work of ministry. A team orientation to ministry assists in bringing ALL the necessary skills to the work, and it promotes accountability among leadership in a much more spiritual way.

As part of this team orientation, ministry leaders will be focused on developing disciples who exhibit and practice the “five-fold ministry gifts” found in Ephesians 4.

11 So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature,attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ (Ephesians 4: 11-13 NIV).

Ministry leadership is about developing others to fulfill the calling of the mission. Congregations seeking pastoral leadership need to be looking for persons who can lead them in learning to the do the ministry instead of leaders who do the ministry for them.

The Leader a Congregation is Looking For

In this cultural age, every congregation should be looking for a pastor who is evangelistic, meaning their primary desire should be to see others come to Jesus. The primary desire of your new pastor should not be to meet your spiritual needs, but rather should be concerned with inviting others into a saving relationship with Jesus Christ.

Another characteristic that should be high on a congregation’s list of qualifications is a person who is interested in community engagement, a person who has demonstrated the ability to engage in building relationships across congregations, businesses and other non-profits in the communities they’ve served.

A final characteristic I would be looking for if I were looking for a pastor is a team-building mentality. Is the person capable and has he/she demonstrated the capacity to surround him/herself with other leaders and allow them to share the work of ministry. Has this person delegated responsibility to others, and has this person taught and trained others how to use their giftedness for ministry?

Those are not necessarily qualities that have been high on your list for previous pastors, but if a congregation goes looking for a pastor like their previous pastors, then they’ll likely get exactly what they’ve gotten in past, and that will only lead to a continuing decline in the congregation. But, I say, “Hey, if you want what you’ve always had, then by all means, go for it. You’ll get what you’ve always gotten, and that’s just insane.”

But, then again, what do I know? I’ve been out of vocational ministry for five years. I don’t know much of anything. I’ve just been observing from the sidelines. One can learn a lot, though, when observing from the sidelines.

Until next time, keep looking up…

Learning to Walk Again…

/ pastorlynnmalone / Leave a comment

Well, the challenging Lenten season continues. It’s strange really because I didn’t enter the Lenten season very seriously. For the first time in over 20 years I didn’t attend an Ash Wednesday service. If I’m totally honest I’d tell you that if it weren’t for Facebook I might have forgotten it was Ash Wednesday.

Logging on to Facebook I couldn’t help but know it was Ash Wednesday. I saw so many people posting pictures of themselves with ashes on their foreheads. Nothing like social media to feed our narcissistic tendencies…even when it comes to our sin, right? No indictment intended, but I just find it ironic that we feel compelled to show the world our piety by posting selfies of ourselves being pious. But, I digress…

Anyway, I didn’t take Lent seriously, but the Holy Spirit has challenged me all season long. He has challenged me concerning my love for Jesus (click here), and thereby, my love for others. I’ll confess that I can’t grasp the love of God that loves a Venezuelan migrant murderer as much as a Georgia nursing student (see here). I’ll confess that I don’t know that I want to grasp it, and that scares the hell out of me!

What I do know is that I would fight tooth and nail if someone (anyone) hurt one of my daughters. One of us would die. I don’t know that I could forgive that. With time and the grace of God, maybe. Yet, forgiveness is what the Lord asks of us, and that’s an awfully big ask. The Holy Spirit and I have been talking about it. We’ve not settled the issue yet, but this is still Lent. Easter is coming…it can’t come soon enough.

Not only has He challenged me on my love for Him, but He’s also challenged the nature of my surrender. I know that I have, too often, chosen my own way in service to Him rather than being attentive to where He was actually calling me. I may even be living that circumstance today. Part of my prayer each day is “show me Your will so that I might walk in Your way.” I think what I really mean is “show me Your will and I’ll choose whether to walk in Your way.”

The question He challenges me with is, “Are you surrendered?” I like to believe I am, but Him even asking the question causes me to wonder. True enough, He has been oh, so very gracious to me regardless. I can’t even imagine why I’ve been so blessed. How or why does He bless when I can’t answer a simple question, or know that I am surrendered to His will? ‘Tis mystery, indeed!

The Holy Spirit has also challenged me concerning the nature of joy. That’s right…joy. How so? Well, the Apostle Paul tells the Roman church, in essence, that joy comes through tribulation (see Romans 8: 31-39). I like to think I’m joyful, but the Holy Spirit has me wondering. I know that I “enjoy” life, but enjoying something doesn’t necessarily mean I am living joyfully. I know I’m grateful…grateful for all His blessings. I know I’m humbled…humbled by His grace.

Do I not know the depths of true joy because I’ve not endured the hardships of tribulation? Dare I pray for tribulation so that I might find out? Yeah, I’m probably not going to do that, and the fact that I’m unwilling to pray such a prayer causes me no little amount of heartburn. Darn this Lenten season!

I suppose the challenge of this Lent has me questioning my commitment to Jesus Christ and His Kingdom. It comes down to a question Jesus asked his disciples in John 6:

66 From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.

67 “You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve.

John 6:66-67 (NIV)

“You do not want to leave, too, do you?” I feel like in one sense that I have, in fact, gone away…I’ve turned back…I’ve fallen down. Abandoning full-time ministry feels almost like an abandonment of Jesus. It feels like I “turned back.” For me, I think it was a matter of ministry was “working for Jesus,” without “walking with Jesus.” There is a difference, you know?

I spent so many years working for Jesus that I quit walking with Him. Perhaps that is the thing that burned me out. I guess He’s just using this Lenten season to teach me to walk with Him again, since I’m not “working” for Him during this time. I am learning to walk again.

Let me say that if a person has a choice of working for Jesus or walking with Jesus, chose walking with Jesus every time. Intimacy with Jesus can easily get lost when we are working for Him. Walking with Him promotes the intimacy we need to actually do the work for Him…and I mean the work that He wants and needs us to do, not the work we want and think He wants us to do. The differences are oh, so subtle, but they are oh, so real.

And to think, I was going to let this Lenten season pass unnoticed. Perhaps all these challenges are my punishment for not giving something up for Lent.

Until next time, keep looking up…

“Do You Love Me?”

/ pastorlynnmalone / 1 Comment

Jesus, after the resurrection, encounters several of His disciples along the shore of the Sea of Galilee, and in the encounter He asks Peter, not once but three times the question, “Do you love me?” (See John 21)

So, that’s the question I’ve been wrestling with most of the week myself: Do you love me? I must confess that wrestling with that question has caused me no small amount of pain and not a little confusion.

My initial answer, like Peter’s, is “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” As with Peter, so with me, Jesus has been persistent in asking the question and with each answer I find myself a little more confused, and if I’m honest, a little more uncertain that my answer is truthful.

I’ve come to the realization that I don’t love Him the way that He loves me. That’s probably because I am unable to grasp how much He really loves me and unless I can grasp that, I can’t love Him that much. Of course, you understand that when I say he loves me that I mean “us”…all of us. He loves us deeply and passionately…so passionately and so deeply, in fact, that He was willing to die for us…to give His life for ours.

Consequently, His call to us is to love others in the same way He loves us. He calls us, like Peter, to pour ourselves out for others (“Feed my lambs,” “Take care of my sheep,” “Feed my sheep”). His love for us is shown by action, not by emotion. Our love for Him can only be seen in our actions toward others. Unfortunately, I’ve come to realize my love for Him stays on the emotional level. I love Him as long as I’m receiving some benefit from Him.

The entire conversation has caused me to question my motivations for leaving full-time ministry in 2019. That’s nearly five years ago now, and this week of reflection on this passage has brought it back up. I’ve wondered if my leaving full-time, vocational ministry is proof that I don’t really love Him. I’ve questioned whether my leaving was courage, or cowardice? I want to believe it was courage. I’ve come to think it was cowardice.

Loving Jesus is a heavy lift. It demands a willingness to “take up our cross and follow Him.” It demands forgiveness. It demands holiness. It demands sacrifice. It demands loving and caring for His sheep…his smelly, dirty, rotten, hard-headed sheep. Did I abandon His sheep? Have I failed to take up the cross? Did I count the cost and determine the price was too high? Was that my way of saying, “Lord, I don’t really love You”? Perhaps I don’t have the strength (or the courage) to do such a heavy lift. After all, I’m not Peter.

I suppose the season of Lent is for grappling with these kinds of deep questions. You might be surprised to discover that when you to get to the end of this blog you’ll not find a deeply compelling answer or a shocking revelation. I’m still grappling with the question. I don’t have an answer yet. Jesus really has backed me into a corner with His question.

All I know to do at this point is pray this prayer: Break me, Lord, until I love you. Let me hurt with the most awful pain until all I have left is to love You. Perhaps I don’t understand what I’m asking for, but perhaps You know best what I need. I know I want to love You the way Peter came to love You. I want to take up my cross and follow You. I want to be broken by You and I want to be broken for You because I want to answer Your question with a definitive, “Yes! Lord You know I love You!”

I can only thank Him that Sunday is coming! Lent can’t be over soon enough.

Until next time, keep looking up…