You're in for a treat with Thabiti's Anyabwile's new book, Finding Good Elders and Deacons. Let me give you three reasons. First, it will help you grow in your understanding of what godly maturity looks like in the context of the local church. This really struck me when I read the book for the first time. Elders should exemplify the character qualities that all Christians should grow into, and so Thabiti's meditations on the list of elder qualifications in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 basically provides all of us with a portrait of what Christian maturity looks like. It's a beautiful picture.

Second, it will provide you with an excellent discipleship tool for using with a younger Christian in a discipleship relationship.

Third, it will provide an excellent gift for your pastors or fellow pastors, giving them a tool for evaluating prospective elder and deacon candidates.

In order to provide you with a better introduction, I thought I'd ask Thabiti a few questions about the book. I'm grateful to him for taking the time to offer these replies.

1) What are some of the wrong qualities churches prioritize in their search for new elders and deacons?

Most well-intentioned churches make the mistake of looking for good qualities that re not prioritized by the scripture. So, they look for men who are well-known or popular, men who’ve been successful at business or another endeavor, or men who appear charismatic and influential. These may not be bad things, but they are in no way sufficient things or priorities. When these kinds of characteristics displace biblical godliness, churches end up looking for the wrong kinds of people who inevitably lead the church in the wrong direction. How can people who place a low priority on godliness ever hope to faithfully follow the Lord?

2) Why do the lists in characteristics of elders and deacons presented by Timothy and Titus seem so ordinary?

The list of qualifications in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 really represent spiritual maturity for all Christians. We should see these qualities in some measure in the lives of every follower of the Lord Jesus Christ. In fact, elsewhere in the New Testament we find these things being commanded or commended of the “rank and file” believer. So, in one sense, the elder and is simply another Christian, one of the brothers in whom God’s grace is at work. What distinguishes the elder or deacon is the degree to which these characteristics are evident and consistent in their life. The elder and deacon should stand out as one in whom these “normal” Christian qualities occur in “abnormal” degree.

3) How have you seen the wisdom of these lists play out in your own experience working with other elders and deacons?

I’m so prone to look for people like me in some way, or to move impatiently in seeking out leaders. These qualities tend to (a) bring to our attention people that don’t fit our mold or readily appear “like us,” and (b) these qualities slow us down such that we avoid making hasty decisions to ordain elders and deacons. The qualifications actually require we take our time in order to properly discern their presence. When I’ve been patient, prayerful, and watchful for “unusual suspects,” the church has been rewarded and blessed with men God approve for the task. That’s what we want in all our churches.

4) What happens when churches forsake these lists?

Disaster. Wolves enter. Unfaithful men take the helm of the church. Sooner or later a low state of spirituality will engulf the church. Even the very image and respect for leadership itself will be tarnished as men unfit for the positions bring the offices into disrepute. Ultimately, poorly qualified leaders hinder the work and honor of the Lord in the local community.

5) Does your book have relevance for churches beyond whichever body is responsible for nominating new leaders?

I hope so. I hope it’s helpful for congregations in knowing how to pray for their leaders and strengthen the leader’s work. I pray it’s useful for aspiring pastors and ministers in discerning a sense of call and qualification. Also, I hope it’s useful as a basic discipleship tool for men. Every man should at least aspire to be an elder because the qualifications are simply another way of describing Christian maturity. Perhaps the book would even be helpful to women in the congregation, holding forth a description of mature manhood. 1 Timothy 3 is what women should expect from male leaders, what single women should pray for in a potential husband, and what married women should honor in their husbands.

Learn more about the book and purchase here.

If churches shouldn’t rely wholly on programs to do the work of ministry, this raises some questions: First, should churches ditch all their programs? Second, if not, how should churches decide which programs to keep or cut?

SHOULD CHURCHES DITCH ALL THEIR PROGRAMS?

Should churches ditch all their programs? Not necessarily.

Certainly churches should view all “programs” that aren’t biblically prescribed as optional, and so they should hold them with a relatively open hand. But this doesn’t mean that all programs are bad, or that they are inherently bureaucratic and counterproductive of real ministry. Some programs, like Sunday school, can be excellent tools for teaching the Bible, equipping Christians with a biblical worldview, and changing the culture of a church.

HOW TO DECIDE WHICH PROGRAMS TO KEEP OR CUT

How then should churches decide which programs to keep or cut? Obviously this is a complicated question that each church will answer slightly differently. Here are three principles for thinking it through. These principles, I should add, are relevant not just for deciding whether to keep a program or cut it, but for thinking through how to reform and improve existing programs as well.

1. Programs should be means, not ends in themselves. That is, they should be means to the end of equipping the saints for the work of ministry. For instance, an evangelism program shouldn’t be the only way people in the church evangelize. Or at least, if it is initially, it should have the stated goal of equipping people to evangelize outside the program.

Further, some programs seem to exist for the sole purpose of furthering their own existence. The fact that the program exists lends it an artificial weight and importance all out of proportion to its contribution to the church’s work of evangelism and discipleship.

Of course, many programs could fall on either side of this divide depending on the quality of content, teaching, planning, and so on. Take Sunday school. On the one hand, many adult Sunday school programs contribute little to the Christian growth of their participants or the church’s culture of discipleship.

Yet in a recent Journal article, Jonathan Pennington argued that Sunday school is a uniquely helpful context for teaching church members a wide range of biblical and practical topics from how to study the Bible to parenting. One of the points he made was that if churches don’t use something like Sunday school to teach on these matters, they probably won’t be taught at all.

From this angle, Sunday school—especially a well-planned, content-driven model—helps a church to equip its members more thoroughly and completely than it would without the help of a structured program like this. Sunday school is a means, not an end.

2. Programs should contribute to a culture of discipleship, not compete with it. Let’s stay with our example of Sunday school. Done well, Sunday school is like a diet plan—it helps to ensure that the church as a whole is receiving a balanced diet of biblical teaching. It’s one specific tool for discipling Christians, and it helps feed an overall culture of Christian growth by creating the expectation that church members will be growing in their knowledge of and obedience to God’s Word.

Sunday school shouldn’t take the place of discipleship. It shouldn’t give the impression that discipleship exclusively takes place in Sunday school, or that Sunday school is absolutely essential to discipleship. Instead, it’s simply one means to the end of discipling Christians, and fostering an overall atmosphere in the church that nurtures discipleship.

Or consider small groups. If a church chooses to make use of them, small groups should be a structure that helps to nurture personal relationships and acts of service. By providing a starting point for relationship building, they should help to knit the whole church together. But people’s church participation shouldn’t begin and end with their small group. They shouldn’t be more devoted to their small group than to their church. 

3. Christians shouldn’t spend all their time “at church.” Christians shouldn’t live out their whole lives within the four walls of their church. We need time to be faithful in our vocations, whether mothering or mortgage brokering. We need time to disciple our children. We need time to befriend and love and evangelize our non-Christian neighbors. And there are only so many hours in the week.

Extra-biblical church programs inherently compete for time with these other, explicitly biblical, priorities. So pastors should always be aware that time at church programs is time taken away from these other things.

MORE TO SAY

Obviously there’s much more than could be said here, but these three basic principles are a starting point. Programs should be evaluated for what they contribute not just to individual Christians’ discipleship, or the act of evangelism, but to an overall culture of discipleship. And pastors should always realize that in terms of time, they’re always dealing with trade-offs. More time in church related activities is less time with non-Christian neighbors.

Next week I’ll give a few practical suggestions about how church leaders can wean a church off programs, improve the programs they’ve got, and cultivate an overall culture of discipleship.

In The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment, Jeremiah Burroughs explains why ministers and other people in positions of authority sometimes have to stand in a place of (presumably, spiritual) danger.  He also notes that this should make people who do not occupy positions of authority happy for their situation! 

Speaking of the Israelites crossing the Jordan in Joshua 4, he writes:

Now it was God's disposal that all the people should pass over first, that they should be safe on land; but the priests must stand still till all the people had passed over, and then they must have leave to go. But they must stay till God would have them to go, stay in all that danger! For certainly, to reason and sense, there was a great deal of danger in staying, for the text says that the people hasted over, but the priests they must stay till the people have gone, stay till God calls them out from that place of danger.

And so many times it proves the case that God is pleased to dispose of things so that his ministers must stay longer in danger than the people, and likewise magistrates and those in public places, which should make people to be satisfied and contented with a lower position into which God has put them. Though your position is low, yet you are not in the same danger as those who are in a higher position. God calls those in public positions to stand longer in the gap and place of danger than other people, but we must be content to stay even in Jordan till the Lord shall be pleased to call us out.

             -- Chapter 1, Section 9

The following is a guest post from Brian Croft. Brian serves as the senior pastor of Auburndale Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky. In addition to contributing to the 9Marks blog, Brian writes regularly on his own blog called Practical Shepherding. Brian is married to Cara, and they have four children.

Why must we vocally project when we preach?

A common conversation I find myself having with many of the men in our church testing their preaching gifts is the issue of projection in preaching.  Different men with different gifts have varying levels of intensity when preaching.  Intensity is not to what I am referring.  Whether you are a loud, passionate, energetic preacher, or a thoughtful, warm, conversational one, vocal projection is necessary in every case.  Here are 3 reasons why…

1)  Volume.  Some preachers think there is not a need to project if they are adequately amplified with a microphone.  In fact, some hear their voice artificially amplified and will even project less thinking they need to compensate.  The fact is, a sound system can only do so much in bringing a preacher’s voice to proper amplification.  Projection is that necessary tool to find that balanced level. 

2)  Clarity.  When I mention projecting to many of our men new to preaching, they think it is strictly a volume matter, but it is just as much a matter of clarity in what is being said. The most common example is when a preacher is speaking and his projection trails off at the last phrase, which affects both clarity and volume.  I remind young preachers if my 37 year old ears cannot hear or understand what you just said in the last half of your final sentence, you can be certain the 85 year old widow with hearing aids did not either.

3)  Tempo.  This is referring to the speed in which a preacher speaks.  In the same way a mumbler has trouble with clarity, a fast talker muddies the words together and makes it hard to understand.  Proper projection can help create a solid rhythm and tempo of speech that can make a preacher who is prone to fast talking, slow down.

A few practical suggestions to develop healthy projection:

- Go in the room where you typically preach, have someone sit in the back of the room while you practice your sermon or read a long passage of Scripture without any microphone or sound amplification.  If they can hear and understand what you are articulating, you probably have found a good balanced of projection for your unique voice.

- The next opportunity you have to preach, have the sermon recorded and listen to your sermon at a normal audio level.  If at any point you cannot hear what you said or understand what was said, then odds are your congregation did not either.  Make a note of those times where you mumbled or trailed off in speech and could not clearly hear what was said and you will probably find a pattern that can be worked on for the next time you preach.

We have all heard the stories of men like Spurgeon who preached to over 10,000 people in massive buildings without any amplification, or Whitefield preaching in the open air to thousands.  Although many testify of the depth and power of the natural voices of these great preachers of old, those preaching venues are still impossible to pull off without one thing..projection.  Consider how well your project when you preach.  It can make a huge difference in not just how you communicate, but the vocal clarity and understandability of what you communicate.