Leadership and Vision

[Gwallard]

I do not think this has been discussed. When I searched for "vision" stuff, I got mostly Federal Vision threads. I am interested in your thoughts on this topic:

How have you used, or have you used, secular material on leadership? Does it often apply in the Church office, or has it been useful to you? What specifically do you think about "vision"? That is, a kind of looking to the future, understanding the information about the present and projections of the future, and setting a vision for either what is valuable or important in the future, and creating a plan/budget/organization based upon that vision of the future. If these "visions" are legitimate, in what cases would they be legitimate, and which would they not be? For example, would it be legitimate for a church eldership to have a "vision" to in the future rent our their space to either a coffee shop or a school during the week? Or, would it be legitimate for a church to have a "vision" of the future being more hostile to the church in one distinct area, and therefore steel the church against Satan's attack in that area now? Or, would it be legitimate for the church to guide the church toward a inner city "vision?"

As far as I can tell on the Christian side, the texts I have heard to support this type of activity are:
Proverbs 29:18 "Where there is no vision, the people perish: : but he that keepeth the law, happy is he."
Acts 18 Where Paul was dead set upon a "vision," so to speak, to take over the synagogue in Corinth.

In fine, in what way do we incorporate secular leadership materials, and what way do we/ should we view "vision," and does vision inherently take over the guiding spot which only God's mission should take?

Edit: to try to be more clear, a Harvard Business Review article that I read defined leadership basically in terms of vision, with management as the necessary corollary and foil. Management is organization, but leadership is setting the goal and motivating to that goal. Etc. Etc.

 

[Ryan&Amber2013]

That's a pretty loaded question, and I don't think I'm the most qualified person to answer it for you. But in simplicity I would say you have the freedom to do what you think is best, as long as you are following principles laid out for you in the bible. I just wouldn't fall into the ditch of primarily viewing the church as a business. I wish you the best, brother!

 

[VictorBravo]

I'll be a curmudgeon and say it: when I hear church leaders use the term "vision," I get very nervous and wary. If they are speaking of eyes being opened by the Spirit through preaching, I'm all for it.

But if that is not clear, I'll start humming to myself, "Be Thou My Vision" while looking for a clear path to deal with it.

There might be a place for agendas, programs, initiatives, etc. But they often tend toward being a vision of one's own heart:

Jer 23:16: Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD.

 

[Gwallard]

That's a pretty loaded question, and I don't think I'm the most qualified person to answer it for you. But in simplicity I would say you have the freedom to do what you think is best, as long as you are following principles laid out for you in the bible. I just wouldn't fall into the ditch of primarily viewing the church as a business. I wish you the best, brother!

I'm sorry, brother! I was not trying to load the question. Is it a loaded question in that it has too much content, or is it a loaded question in that it has a controversial subject matter, or a hidden assumption?

Thank for answering! I think that is my view in the abstract: simply apply leadership principles recontexualized in the realm of the truth, since most of them are common grace/ borrowed capital. However, "vision" is one that eludes me. I'm not sure how much an elder can have "vision" differing from the call of Christ. This may be a complex matter of inner call and external call. But I thought I'd ask!

 

[Andrew35]

I'll be a curmudgeon and say it: when I hear church leaders use the term "vision," I get very nervous and wary. If they are speaking of eyes being opened by the Spirit through preaching, I'm all for it.

But if that is not clear, I'll start humming to myself, "Be Thou My Vision" while looking for a clear path to deal with it.

There might be a place for agendas, programs, initiatives, etc. But they often tend toward being a vision of one's own heart:

Jer 23:16: Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD.

When I start hearing about "mission" and "vision" and all that in the context of church, I typically feel like I'm dealing with a Southern Baptist.

 

[Gwallard]

There might be a place for agendas, programs, initiatives, etc. But they often tend toward being a vision of one's own heart:

Jer 23:16: Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD.

That is where my reluctance comes from. In secular leadership, "vision" is something like a prophetic vision of the future based upon information, intuition, and charisma. It's like a marshaling of power to a task one knows to be important. If I put that in its best light, then it's like a point of emphasis that will be important in the future, therefore we ought to be prepared for it. An example might be the pastors who made a point of educating their parishioners on homosexuality in the middle 2000's.

 

[Ryan&Amber2013]

I'm sorry, brother! I was not trying to load the question. Is it a loaded question in that it has too much content, or is it a loaded question in that it has a controversial subject matter, or a hidden assumption?

Thank for answering! I think that is my view in the abstract: simply apply leadership principles recontexualized in the realm of the truth, since most of them are common grace/ borrowed capital. However, "vision" is one that eludes me. I'm not sure how much an elder can have "vision" differing from the call of Christ. This may be a complex matter of inner call and external call. But I thought I'd ask!

I just meant "loaded" in the sense of a lot of content. It sounds like you're right-on track with your thinking. As long as your main focus stays in line with being true to the Bible, it seems like you have freedom in the Lord in this area. Which I definitely get the impression you want to obey God.

I have friends who have different Christian beliefs than me, and I rejoice in that because I know they love God, live to obey Him, and really study the Bible to figure out what God wants. Often we just come to different conclusions about various topics, and I personally think that's okay so as long as it is Biblically justified. I hope that makes sense from my perspective.

I will add that there are plenty of sound-thinking people on here that will give you some good food for thought to help you make a good decision.

(One more thought: maybe you can talk to a pastor who is in to the vision thing and try to see where he is coming from, and use discernment to see if that is something you would like to do as well.)

 

[iainduguid]

Let's start by disposing of Proverbs 29:18. The word for "vision" (hazon) means specifically a prophetic vision, not some kind of human insight. (And by the way, the second half of the KJV translation is simply wrong; the Hebrew cannot mean "the people perish" but means something more like "the people are unrestrained").

Often, whether in churches or businesses, "vision" simply means forethought, planning, goal-setting and so on - an ability to communicate to people where (God willing) you think the enterprise should be in a few years time. There are lots of ways in which this can go wrong - confidence in the flesh and human strategies, wrong or unbiblical goals, etc, hence some people's understandable kneejerk negative response. The importance of vision will also vary in different churches - a well-established church in a very settled community may be faithful simply by continuing to do the things it has been doing in the past, while a church planter trying to gather a core group must be able to communicate to people what the church will look like if, in the providence of God, it comes into being. That takes vision.

We might boil it down to this: if a leader is leading he is going somewhere and asking people to go with him. If he has no vision (or can't articulate it to you), he probably doesn't know where he's going and so you probably shouldn't follow him. If he has the wrong vision, then he is even more dangerous: he may paint a beautiful picture but he is leading people in the wrong direction. A good vision is not an immediate leading from God ("Thus says the Lord"), so much as it is a mature application of the Word of God to the specific situation of the church at this point in space and time, which may not actually be very radical at all.

 

[Gwallard]

Let's start by disposing of Proverbs 29:18. The word for "vision" (hazon) means specifically a prophetic vision, not some kind of human insight. (And by the way, the second half of the KJV translation is simply wrong; the Hebrew cannot mean "the people perish" but means something more like "the people are unrestrained").

Often, whether in churches or businesses, "vision" simply means forethought, planning, goal-setting and so on - an ability to communicate to people where (God willing) you think the enterprise should be in a few years time. There are lots of ways in which this can go wrong - confidence in the flesh and human strategies, wrong or unbiblical goals, etc, hence some people's understandable kneejerk negative response. The importance of vision will also vary in different churches - a well-established church in a very settled community may be faithful simply by continuing to do the things it has been doing in the past, while a church planter trying to gather a core group must be able to communicate to people what the church will look like if, in the providence of God, it comes into being. That takes vision.

We might boil it down to this: if a leader is leading he is going somewhere and asking people to go with him. If he has no vision (or can't articulate it to you), he probably doesn't know where he's going and so you probably shouldn't follow him. If he has the wrong vision, then he is even more dangerous: he may paint a beautiful picture but he is leading people in the wrong direction. A good vision is not an immediate leading from God ("Thus says the Lord"), so much as it is a mature application of the Word of God to the specific situation of the church at this point in space and time, which may not actually be very radical at all.

Thank you! I feel justified about my incredulity about Proverbs 29:18 being interpreted in the way leaders understand "vision." In all the other uses of that Hebrew word it has all the characteristics of a technical term for only prophetic vision. By the way, I heard this used in class, Dr. Duguid.

Yes, it seems like a sticky subject because it is so hard to concretely apply "vision." Did you have visions for your church plants, Dr. Duguid? In trying to communicate to the people what the church will look like in the future if it comes into being, which things can we impart to those people? Buildings? Programs? Or, is the church planter basically "selling" the congregation on Christ and the denomination who serves him more faithfully?

Edit: "selling" is the wrong word, but perhaps appropriate given the discussion

 

[TheInquirer]

I'm just finishing up with working with our church staff through forming a vision/strategy. All we did is look at God's priorities for us in Scripture and set those as goals - things like loving God, loving people, presenting people mature in Christ, growing in godliness, making disciples, etc. Then work back from there on how to structure your ministry/ministries around the best ways to achieve those goals, always making the word of God central.

If your "vision" is not based on the word of God (many get sidetracked by setting "numbers" goals like corporations - bad idea in my opinion) you will be going in the wrong direction.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

It's an interesting topic. It's one of those things that I think really distinguishes the Reformed from the rest of Evangelicalism.

We need not consult secular writers on the topic of leadership. Most of the stuff that's really big in Evangelicalism amounts to little more than the secular stuff repackaged in Christian wrapping paper. But why? What does the Bible lack for one desiring to know something about leadership? Nothing! It is THE source book to study and consult!

What the Church really needs is Isaiah 8:20 men, who will boldly declare — "To the Law and to the Testimony: if they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them."

We need "Ordinaries" not "Visionaries." That's my

 

[Stephen L Smith]

Much of this is discussed in Peter Lillback's insightful book "Saint Peter's Principles"