Thursday, July 31, 2014

Church Staffing Grid

Okay, personally, I was over the whole acronym thing about 15 years ago. That said, for the first time in that time frame I have come up with one that I think works well. How's that for internal contradiction? Anyway, I came up with this a little while ago and has served as somewhat of a guideline for putting together my staff, and more specifically, the "pastoral" staff. However, I do believe this can serve as a guideline for any leadership team.
The way I say it is, "I believe every staff is held together by P.A.S.T.E." I would say that to have the best team possible we should have people in each of these areas. I've written brief descriptions of each below so maybe you can read through them and compare it to those on your team. Also, see where you might fit into the bigger picture yourself.
P - prophetic. This person tends to be concerned with having reverence for God and caring for the poor and needy (like the prophets in scripture). Additionally tends to speak into areas the Church tends to become complacent.
A - apostolic. This person is a starter of new things then gets others to run with it, likes having a lot of plates spinning and can generally boil things down into a simple vision people follow.
S - shepherd. This person is caring, a good listener and many will often give people hours of their time in counseling. When thinking of sermons, etc. this person thinks of about the people being spoken to.
T - teacher. This person can bring refreshing and practical perspective on the scriptures for those who are being taught.
E - evangelist. This person can cultivate the truth of the gospel into an area (whether that be an entire city or a neighborhood or a workplace).
Every person on my staff has at least 2 of these.  For me, mine are Teacher, Apostolic and Evangelist (not necessarily in that order).  How about you and your team?

Thursday, July 3, 2014

Maybe we should change how we refer to the bible...?

A couple weeks ago I wrote a post called, "Pivot of Perspective On Bible Study" where I talked about a few different ways I've been talking to people about how they view the bible. Here I would like to throw out a few thoughts I've been thinking a bit through about how we refer to it in our speech.  We refer to the bible in a number of ways. We call it things like:
  1. Scripture
  2. The Bible
  3. The Word
  4. God's Word
  5. The Holy Bible
  6. Word of God
All of these are certainly good and well-meaning names and I am not saying we should change how we refer to it. Instead, I'm asking the question, what if we changed the way we referred to it? How could that impact how we see it impacting our lives? I have found the most common way we refer to it is, "The Word of God." We have time in the Word. We study the Word.
But the more I study it I'm starting to think maybe a more accurate and fresh description of it would be, "Acts of God" versus "Word of God." Now, I know that would be a bit awkward to refer to it by that name in the contexts we typically use the phrase "The Word of God." And I'm certainly not saying the ways in which we currently refer to it are inaccurate. But, just think about it for a second. We are not just talking about words here. We are, in fact, talking about actions God has taken.
Maybe referring to it (or thinking about it) as "Acts of God" would cause us to see how our actions should change? Maybe it would be a refreshing reminder that God took action toward and for us? Maybe it would also cause us to follow in action more than simply studying it does? And, maybe understanding it as Acts of God would reach much deeper into our affections/desires/feelings?
After all, we do say things like, "Actions speak louder than words."