Bill Hybels, Courageous Leadership (Grand Rapids: Zondervans, 2002) 253 pages, paperback.
This book is written from the heart. Bill Hybels packs into these pages key lessons and good advice about pastoral leadership that he has learned and continues to learn through his involvement with the Willow Creek Church and its Association. He is convinced that the local church is the hope of the world, but it needs courageous leaders. “[L]ocal church leaders have the potential to be the most influential force on planet earth. If they ‘get it,’ and get on with it, churches can become the redemptive centers that Jesus intended them to be”. So after thirty years of ministry, Hybels shares what in his opinion this kind of church leadership is all about.
With many personal illustrations Hybels walks us through the various dimensions of ministry leadership. He centres his discussion in the fact, function and potential of the local church. But then argues that “the outcome of the redemptive drama being played out on planet Earth will be determined by how well church leaders lead”. For this reason church leaders must take their role seriously, be committed to developing their gifts and abilities fully, and then be willing to act courageously for the good of the Kingdom. However, the bottom line remains “the Acts 2 church” .
In the course of his book Hybels considers the singular importance of vision and its implementation. Team ministry ranks high in his estimation. Both financial and personnel resource development must be priorities. And then the most important element, a leader’s self-development, occupies the last six chapters. Personally, I think these last six chapters are the best in the volume because they draw readers into deep reflection upon their own leadership journey and challenge them to be very intentional about this. If ministry leaders neglect self-development, they risk losing everything God has called them to be and to do.
A key component to the courageous leadership that Hybels encourages is the defining vision. Hybels states that “when a church needs a God-honoring, kingdom-advancing, heart-thumping vision, it turns to its leaders. That’s because God put in the leader’s arsenal the potent offensive weapon called vision” . He defines vision as “a picture of the future that produces passion” . I wonder how Hybels would distinguish between vision and calling? A vision is bound up with a leader’s very life. “That’s why God made you a leader. That’s your unique calling”, he claims. But are vision and calling the same?
I think Hybels would agree that every believer in Jesus has a calling. If this is so, then logically all believers should also have a vision for how that calling should find expression in their lives. So what makes a “leader’s vision” different? Or perhaps that is not the right question. Perhaps we need to ask whether the ministry leader’s function in a local church is to help the whole body discern how to integrate their personal callings and visions and direct them towards building an Acts 2 church. If we operate on the assumption that only the ministry leader sees the vision and then has to communicate this vision to the local church, are we in fact eliminating from the equation the very resource the Holy Spirit has given to the church to produce the growth of the church, namely the whole body?
Vision development in the local church must be seen as a community function. To try to cast vision from the top down makes the local church vulnerable when ministry leaders move. Such a process may work in a corporation, but when applied to the local church it fails to embrace the richness of perspective and the significant role that every member should play in vision development. Yes, ministry leaders must take responsibility to ensure that the process works and they certainly will have a very influential part to play, but the vision cannot be only theirs.
Calling relates to our position in Christ and the natural and spiritual endowments that He gives to us. Vision, perhaps, seeks to define in specific times and spaces how that calling will be lived out.
I found it intriguing that from time-to-time in his book Hybels mentions the elders of his church. He certainly honours them and consults with them. However, it is very difficult to discern exactly how his spiritual leadership integrates with their spiritual leadership. It seems that his ministry team is far more significant for the building up of his local church than the elders. Does he consider the elders as part of the ministry team? I am sure he would answer in the affirmative. However, such a perspective, while perhaps implied, is not stated.
How then do ‘courageous leaders’ in local churches relate to their fellow elders? Are elders truly spiritual leaders who carry the responsibility for the spiritual nurture and health of the local church? Hybels spends considerable time talking about the qualities he looks for in new ministry leaders, but does not discuss the question of selecting elders. He describes the importance of working carefully and wisely with ministry colleagues, but has nothing to say about his work and relationships with his elders. Perhaps this will be the subject for a subsequent volume.
This silence about the elders’ role begs the question whether ‘courageous leadership’ in a local church has any necessary connection with the elders’ team (however this may be defined). Finding good processes to integrate the respective contributions of the elder’s team and the ministry leadership team in a local church has to be an essential priority for the lead pastor if there is to be harmony, vitality, and growth.
Finally (and here I let my bias show more explicitly) Hybels does not appreciate the courageous leadership development that happens in seminaries. On the one hand he has good things to say about the influence of Dr. Bilezikian’s teaching in his life during college days. On the other hand his characterization of teachers seems to be quite one-dimensional. “[O]nly leaders can develop other leaders and create a leadership culture. Teachers can’t do it. Administrators can’t do it”. I wonder what Hybels thinks motivates many seminary teachers to devote their lives to such vocation? Could it be that they have a passion to develop good ministry leaders? Could it be that they have significant ministry leadership experience and giftedness themselves and discern the seminary context as being a primary means by which to fulfill their calling to multiply ministry leaders? Could it be that seminaries consider as central to their mission the development of godly ministry leaders who can do the job effectively? Seminaries by and large seek to involve good ministry leaders as faculty for the development of the next generation of ministry leaders. I am undoubtedly defensive about this because of my involvement in seminary ministry. However, I do think Hybels’ characterization does not do justice to the passion and ability many seminary faculty bring to the daunting task of participating in the formation of the next generation of courageous ministry leaders. Undoubtedly it will require all of the resources of the church – local church, seminary, and denominational leadership – to get this job done well.
The questions I raise should not deter you from buying and reading Hybels’ book. You will enjoy it and be challenged.