Successful Church Leadership...According to Whom?

Fundamental Evangelistic Association
selected articles from:
^{^{^©}}FOUNDATION
A MAGAZINE OF BIBLICAL FUNDAMENTALISM
Dennis W. Costella, Editor; Karel Beyer, Production Manager; Matt Costella, Copy Editor
M.H. Reynolds, Jr. (1919-1997), Founding Editor

Successful Church Leadership...According to Whom?

by Dennis Costella
©FOUNDATION Magazine, Mar-Apr 2000

DR. ROBERT SCHULLER hosted his 30th annual "Robert H. Schuller Institute for Successful Church Leadership" in late January at the Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, California. We attended this institute in order to provide our readers with firsthand coverage of that which is purported to be the direction church leaders must take in order to build successful churches and become effective leaders in the 21st century. Through the years, this institute has had a far-reaching influence on churches and church leaders impressed with the size and the mechanics of the largest weekly religious media ministry in the world and the grandeur of the Crystal Cathedral campus itself. Unlike the typical attendee of the popular "Church Growth Seminars," the majority of those in attendance at the Schuller Institute were from denominations and traditions that would not be considered "evangelical," theologically speaking. However, the charismatic persona of Schuller, his ability to articulate principles for successful ministry and his proven track record for catching the attention and admiration of millions compel many Evangelical and even some Fundamentalist Christians to consider, and perhaps even implement, his tactics and philosophy for ministry and, specifically, for church growth.

Schuller has a tremendous impact on the religious scene, and many embrace his beliefs concerning what is to be the true mission of the church today and the method of best communicating that message to the world. Without question, Dr. Schuller is a truly successful church leader from the world's perspective, and he gains the ear of many when he sets forth how successful churches are to be built. Schuller's strategy for "Successful Church Leadership" that will supposedly result in dynamic growth for struggling churches (even old-fashioned, Bible-believing churches) unfortunately appeals to many, which is why we must give a Biblical answer to such man-made strategies.

The question that many church leaders often ask, perhaps out of discouragement, discontentment or even earnest zeal, is this: "What needs to be done in order to accomplish church growth and successful church leadership?" Sadly, rather than looking to God's Word for the answer, many often turn to those whom the world considers to be "successful" in the ministry, such as Robert Schuller. What has Schuller endeavored to instill in the minds of the 32,000 men and women who have sat under his tutelage and listened to the church leaders he has selected to address the Institute for Successful Church Leadership for the past thirty years? The answer is clearly stated in the Institute program manual: "In 1970, Dr. Schuller founded the Institute for Successful Church Leadership...to share his church growth principles" (emphasis ours). The purpose of the Institute is to build "successful church leaders" according to what Dr. Schuller has found to work in his own ministry, not necessarily what the all-authoritative and always relevant Word of God says is required of successful servants of Christ.

The strategies and programs for supposedly doing the Lord's work in the world today often disregard the Bible's direction for the faithful local church. The dynamic church growth approach, without apology and of necessity, calls for a dramatic change from the traditional methods of worship, ministry and emphasis. For Schuller, church growth requires a dramatic shift from Bible preaching to instilling the virtues of "possibility thinking" in the minds of the emotionally needy and "unchurched" crowd. His sermons are simply aimed to "heal the hurts" of the unchurched, a message quite different from anything heard in a faithful, Bible-preaching church. For example, Schuller repeatedly thundered the theme of this year's Institute from the platform: "Faith + Focus + Follow-through = Success!"-a far cry from the charge of the apostle Paul to "Preach the Word ... Reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine ... Commit to faithful men."

While the televised services reveal the worship style of the Crystal Cathedral services to be more formal and traditional than that of most contemporary mega-churches, Schuller does not reject the tactics and strategies of those who embrace alternative approaches to worship and ministry. The Institute featured many of the latest church growth experts who reject any form of traditionalism or formality in their effort to increase church attendance. Speakers such as Bill Hybels, pastor of the Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Illinois; Dr. Ken Hunter of the Church Growth Center in Corunna, Indiana, and Walt Kallestad, pastor of the Community Church of Joy in Glendale, Arizona, believe in redesigning the style of the church service, making it a "user friendly," nonthreatening "seeker service" that attracts the "seekers" in the community and keeps them interested. The ministries of Hybels and Kallestad illustrate the amazing numbers that flock to a church dedicated to impressing the unsaved who are familiar with the first-rate glitz, marketing and entertainment of the world. Such church leaders believe any method of worship and evangelism is acceptable, as long as the lost are being reached for Christ. Thus, like Schuller, they have accepted a pragmatic view of worship and evangelism-"the end justifies the means; if it works, it must be of God." Is the purpose of the local church to attract the unsaved, and in so doing, design the church service and even the message around that with which the unsaved are comfortable? Should the unbeliever's worldly frame of mind determine the style and content of the church service? Absolutely not. We will see later that God's Word clearly teaches otherwise.

Dr. Schuller's Principles for Ensuring Success

Schuller provided the key elements of success-at least from his viewpoint- at several Institute sessions. He firmly believes that his psychology of "self-esteem," preached from his pulpit for the past 45 years, is what has made his ministry so popular. "I was influenced by my psychology training in Hope College more than anything else," he said, "so I targeted the emotional health of humans ... Self-esteem, that's where it's at!" He noted that positive, non-judgmental messages attract the unchurched because people do not want to be indoctrinated with theology. Schuller referred to his early book Self Esteem, the New Reformation as his own "systematic theology" for the unchurched and said this self-esteem theology resulted from his studies with Viktor Frankl and Karl Menninger. He told those in attendance at the Institute, "If you don't buy into it (the self esteem theology), you're wrong! I think that it's the only time in my life when I say that."

To help define the mission and ministry of the church, Schuller cited "Eight Principles of Retailing" necessary for the church to "sell" its product to the consumer, the world. He pictured the church as a retail business and proposed that what works for the commercial world will likewise draw the "business" of the consuming public who seek for a church designed to meet their "needs." Schuller told church leaders that in order to build a successful church, they needed to define their market and consider their church's accessibility, surplus parking, inventory, facilities, visibility, friendly service, responsible financial basis and viability of its product. For any who disagreed with his opinion, Schuller countered, "If you don't agree with me, you're not going to hurt me, but you'll hurt yourself."

Another of Schuller's principles for being a successful church leader is to become a "possibility thinker" rather than an "impossibility thinker." According to Schuller, a "possibility thinker" is educated, inquisitive, a chance taker and one who welcomes change. On the other hand, an "impossibility thinker" is indoctrinated, judgmental, traditional and prejudicial.

In the following excerpt from his plenary address, Schuller cites the reason why he began his Institute 30 years ago and why adhering solely to Bible principles as taught in theological institutions does not work in a changing world:

I wanted to create a platform for successful ministers to tell their stories so we can learn from them. I have observed that it is a fundamental factor in life that success is usually achieved by those who are at the frontline of research and development. They are the ones who are making breakthroughs, and they are learning something that they weren't taught in school. They, for the most part, are college graduates-theological seminary graduates-and they were taught this at the universities. They get out well educated, but things are changing and the time is not what it was when the professor of that department was in charge. A professor in a theological seminary can be teaching principles that he thinks are still accurate, but he's not out there in the frontline 24 hours of a day, and the world is changing. You are so well educated and you respect your professor, so you don't want to go against their wishes but something isn't working. And so you have a little freedom-you try something else, and it works! What happens then if you discover something-the professors in college and in the graduate schools do not rush in and applaud you? They're threatened. Meanwhile, the power people in your denomination do not recognize you and applaud you. They may be jealous or suspicious that maybe you're becoming a heretic. Suspicion and jealousy stands in their way. I learned things the first 15 years here, and it was a breakthrough that I had never been taught or read in any other book...

Next, notice that Schuller determines success in ministry by pragmatism rather than by adherence to the Biblical model, purpose and ministry of the New Testament church. He claims that in order to sell the message of self esteem to the hurting unchurched, then the consumer must determine the medium:

When we started here, I decided our market was not going to be people that are in the Reformed Church in America. And our market was not going to be the minds of people who are interested in John Calvin. And I was not going to target the minds that are interested in the Bible, cover-to-cover. The reason for that-at that time I observed, through my own market researching, that most of the non-churched people were not impressed with the Bible as the Word of God ... I targeted the market. I was influenced by my psychology training in Hope College more than anything else. So I targeted the emotional health of humans ... unchurched people....

Unchurched people will follow a crowd-puller. Indoctrinated, dedicated, Bible-believing, denominational Christians aren't interested in crowd-pullers; they're interested in doctrine-pulling power, Bible study-pulling power or denominationalism-pulling power. But if you're going to try to reach unchurched people, try to find somebody you can invite as a guest that'll make the unchurched people say, "Did you hear that Larry King's going to be in that church Sunday morning? I don't believe it. I don't believe it; he's not a Christian. It's a Christian church, I think." You'd be surprised who will come, and you'll be surprised what ice you will break if you just get them in the front door, sitting in that building for the first time....

I learned one thing very quickly: Unchurched people aren't interested in theology. That's why if you only know Schuller from the books that he writes or the sermons you hear him deliver, he's not that theological. Maybe that's a heavier theology in itself-what the people want; what do the unchurched people want? Do they want to hear the difference between consubstantiation or transubstantiation? I don't think so. Do they want to know something-unchurched people-do they really want to know the difference between the dispensationalism and post millennialism? ... I think you've got to get them where they're hurting, where they're hungry. That's what I picked to begin my psychology background, and I got heavy into studying with Viktor Frankl, Karl Menninger. And I evolved what is called the self-esteem theology.

Schuller suddenly dropped out of his positive-only mode when describing "Impossibility Thinkers," those unwilling to compromise the guiding principles and precepts of the Bible. Although he claimed to personally have a strong theological belief system rooted in the Reformed Church in America, he said that it was not his purpose to indoctrinate his audience with such beliefs. His goal was "to be a witness of Christ," divorced from anything that appeared to be "negative."

The "possibility thinker" is educated. The "impossibility thinker" is not. He may have the credentials, the degrees. He may be a professor, but he's not educated, he's indoctrinated-indoctrinated by a creed or a letter of the law. The educated person asks questions. Two things mark the truly educated person: honesty and humility. And you don't find those qualities dominating the indoctrinated mind. The indoctrinated mind is constantly operating from the subconscious collection of opinions that border, if they're not rooted, in prejudice, pre-judging, prejudicial-it may be gious prejudice, racial prejudice or cultural prejudice. But the "possibility thinker" is educated. The "impossibility thinker" is indoctrinated.

The difference between the "possibility thinker" and the "impossibility thinker": The "possibility thinker" tends to be very curious, very inquisitive. That's because he's educated. The "impossibility thinker" is entrenched. He's indoctrinated. He's got the answers. He lives in ruts-and a rut is nothing but a grave with the ends knocked out. The "possibility thinker" is adventurous . He's interested in research, experimenting. John Calvin, who is the father of the Reformed Church where I have my roots, says the church should always be reforming. Great!

Featured Speakers and Workshops Exemplify "Possibility Thinking"

The morning and evening plenary sessions featured those who were notable in one way or another for their demonstration of "Successful Church Leadership." Some speakers exemplified the realized dreams of "Possibility Thinkers," as Schuller would put it. Dr. Floyd H. Flake of the Allen African Methodist Episcopal Church in Jamaica, New York, provided an impressive account of how his ministry has impacted the community and the lives of tens of thousands of inner-city men, women and children. Another plenary speaker was Bishop Charles E. Blake, pastor of the 17,000-member West Angeles Church of God in Christ in Los Angeles. Here, again, is an example of a man who aspired to reach seemingly unattainable dreams and succeeded although faced with opposition in society. Both Flake and Blake commanded the audience's great respect for their accomplishments in their respective communities and inspired "Possibility Thinking." Yet one needs to ask the question as to whether or not political and social accomplishments, however needful and good, are the marks of faithful, Biblical church leaders.

One plenary address, delivered by Dr. Tony Campolo during the first evening of the Institute, urged those in attendance to realize that their role as leaders is to "declare the kingdom of God" and to "build the kingdom" through transformation of society. Campolo mocked those pastors who teach that society is deteriorating and waxing worse and worse. On the contrary, he said society is becoming transformed through the efforts of believers today. "What do you need for evidence that something is happening in America?" Campolo asked. "How many football stadiums do you have to fill with screaming men cheering Jesus before you have to admit that something weird is going on out there"? Campolo's errant theology concerning the church and the kingdom fit in well with the many post-millennialists present at the Institute. Yet, once again, one needs to ask the question as to whether or not the true mission of the church is to build the kingdom and change the world.

Other plenary addresses bore testimony to the amazing growth that is possible by those committed to "Church Growth" principles. These speakers designed their churches and ministries primarily to reach the unchurched, and the result was phenomenal growth. The Rev. Bill Hybels, featured at previous Institutes, is one of the most well known leaders of the "Church Growth" movement. His concentrated efforts at reaching the "non-churched"-or, as he inoffensively referred to in his message-"the far from God," have resulted in 12,000 attendees at the 120-acre Willow Creek Community Church campus in South Barrington, Illinois. Hybels and others believe that the purpose of the church is to reach the "seeker" by utilizing contemporary, user-friendly, seeker-oriented ministry, and he illustrated his point by telling how his unsaved sailing partner would never have come to know the Lord had he refrained from befriending him despite his worldliness and unregenerate lifestyle.

Dr. Luis Palau provided an Evangelical presence that served to answer the critics who would point out the ecumenical, liberal tenor of the Institute program. A respected speaker such as Palau gave Evangelical credibility to what would have otherwise been rightly perceived as an Institute instilling in the attendee Schuller's brand of "philosophy and vain deceit" (Col. 2:6-8).

Dr. Kent Hunter, know as "The Church Doctor," conducted a workshop that supplied the potential successful church leader with "Twenty Worship Styles to Reach Different People in Your Community." Hunter's plenary address and featured workshop gave pointers on how to make the church a mission to the surrounding culture. He emphasized the same principles that all the other church growth experts emphasize, namely, that church leaders must continually change the medium (the church) in order to better communicate the message, which, they claim, does not change.

The message, however, does change whenever church leaders perceive the sole purpose of the church to be evangelistic. If seating the "seeker" within the sanctuary so he can eventually, somehow, be introduced into the kingdom is the goal and purpose of the church, then the most successful church leaders will be those who-through changing the church into a facsimile of the surrounding culture-fill the most seats. Is this acceptable? Is this successful church leadership according to God? Absolutely not! Schuller says his sole purpose is to be a "witness of Christ" to the world, not to teach or indoctrinate. Is this successful church leadership according to the Word of God? Absolutely not! To faithfully, successfully proclaim Christ, one must preach the Gospel to the unsaved, teach the Word to the saved and contend for the Faith. If the latter two are renounced or deemphasized by the church or its leadership, the first objective is inevitably perverted.

Successful Church Leaders According to the Word of God

The church is to be the instrument whereby believers who worship the Lord in "the beauty of holiness ... in Spirit and in truth" are built up in the faith, equipped for service and then sent forth to a lost and dying world with the one, true Gospel message. No gimmicks, psycho-babble or contrived "self esteem theology" that appeals to the masses will meet God's standards for success.

Carefully study the second epistle to Timothy and see how the apostle Paul instructs and "indoctrinates" young Timothy, who truly was a "successful church leader" according to God's estimation. First, the truly successful church leader will be empowered by God to preach the Gospel as defined in the Word to a lost and dying world (1:7-11). He will also be grounded in apostolic doctrine and hold to it by the conviction of the Holy Ghost (1:13, 14). Now notice what follows: The successful church leader will then take that all-authoritative truth, the "faith once delivered," and commit it "to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also" (2:1-3). This indoctrination in the Word is a basic responsibility that the leadership of the church must accept and obey. The church leader must indoctrinate himself in the Word of God and then must indoctrinate others in that same Word.

In teaching Timothy how to be a successful church leader, Paul did not end his Spirit-led instruction at verse three of chapter two, for indoctrination is useless unless it is practically applied to ministry. Timothy was also charged to be a student of the Word (2:15) so that he would be able to identify, name and separate from those false teachers who "erred from the truth" (2:16-21). Likewise, he was to warn others to do the same. Only then could he be "prepared unto every good work." No "positive-only" ministry can ever be acceptable to God nor effective in accomplishing His good work because sometimes God requires His children to be "negative."

Notice also the charge given to Timothy in 3:16-4:5. Can a truly successful church leader take this text seriously and at the same time believe that the church growth expert's programs and narrowly-defined purposes are truly Biblical? No, for God is holy, and God is love. We, like our Savior, are to exemplify holiness and love to others by honoring our Savior through obedience to His Word. Successful church leadership, according to the Lord, only results from fidelity to His Word, regardless of whether or not such fidelity is popular with the world.

Related Article:

The Church Growth Movement -An Analysis by D.W. Costella Mar-April 1998

FOUNDATION Magazine is available from the Fundamental Evangelistic Association. Click here to go to the ordering form / price list.

Return to FOUNDATION Magazine Index Page