Mikros (the Greek word for small) is published bi-monthly by the Institute for Small Church Heath. Dr. Glenn C. Daman, editor. The newsletter may be obtained free of charge through e-mail by contacting daman@westernseminary.edu or may be downloaded from the web site. Permission is granted to copy the newsletter for distribution provided it is furnished free of charge. All rights reserved. Glenn C. Daman, Editor, Institute for Church Health, Western Seminary, 5511 SE Hawthorne Blvd, Portland OR 97215
To understand leadership we need to understand its fundamental purpose. It has been rightly said that if you do not know where you are going, you will probably end up somewhere else. In other words, if we do not have a clear idea of what our goals are, then we will never have a clear idea of what we are to do. This is especially true concerning leadership. How we understand the purpose of leadership will determine how we define the task of leadership and how we go about performing our responsibilities. Our purpose defines our goals, our goals define our priorities and our priorities influence how we define our responsibilities. If our purpose as leaders is organizational, then our goals will be to have an efficient organization. Our priorities, then, will be determined by what contributes to an efficiently run organization. Our responsibilities will ultimately be organizational in nature. However, if, our purpose as leaders is spiritual in nature, then our goals must be spiritually defined.
Paul describes the purpose of his ministry in Col 1:28-29, “We proclaim him, admonishing and teaching everyone with all wisdom, so that we may present everyone perfect in Christ. To this end I labour, struggling with all his energy, which so perfectly works in me.” For Paul, the purpose governing all his activities and efforts was the spiritual transformation of people. This defines our purpose as well. Since it is our function to bring people to Christ, our goal is to lead in a manner that brings transformation in the lives of people. People, to enter into a vital relationship with Christ, must be radically changed. First they must be changed redemptively, that is they must be changed from being spiritual dead to spiritually alive. Second, they must be changed sanctificationally. Even though they have a relationship with Christ, there must be the ongoing process by which they begin to manifest and reveal Christ’s character within them. This task, while resting ultimately upon the initiative of the Holy Spirit, involves the work of spiritual leaders. Paul states emphatically that God gave leaders to the church for the purpose of assisting the church in this sanctificational process (Eph 4:11-13).
A spiritual leader does not lead passively, merely imparting knowledge about God in the hopes that people might respond. Instead, we are to aggressively and actively seek to influence and impact people for the cause of Christ. Too often, in the church, our preaching and ministry has followed how we present theology. The reason theology has lost its power and influence in the church is because it was often presented without a transformational goal. Systematic theology, which is the study of God, too often was given without the call to respond properly to God. It addressed the mind, but never addressed the will. It may have challenged how we think about God, but it neglected to challenge how we live before God. So people regarded (wrongfully and tragically so) theology as dead orthodoxy rather than necessary for vibrant spirituality. We face the same danger in the church regarding leadership. When we start to view leadership merely organizationally (i.e. vision casting, administration, programs, etc.), we lose the very soul of leadership. The task of leadership is not to challenge the mind of people with biblical facts (although this is necessary), nor is it to guide the church organization, it is to seek to challenge people with transformation through the proclamation and application of biblical truth (see Acts 2:40; 26:3,29; 2 Cor. 10:1,2; Gal 4:12). When we lead the church without seeking to transform the church the end result is that we render leadership impotent and stagnate. The effect is that people become cynical and apathetic towards leaders.
Crucial in our understanding is the realization that all transformation is ultimately the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the individual and congregation. In the end, we must always recognize that we have done nothing worthy of recognition and merit in changing people. All the credit must and will go to the work of a sovereign and gracious God working in the lives of people. However, equally crucial is the realization that God in his infinite wisdom and grace chooses to use us as leaders in the process for effecting change within the church and within people. We are to lead with a transformational goal simply because God calls us to this ministry, equips us for this ministry, empowers us in this ministry and uses us through this ministry. Being transformational in our task is critical because of the need for change in the lives of people. They do not come into the church spiritual whole. Instead, they enter the doors of our sanctuary spiritually and morally crippled and marred.
The world in which we live is in a crisis of confusion concerning the character of God. Like the paganism and polytheism that tainted the Ancient Near Eastern world, so our society is influenced by corrupted views of God. The names have changed, but the false gods they represent have not. Instead of Baal we have New Age philosophy, instead of Re we have Eastern Mysticism with its worship of creation, instead of Asherah we have the worship of the super-models and the sexuality they represent. We have consumerism, materialism, humanism, Yoga, meditation and a host of other philosophies that spew forth the same cesspool of idolatry represented by the gods of the Canaanites. Like the Israelites in the times of the prophets, so our culture has been indoctrinated with the teaching of the modern idols resulting in the incorporation of these even into our own view of spirituality. We live in an age where there is a renewed interest in spirituality. However, this interest has not brought a clarification of biblical truth in the minds of people, but corruption as truth has become relative and God has become limited in his own being (as expressed by Process Theology). The result is a clouded view of God and a confused understanding of the nature and being of God. Like the prophets of Scripture, our task as leaders is to call people from the confusion of polytheism to the clarity of the monotheistic God of Scriptures. Like Elijah on Mount Carmel we are to challenge people to choose between the God of the Bible and the gods of the culture. We are to confront faulty notions of God and rebuild people’s perspective with a right understanding of God. Transformation begins, not with changing people’s perspective of themselves, but with changing people’s perspective of God. Even though we know our people well, even in the small church we should never assume that they have a right understanding of God. Many people who come to church Sunday after Sunday, who have been raised in our congregations, who wouldn’t dream of reading any other Bible but the King James Version, have idolatrous views of God. As Stephen Charnock points out, it is not the absolute denial of God that is at the heart of atheism; it is the denial or doubting of some of the rights of his nature (The Existence and Attributes of God, 1:24). Idolatry is not just the denial of the God of Scripture in favor of another; it also is the misrepresentation of him. If we are not actively seeking to correct people’s view of God, then we deny the exclusiveness of God and the vitality of his nature and we become idolaters ourselves.
With the distortion of our view of comes a distortion of our view of morality. It should not surprise us that we see a moral decline in our culture for it is the inevitable result of post-modernity. When truth becomes unknowable, morality becomes indefinable (1 Timothy 1:10-11). Morality and ethics are further undermined when the focus shifts from personal character to personal achievement. As Millard Erickson points out, “The effect of this modernization is to create two separate spheres, the public and the private. The one world is defined by personal relations, and is made up of small, insulated islands of home, family and personal friends. The other is defined by the functions within the capitalistic machine. In this great system of production and distribution, persons are valued not for who they are or what they believe or hold as values, but for what the do” (Milliard Erickson, Postmodernizing the Faith, p. 30). The tragedy is that what is true in our culture is equally true in the church. No longer is a leader evaluated by what the values he or she represents, but by the achievements they accomplish. As long as the pastor is well liked, communicates effectively from the pulpit and “builds” the church, people are willing to overlook significant moral and ethical weaknesses.
Along with this moral decline has come a whole new set of moral questions. Genetic engineering, artificial reproduction technology, doctor assisted suicide, right to die and a host of other medical ethical questions brought about by the advancement of science have raised a whole new set of moral issues. Other issues, while long present within different subcultures are now become prevalent within the mainstream of society. Issues such as gambling (now supported by the state), pornography (both soft and hardcore), civil disobedience, drug abuse (both alcohol and stimulants), divorce and a host of other social issues are no longer outside the church but present within the church. We live in a society where self-centeredness and manipulation are encouraged (for an example see the proliferation of the ‘reality TV’ shows where people are willing to hurt, embarrass and manipulate others for their own gain) and humility and community are abandoned. Just because people come to church does not mean they leave the cultural morality (or immorality) behind to embrace a biblical morality and ethos.
It is in this world that the leader must lead. As we lead we must not lead people to transform their morality by merely confronting cultural vices; we must challenge people to be completely different. As Carl Henry points out, “Christianity is qualitatively different or it has nothing distinctive to offer the world.” He goes on to point out, “We need to do more than to sponsor a Christian subculture. We need a Christian counterculture that sets itself alongside the secular rivals and publishes openly the difference that belief in God and His Christ makes in the arenas of thought and action. We need Christian countermoves that commend a new climate, countermoves that penetrate the public realm” (Carl Henry, “Twilight of a Great Civilization, p. 44). The transformation that we are to call people to is to be complete and entire, affect the very core and essence of the personhood. Concerning the transformation that is to take place, Paul writes that we are to be a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). This is not merely a restoration of the person by the Holy Spirit to a pre-fall condition, but a complete transformation penetrating the very nature of the individual. The result is that we are to thinking differently and have a completely different mindset (Romans 8:5-7).
Inherent within our call as small church leaders is our calling to transform people. While it is ultimately the work of the Holy Spirit in accomplishing this transformation we need to recognize that we have the distinct privilege of being used by the Holy Spirit in challenging peoples lives. To be one who is used by the Holy Spirit it is important that we be available for him to use. This availability is not only in our inward willingness to serve, but how we develop as leaders.
To effectively speak to the issues of people and the misconceptions they have, we need to understand the culture in which we live. We are the product of our culture. It influences and governs our thinking far more than we realize. A person who was raised in an American culture thinks and reacts radically different than a person raised in an Islamic culture. Even within a specific culture, there are a divergent number of subcultures that affect the way people live and the moral values they embrace. An individual living in an inner-city subculture will view life differently from a person raised in a rural setting. A person from the south has different values than a person in the northwest. Where our culture embraces and supports biblical values we can embrace and encourage them as leaders. Where our culture remains neutral, we can and should remain neutral (for example in issues of dress and styles). However where our culture violates biblical values and teachings we must confront and challenge them from a biblical perspective. To distinguish between these different levels of cultural involvement, we need to have a thorough and Spirit guided knowledge of our culture. We need to strive to step outside our culture and honestly assess our culture from a biblical perspective. While it is ultimately impossible to be culturally neutral (we are always influenced by our culture), we must strive to be culturally critical, ever re-examining our cultural expectations and values by the standards of Scripture.
To lead effectively we need to understand what God desires to transform people and the church into. This perspective is determined from Scripture as we seek to understand what God desires to accomplish within the lives of people. As the leaders, we are to be continually searching and examining the Scriptures to determine what God wants to church to be and how the church is to be involved within the community.
We cannot lead where we have not gone, we cannot transform others if we ourselves are not at the same time being changed. The greatest challenge we face in ministry, and the most important ingredient to effective leadership is not what we do in relationship to the church, but what we are allowing the Holy Spirit to do in relationship to our own life. The disciplines of study, prayer, self-examination and personal discipleship are central to the pastoral responsibility. We may be able to run an organization without prayer and an intimate relationship with God, but we cannot transform others. If we are not being transformed we will inevitably fall prey to the same snare that captured the leaders of Israel, who became more concerned about their own well being than they did about spiritually nurturing the people (Jeremiah 23:1-2, 16-18).
If the purpose of our ministry is transformational in nature, the question confronting us is whom we are to transform and how do we go about achieving the process. We have repeated stated and implied that ministry is intrinsically simple, but it is not easy. This is especially true regarding the task of influencing and impacting people’s lives. In ministry we can become so focused upon programs and structures that we loose sight of the real object of our ministry. In many cases we fall prey to the proverbial error of the tail wagging the dog. The reason is because we become muddled in our thinking regarding the focus of our ministry. When this happens ministry becomes confusingly complex and thorny. The result in the small church is that we start trying to duplicate what worked elsewhere. We attempt to become the mini-mega-church. Instead of developing a ministry that is tailored to our specific small church location and environment, we try to force an external model upon the church. The result is not only frustration in the ministry of the pastor and people, but a failure to develop a truly transformational ministry.
Any size church can have a powerful, transformational ministry whether it is small or large. Because the focus of ministry is transformational rather than merely numerical growth, the size of the church is never an indicator of the quality of ministry it might have nor is it a barometer of the influence in can have in changing people’s loves. However, to make a difference for the cause of Christ we need to have a clear understanding of whom we are to influence and how we have a transformational impact upon them.
One of the pictures used to present the pastoral ministry is that of a shepherd (from which the term “pastor” is derived). This term used by Paul in Ephesians 4:11 had its roots in the Old Testament understanding of Biblical leadership in relationship to both God and the human leaders of the people. God was the shepherd who cared for his people, protecting and providing for them (Psalm 68:7; Psalm 23; Isaiah 40:11). This correlation between the leader of the people and the shepherding model finds it parallel throughout the Ancient Near East. With its close ties to an agrarian milieu, both within the language and culture the king was regarded as the shepherd of the people. Thus it was easy for the Old Testament writers to speak not only of God being the shepherd of Israel, but also referring any individual who was designated by God to be the leader of the people of God. This imagery further finds expression in Christ’s own picture of his care of his people. He referred to himself as the good shepherd and his people as his flock. While the terms “Elder” and “overseer” describe the position of leadership within the church it was the term shepherd that served to describe the function of leadership (see 1 Peter 5:1-4; Acts 20:28-29). This picture provides us a clearly perspective of the responsibility we have as pastors. Rather than being leaders who are visionaries, we are shepherds that care. As E. Glenn Wagner points out, “I wonder: If I came to a new church and showed the people that I was a shepherd, that I cared for them-but did not yet have a vision for them-where would that congregation be in a year? Worst case? I might be pasturing a church of forty or fifty people because my abilities and gifts wouldn’t carry me beyond that. But is that so wrong? …Doesn’t that little church deserve a shepherd who models Christ? On the other hand, where would that church be if I came as a leader which great vision but no shepherd’s heart? I think the latter scenario could be more destructive than the former.” (Wagner, Escape from Church, Inc, p.148). While having a vision and being a leader is beneficial to ministry, it is not the core of our ministry. Instead we are called to provide care for the people. A shepherd is one who understands the people and tailors the ministry to minister to the needs of people.
Being effective within the pastoral role involves more than overseeing the spiritual well being of the whole congregation. It also involves providing individual care and guidance for everyone within the congregation. The danger is that we can depersonalize ministry to the point that we are leading the congregation but not ministering to the individuals within the church. However, Christ himself models individual care by giving personal attention to each person within the body of Christ. Christ states that a shepherd is one who “calls his own sheep by name” (John 10:3). This implies a personal relationship in which there is intimate knowledge of the special needs and care necessary to bring healing and health to the each sheep. Furthermore, the word “calls” “expresses personal address rather than general or authoritative invitation” (Westcott, Gospel of St. John, p. 152). This is further highlighted by Christ’s statement in verse 14 and 15 that “I know my sheep and my sheep know me-just as the Father knows me and I know the Father.” Just as there is personal interaction and involvement between the Father and the Son, so there is personal interaction between Christ and his followers.
As pastors of small churches we often decry our lack of resources and our limitations within the church and within our own giftedness. What we fail to recognize is that we already possess the greatest asset necessary for effective, transformational ministry: That being a personal knowledge of the people we serve. Because the church is small, everyone within the church has direct access to us, and we have a personal knowledge of what is going on in their lives. We know everyone’s strengths and weakness, we know the struggles and triumphs they face. We know the difficulties that they are confronted with each day. This knowledge becomes the basis for effectiveness in ministry as we can personally encounter them in their daily lives. We can have a personalized ministry, one that ministers specifically and particularly to them. Our ministry is not generically conducted with a “one size fits all” approach. Rather it is custom-made, tailored to the individual. As we interact with people we can apply scripture to specific situations they are facing. This is not done in a “formal counseling” session, but over informal interaction over a cup of coffee or a breakfast at a local diner.
When people enter the church they do come from a spiritual vacuum where they are untouched by the spiritual perceptions permeating our culture. Nor do they enter into the church spiritually whole. The reality remains that everyone (ourselves included) enters the church spiritually scarred and wounded. They have been damaged by the pains and trials of spiritual battles. They have been marred by the effects of sin in the past. Like Peter, after his denial of Christ, they wonder if God could ever accept and love them again. However, perhaps the greatest tragedy is that often they are not even aware of the spiritual scars that plague their life. The greatest deception of the evil one is the deception that we are not in desperate need of God’s infinite grace and forgiveness. We believe that we are inherently good and acceptable before a righteous God. We have been taught so long that we are to have a healthy self-image that we have forgotten that before we can think rightly about ourselves, we first must think rightly about God. The result is not only spiritual disaster but also emotional upheaval. So people struggle with their personal identity, with depression as they are unable to cope or understand the struggles they face, with anger as the actions of others seem to thwart their own search for personal identity. The apostle Paul summarizes the reality of many when he writes, “Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming. You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived. But now you must rid yourselves of all things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips” (Colossians 3:5-8). Paul recognized that there remains often a dichotomy between the way people are to live because of their new life in Christ and the way in which they are currently conducting their lives. He realized that just because we are called to live Chrsit-like does not mean that we will live Christlike.
It is this discrepancy that challenges the pastor to shepherd his people. We are the avenue through which God often uses to bring his healing suave to the spiritual and emotional wounds of people (see Ephes 4:11-16). To do this, we must “feed the sheep,” that is we must constantly be communicating the truth of God in a manner that addresses and heals the spiritual struggles we face. The way we bring this healing is not through programs but through the proclamation of the word of God. When we are serving small churches, especially in isolated rural areas, we often do not have the counseling resources to which we can refer people for help. While there is a great deal of value to psychology and it is a discipline that we should not hesitate to utilize, we also can have confidence that we have an invaluable resource already in our possession by which we can bring spiritual and emotional health to people.
This is not to say that the use of professional counselors should not be utilized when it is available. In the ongoing debate concerning the value and place of psychology to address the emotional needs of people we often forget that it is not a case of either/or, but an issue of both/and. When psychological services are available we should not hesitate to utilize them. However, even in addressing the emotional needs of people there are also spiritual needs that need to be addressed. This is the role we fulfill as shepherds. A shepherd not only mends the broken but provides oversight in helping people find other resources to address individual needs and then follows up to make sure the person is on the way to emotional and spiritual health. The advantage we have as shepherds of small churches is we can often identify individuals who are in emotional and spiritual stress and we can intervene before the individual comes to a point of severe crisis
Spiritual wolves are the constant threat to the sheep. Consequently the shepherd is to be continually on vigil least these wolves infiltrate the sheep and decimate the flock. Paul warns of this danger in his writing to those who desire to be shepherds of God’s flock (Acts 20:29). The church lives in a hostile area where the battle we face is incessant requireing perpetual vigilance. There remains the relentless threat that individuals and false teaching will infiltrate the church and seek to destroy the health of the church. This warning relates to the false teachers prevalent in a fallen world. These false teachers will corrupt both doctrine and practical living. They will distort the truth of scripture and the understanding of God and his redemptive plan, and they will corrupt godly behavior in order to prevent people from being transformed into the image of Christ. The challenge we face in the church is the challenge of not only doctrinal integrity but Christ-centered consistency in daily practice. One of the strengths of the small church has been its adherence to doctrinal truth. The small church has often remained a stalwart in upholding the doctrinal history of the church. However, in its adherence to correct theology it has often fallen prey to the same error as the church at Ephesus which maintained doctrinal purity and diligent activity, but had lost touch with its daily practice. It had strongly opposed the Nicolaitans and their heretical theology, but lost connection with the daily relationship with God (Revelation 2:1-7). Those in the small church have long upheld the doctrines of the church but overlooked the greater danger of no longer having a biblical worldview that governs all aspects of life. We have become practical schizophrenics who believe one thing, but practice another. As shepherds it is not only our task to correct bad theology, it is also our task to correct corrupt lifestyles. To guard against spiritual wolves is to be vigilant concerning both those who teach heresy and those who practice it. When we become professionals rather than preachers, where we become driven by crowds rather than truth we run the risk of teaching what is popular rather than what is transformational. When this happens we are no longer shepherds but hired hands who abandon the sheep to avoid the trauma of confronting wolves (John 10:11-13).
However, error not only infiltrates the church from a secular culture bent on rebelling against God, it also comes from those who are within the church. Paul goes on to warn, “Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20:30). These are individual who are more concerned about position and their own standing within the church rather than the health of the congregation. They promote their own agenda rather than prayerfully seeking God’s direction for the church. They reduce the church to a political struggle for power and authority within the congregation. While in the small church the “tribal chief” is often one who has a deep love for God and a passion for the well-being of the church, and the wise pastor learns to work with them, there are times when their position within the church and their desire to maintain their authority becomes more important than what is best for the church. Sometimes some of the most difficult tasks we face in the small church is confronting the tribal chief and loosening authority from them. While this should always be done carefully and under girded with prayer, there are times that it must be done even at the risk of our position within the church. To be godly shepherds requires that we protect the congregation from those who are within the church who lead the church away from the truth and hamstring the ministry. While this is never easy and sometimes extremely painful, it may be necessary to be faithful to our calling to be shepherds.
When we entered ministry we did so with optimism and a sense of excitement. We had an idealistic view where people would be thrilled by our messages and excited about our programs. With the command of Jesus to “feed my lambs” in our mind, we entered with a serene pastoral image of a shepherd lovingly watching over the flock as the little lambs frolic at his feet. It does not take long for this idealistic view to be shattered in the pain of rejection, discouragement and disappointment. Instead of a flock of sheep, we often wonder if we were given a herd of stubborn mules, who have the furiousness of wolves, the spiritual sensitivity of a baboon and the speed of a turtle.
Not only are we confronted with the pain of dealing with broken people, but also we ourselves are often broken by our own inadequacies and failures. The demands of ministry always exceed our capabilities and resources. We face the difficulties of trying to heal conflicts, deal with emotionally disturbed people (some of whom may even be on the board), and free people caught in the snares of sinful behaviors. We are confronted with our inadequacies as we counsel couples who have deep-rooted bitterness towards one another, assist parents whose child is rejecting every value and ethos they treasure, and help someone through the trauma of terminal cancer. In all this we are painfully aware of our own sinfulness and weaknesses. At times we stand in the pulpit knowing full well that we are not practicing the very message we are preaching. In our despair we blame our education and complain that the seminary or college did not adequately train us for the problems we face. But the reality is that the failure is not the seminary or college, for no matter how much training we received we could never be fully prepared for the trials we face.
What we failed to realize as we enter ministry is that to be a shepherd and transform people there would be an incredible cost that we would have to pay. When Jeremiah complained to God about the wickedness of the people and the treatment he received, God reminded him, “If you have raced with men on foot and they have worn you out, how can you compete with horses? If you stumble in safe country, how will you manage in the thickets by the Jordan” (Jeremiah 12:5). In other words, “If you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.” What we forget is that when God called us to transform people there was a sacrifice that had to be made. Christ realized this when he stated, “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). What distinguishes the genuine shepherd from the hired hand is the degree that the shepherd places the welfare and well-being of the sheep above his own. The genuine shepherd is willing to pay the price in protecting the sheep. Paul recognized the cost when he described the trials and struggles he faced in ministry (2 Corinthians 4:7-12). His motivation was that “All this is for your benefit, so that the grace that is reaching more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow to the glory of God” (verse 15).
If we desire to change people and transform individuals into disciples for Christ, then we must be willing to sacrifice our time, energies and talents so that others may realize the grace of God operating in their lives. It requires that we sacrifice our dreams of “success” (i.e. serving larger churches or growing churches in highly visible locations) to minister to a small congregation in isolated communities. It means that we recognize that the church of thirty is just as valuable to God as the church of 3000 five blocks down the street. God is just as concerned about the growth of the individual as he is the growth of the whole. In our market driven, mega-size society, what we often fail to understand is that God values each individual and that he sacrificed himself not just for the masses of people who would become the church, but also for each individual who would become part of the church. Since we are to follow him and pattern our ministry after his, we should do no less. The power to transform people corresponds to the amount we are willing to sacrifice for them. God did not call us to a life of ease, but to a life of pain, sorrow, and difficulty in order that in the end he might receive the glory.
The picture Christ desires to present of his own ministry is not that of a shepherd who oversees the well-being of the 99, but the shepherd who leaves the 99 in order to search diligently for the wayward one (Matthew 18:12-14). While this statement makes for a wonderful picture of a shepherd carrying his lamb back to the flock, what we often overlook is that the context is not of someone who got lost, but someone who has become ensnared in sin and is rebellion against God (verses 15-20). This is not a lamb that lost his way, but one that deliberately went his own way. Perhaps even more troubling is God’s condemnation of the shepherds in Ezekiel 34:1-10. His chief indictment against them was that “you have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost” (verse 4). To care for people means that we are diligent in our care even of those who are in rebellion against God and causing us the most difficulties in ministry. We are not satisfied merely to look at the number of people we have in our pews or how many new individuals have come in the front door. We are also deeply concerned about the people who are leaving the church, who are no longer attending and we go out of our way to bring them back into fellowship. As Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 4:28-29, “Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches. Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn?” To be effective as a shepherd requires that we are not content when people leave the church, not because we have “lost a costumer,” but because the person has stepped outside of fellowship with God. Consequently we are willing to go and diligently and lovingly seek to bring them back into a right relationship with God.