7 reasons why Church Leadership is it's own thing.
I recently quizzed ChatGPT on how many leadership books have been published in the past 50 years. Its answer was essentially a shoulder shrug and: “Nobody really knows,” followed by an estimate of “many hundreds of thousands” of books and articles. It never ceases to amaze me how this genre never seems to run out of things to say. The leadership onion has endless layers—and plenty of tears.
In my doctoral research, I was specifically exploring the overlaps and distinctions between generic leadership theory and Christian leadership. What quickly became clear is that there has been significant cross-pollination. Popular leadership theory has deeply influenced Christian leadership—its language, frameworks, corporatised principles, and culture. At the same time, Christian and biblical ideas have influenced popular leadership discourse, particularly around servant leadership, ethics, power, and workplace spirituality.
Good leadership practice applies in any context. And yet, I am convinced that Christian leadership—and specifically church leadership—is far more layered and nuanced. It is a particular kind of leadership exercised in a particular kind of community under particular theological and spiritual conditions. As such it deserves its own space within the leadership conversation.
Here are seven reasons why I think church leadership warrants being a distinct field of learning and practice.
1. The Bible is the authoritative pretext
For church leaders, the biblical text is not merely inspirational; it is the authoritative pretext for the church leadership context. Church leadership rests on, and works from, a biblically derived worldview shaped by Scripture’s grand narrative and exemplars—especially Jesus.
The Bible locates leaders within God’s story, grounding their identity in Christ and framing leadership within God’s creational and redemptive purposes. Scripture functions as a theocentric reference point for how leaders lead and where, in principle, they lead others. As Paul reminds Timothy:“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:16–17).
At the same time, Scripture is both unifying and complex. Church leaders must navigate theological diversity, hermeneutical disagreement, and contested convictions. Which doctrines are non-negotiable? Where can tensions be held? When must a leader be prophetic, and when diplomatic?
CEOs operate under constitutions and policy manuals. Church leaders are accountable to all of those—and the Bible, a transcendent authority that both guides and constrains leadership practice.
2. Authority Is Always Delegated
Robert Clinton writes,“A Christian leader is a person with God-given capacity and God-given responsibility to influence a specific group of God’s people toward His purposes for the group.”1
At the heart of this definition is delegation. Church leaders do not self-authorise; they lead as God’s delegates. Their authority is derivative, rooted in calling, gifting, and communal discernment. Leadership flows from abiding in Christ—the true Vine (John 15)—and fruitfulness emerges from that dependence.
While human processes appoint leaders, church leadership is more calling than career. Without an ongoing personal and communal sense of God’s endorsement, authority collapses into mere positional power (remember King Saul?)
Generic leadership theory assumes authority is conferred primarily through role, expertise, or performance. Church leadership by contrast understands authority as entrusted, contingent, and answerable beyond the organisation itself. Church leaders therefore live in a precarious space—held between divine calling and human recognition.
3. Leaders must embody their message
The implications of the first two points are unavoidable: church leaders must practise what they preach. Ethics matter in every leadership role. But in most professions, private life and professional competence are largely separable. In church leadership, they are not. Personal and public life are assumed to be integrated. The leader must embody, however imperfectly, their message.
Embodiment is not only about moral restraint or formation; it is also about love. Church leaders are not managing clients but shepherding a community that often functions as family. The church is more organism than organisation. This requires vulnerability, relational presence, grace, and forbearance. Where secular leadership can remain professional and detached, church leadership demands personal, costly love.
Generic leadership theory permits functional separation between role and self. Church leadership assumes congruence between message, life, and leadership.
4. Power management is crucial
Barbara Kellerman in her book The End of Leadership distinguishes between power, authority, and influence—power as force, authority as position, and influence as relational persuasion.2 It is a helpful framework, yet in practice all leadership involves power in various forms.
Church leadership, however, carries a uniquely potent form: spiritual power. A leader’s influence is often amplified by perceived divine authority because, “This leader is called by God.” This significantly increases vulnerability in both the leader and those they lead. In religious contexts, far more is at stake: faith, belonging, righteousness, community, and even eternal destiny.
As Graham Hill notes in his recent reflection on Philip Yancey,"when a Christian leader with a significant platform and influence enters into a sexual relationship with someone in their ministry orbit, the power dynamics make genuine consent impossible. This is always an abuse of power....a consensual affair is a misnomer."3 Downplaying power does not neutralise it—it intensifies harm. Church leaders therefore carry an elevated responsibility to recognise, name, and steward their power carefully.
In contrast, generic leadership theory often treats power as neutral or instrumental. Church leadership must reckon with power as spiritually amplified and ethically inseparable.
5. Effectiveness and success are harder to define
Every church leader wants to be effective—but effective by whose definition? Church leadership lives in tension between objective and subjective measures of success. Quantitative metrics like attendance, giving, baptisms matter. But so do qualitative realities: spiritual maturity, relational health, emotional depth, and communal integrity.
Numbers may indicate attraction, but not necessarily a measure of health and rarely a measure of transformation. Inner change resists quantification, yet it becomes visible through stories, patterns, and long-term fruit.
Generic leadership theory privileges measurable outcomes and performance indicators. Church leadership must hold formation, faithfulness, and fruitfulness together. Thes leaders must lead without the comfort of clear dashboards. Wisdom and discernment matter more than targets alone.
6. Exponential complexity and role fluidity
Church leaders operate in an exponentially complex environment. Their work is layered with personal, pastoral, organisational, legal, cultural, inter-generational, and existential demands.
Communities are voluntarily engaged. Resources are fragile. Churches carry the same regulatory, governance, and financial responsibilities as secular entities—often with fewer supports. And in the midst of this, leaders are expected to be preacher, pastor, strategist, manager, counsellor, and visionary.
As Darren Nelson in a recent Substack writes:"Pastors expecting to drop a new 30-50 minute monologue every 7 days that’s engaging, insightful, funny, accurate, deep, rich, thought-provoking, faith-inspiring, and unpacks the gospel in a way that’s helpful for long-time believers and new visitors—while not neglecting counselling, leadership development, budget decisions, care calls, 15 unexpected tasks during the week, and being a godly husband and dad—is a particular kind of crazy."4
He is not exaggerating. Church leadership requires constant hat-switching and sustained emotional labour. It is ultimately impossible for one person to do well alone. Where generic leadership theory assumes role clarity and bounded responsibility, Church leadership is marked by role fluidity and overlapping expectations.
7. An “Anti-Professional” Profession
John Piper described pastoral ministry as an “anti-professional” profession. In his 2013 book Brothers, We Are Not Professionals, he laments the trend toward substituting spiritual depth with professional polish. He writes:
"We pastors are being killed by the professionalizing of the pastoral ministry. The mentality of the professional is not the mentality of the prophet. It is not the mentality of the slave of Christ. Professionalism has nothing to do with the essence and heart of the Christian ministry. The more professional we long to be, the more spiritual death we will leave in our wake. For there is no professional childlikeness (Matt. 18:3); there is no professional tender-heartedness (Eph. 4:32); there is no professional panting after God (Ps. 42:1)….. We are God-besotted lovers of Christ. How can you be drunk with Jesus professionally? Then, wonder of wonders, we were given the gospel treasure to carry in clay pots to show that the transcendent power belongs to God (2 Cor. 4:7). Is there a way to be a professional clay pot?" 5
I'm not sure I entirely agree, and I wonder if Piper really understands what it’s like to lead a local church today. He rightly resists under-spiritualising church leadership yet his framing risks reviving what Charles Taylor called the “two-tiered distortion” and A.W Tozer named the old sacred secular antithesis” 6 with an artificial divide between spiritual depth and practical competence.
Piper is right, the great leaders of the bible didn’t need to read Covey, Collins or Greenleaf to be effective leaders….but it wouldn’t have hurt either. We can under-spiritualise church leadership by treating it as merely another profession. But we can also over-spiritualise it by pretending leaders have no agency, skills to develop, or responsibility to improve as if somehow the fruit of the Spirit have nothing to say to how we work. It’s a paradoxical “both-and.” Some of the most “useless” leaders I’ve known have been wonderfully spiritual people who, in their lane, made an incredible impact.
1. The Bible is the authoritative pretext
For church leaders, the biblical text is not merely inspirational; it is the authoritative pretext for the church leadership context. Church leadership rests on, and works from, a biblically derived worldview shaped by Scripture’s grand narrative and exemplars—especially Jesus.
The Bible locates leaders within God’s story, grounding their identity in Christ and framing leadership within God’s creational and redemptive purposes. Scripture functions as a theocentric reference point for how leaders lead and where, in principle, they lead others. As Paul reminds Timothy:“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:16–17).
At the same time, Scripture is both unifying and complex. Church leaders must navigate theological diversity, hermeneutical disagreement, and contested convictions. Which doctrines are non-negotiable? Where can tensions be held? When must a leader be prophetic, and when diplomatic?
CEOs operate under constitutions and policy manuals. Church leaders are accountable to all of those—and the Bible, a transcendent authority that both guides and constrains leadership practice.
2. Authority Is Always Delegated
Robert Clinton writes,“A Christian leader is a person with God-given capacity and God-given responsibility to influence a specific group of God’s people toward His purposes for the group.”1
At the heart of this definition is delegation. Church leaders do not self-authorise; they lead as God’s delegates. Their authority is derivative, rooted in calling, gifting, and communal discernment. Leadership flows from abiding in Christ—the true Vine (John 15)—and fruitfulness emerges from that dependence.
While human processes appoint leaders, church leadership is more calling than career. Without an ongoing personal and communal sense of God’s endorsement, authority collapses into mere positional power (remember King Saul?)
Generic leadership theory assumes authority is conferred primarily through role, expertise, or performance. Church leadership by contrast understands authority as entrusted, contingent, and answerable beyond the organisation itself. Church leaders therefore live in a precarious space—held between divine calling and human recognition.
3. Leaders must embody their message
The implications of the first two points are unavoidable: church leaders must practise what they preach. Ethics matter in every leadership role. But in most professions, private life and professional competence are largely separable. In church leadership, they are not. Personal and public life are assumed to be integrated. The leader must embody, however imperfectly, their message.
Embodiment is vital in church leadership not simply for ethical reasons but because the spiritual formation of those they lead (fundamental to the role) occurs to some extent through proximity to the leader. Leaders shape communities not only by what they design, or present from platforms, but by who they are becoming in plain sight. This means that church leaders are always discipling, even when they are unaware of it. Their prayer life, emotional regulation, conflict posture, Sabbath practices, humility, and repentance all quietly catechise the community.
The way a leader embodies Scripture in the totality of life will be scrutinised by those they lead. Small inconsistencies may be overlooked; major ones will not. Character ultimately trumps competence, and when character fails, a sacred trust is often shattered. Recent examples—such as Philip Yancey’s public confession and withdrawal from ministry—remind us that even deeply respected leaders are neither immune from the temptation of dis-integrated living, nor protected from its consequences.
Embodiment is not only about moral restraint or formation; it is also about love. Church leaders are not managing clients but shepherding a community that often functions as family. The church is more organism than organisation. This requires vulnerability, relational presence, grace, and forbearance. Where secular leadership can remain professional and detached, church leadership demands personal, costly love.
Generic leadership theory permits functional separation between role and self. Church leadership assumes congruence between message, life, and leadership.
4. Power management is crucial
Barbara Kellerman in her book The End of Leadership distinguishes between power, authority, and influence—power as force, authority as position, and influence as relational persuasion.2 It is a helpful framework, yet in practice all leadership involves power in various forms.
Church leadership, however, carries a uniquely potent form: spiritual power. A leader’s influence is often amplified by perceived divine authority because, “This leader is called by God.” This significantly increases vulnerability in both the leader and those they lead. In religious contexts, far more is at stake: faith, belonging, righteousness, community, and even eternal destiny.
As Graham Hill notes in his recent reflection on Philip Yancey,"when a Christian leader with a significant platform and influence enters into a sexual relationship with someone in their ministry orbit, the power dynamics make genuine consent impossible. This is always an abuse of power....a consensual affair is a misnomer."3 Downplaying power does not neutralise it—it intensifies harm. Church leaders therefore carry an elevated responsibility to recognise, name, and steward their power carefully.
In contrast, generic leadership theory often treats power as neutral or instrumental. Church leadership must reckon with power as spiritually amplified and ethically inseparable.
5. Effectiveness and success are harder to define
Every church leader wants to be effective—but effective by whose definition? Church leadership lives in tension between objective and subjective measures of success. Quantitative metrics like attendance, giving, baptisms matter. But so do qualitative realities: spiritual maturity, relational health, emotional depth, and communal integrity.
Numbers may indicate attraction, but not necessarily a measure of health and rarely a measure of transformation. Inner change resists quantification, yet it becomes visible through stories, patterns, and long-term fruit.
Generic leadership theory privileges measurable outcomes and performance indicators. Church leadership must hold formation, faithfulness, and fruitfulness together. Thes leaders must lead without the comfort of clear dashboards. Wisdom and discernment matter more than targets alone.
6. Exponential complexity and role fluidity
Church leaders operate in an exponentially complex environment. Their work is layered with personal, pastoral, organisational, legal, cultural, inter-generational, and existential demands.
Communities are voluntarily engaged. Resources are fragile. Churches carry the same regulatory, governance, and financial responsibilities as secular entities—often with fewer supports. And in the midst of this, leaders are expected to be preacher, pastor, strategist, manager, counsellor, and visionary.
As Darren Nelson in a recent Substack writes:"Pastors expecting to drop a new 30-50 minute monologue every 7 days that’s engaging, insightful, funny, accurate, deep, rich, thought-provoking, faith-inspiring, and unpacks the gospel in a way that’s helpful for long-time believers and new visitors—while not neglecting counselling, leadership development, budget decisions, care calls, 15 unexpected tasks during the week, and being a godly husband and dad—is a particular kind of crazy."4
He is not exaggerating. Church leadership requires constant hat-switching and sustained emotional labour. It is ultimately impossible for one person to do well alone. Where generic leadership theory assumes role clarity and bounded responsibility, Church leadership is marked by role fluidity and overlapping expectations.
7. An “Anti-Professional” Profession
John Piper described pastoral ministry as an “anti-professional” profession. In his 2013 book Brothers, We Are Not Professionals, he laments the trend toward substituting spiritual depth with professional polish. He writes:
"We pastors are being killed by the professionalizing of the pastoral ministry. The mentality of the professional is not the mentality of the prophet. It is not the mentality of the slave of Christ. Professionalism has nothing to do with the essence and heart of the Christian ministry. The more professional we long to be, the more spiritual death we will leave in our wake. For there is no professional childlikeness (Matt. 18:3); there is no professional tender-heartedness (Eph. 4:32); there is no professional panting after God (Ps. 42:1)….. We are God-besotted lovers of Christ. How can you be drunk with Jesus professionally? Then, wonder of wonders, we were given the gospel treasure to carry in clay pots to show that the transcendent power belongs to God (2 Cor. 4:7). Is there a way to be a professional clay pot?" 5
I'm not sure I entirely agree, and I wonder if Piper really understands what it’s like to lead a local church today. He rightly resists under-spiritualising church leadership yet his framing risks reviving what Charles Taylor called the “two-tiered distortion” and A.W Tozer named the old sacred secular antithesis” 6 with an artificial divide between spiritual depth and practical competence.
Piper is right, the great leaders of the bible didn’t need to read Covey, Collins or Greenleaf to be effective leaders….but it wouldn’t have hurt either. We can under-spiritualise church leadership by treating it as merely another profession. But we can also over-spiritualise it by pretending leaders have no agency, skills to develop, or responsibility to improve as if somehow the fruit of the Spirit have nothing to say to how we work. It’s a paradoxical “both-and.” Some of the most “useless” leaders I’ve known have been wonderfully spiritual people who, in their lane, made an incredible impact.
Christian leadership is animated by Christ in us. But wisdom, skill, and formation are not enemies of spirituality—they are expressions of stewardship. Generic leadership theory professionalises leadership minus transcendence. Church leadership must integrate spiritual depth with disciplined competence.
__________
So, church leadership is not simply leadership with Christian language layered on top. It is leadership shaped by Scripture, animated by the Spirit, constrained by love, accountable to God, and exercised among people whose participation is voluntary and whose formation is at stake. It sits at the intersection of theology and organisation, calling and competence, vulnerability and authority, love and power. It involves souls as well as systems, formation as well as function.
This does not make church leadership superior—but it does make it different. As such, church leadership requires more than borrowed frameworks from generic leadership theory. It demands wisdom—biblically grounded, theologically informed, psychologically aware, and spiritually formed. If we want church leaders to be healthy and effective, we must take seriously the distinctiveness of the task they are called to carry.
_____________
And to that end I recognise the immense value of organisations seeking to meet this need. Which is why one of my "day jobs" at the moment is working for Partners In Ministry - an Australian organisation dedicated to church leadership health and effectiveness. There are many very good leadership training options available today, but what I most appreciate about this organisation is the way their frameworks are deeply integrated into the church context by people who personally understand the complexities and nuances of Church leadership. I'm delighted to be contributing to the shaping and delivery of this and if you'd like to know more reach out to me personally or see the PIM link here.
___________
Notes:
1. Robert, Clinton, The Making of a Leader: Recognizing the Lessons and Stages of Leadership Development, Second edition. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2012), p12
2. Barbara Kellerman, The End of Leadership. 1st ed. New York: Harper Business, 2012. p13
3. Graham Hill, "Philip Yancey, Celebrity, Brokenness, and Me" Spirituality and Society with Hilly, Substack, January 8, 2026. https://open.substack.com/pub/
4. Darren Nelson, Teaching for Change, Substack, January 2, 2026. https://substack.com/@
5. John Piper Brothers we are not professionals, Nashville, Tennessee. B&H Publishing Group, 2013. p1
6 Charles Taylor, A Secular Age, First Harvard University Press paperback edition. (Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2018), 36. And A. W. Tozer, Pursuit of God, Updated edition. (Abbotsford, WI: Aneko Press, 2015), 27
On this topic see also:Peter G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory and Practice, Ninth Edition. (Los Angeles: SAGE Publishing,
2022). page 10-11
Henry and Richard Blackaby, Spiritual Leadership: Moving People on to God’sAgenda. Rev. & Expanded. Nashville, Tenn: B & H Pub. Group, 2011.
