Church: An Open or Closed System?

Most churches are filled with self-appointed consultants who feel that it is incumbent upon them to share their findings with the senior pastor. One "consultant" will say that the need is for the church to return to core traditional values, reflected in worship styles incorporating hymns/Southern Gospel . Another "consultant" will say that the need is to respond the external environment and offer a program that appeals to the community, thus the need is to employ more contemporary models--praise and worship or contemporary Christian music. Two people, two perspectives, both probably shaped by personal biases, that is, personal preference.

The underlying question is whether the church is an open system or a closed system. If it is a closed system that is designed only to respond to internal environmental conditions, then it may be possible to have a happy but dying church. On the other hand, an open system that responds to external needs and conditions may produce discomfort among members, but result in growth.

Reflecting upon the ministry of Jesus, it seems He intended to birth a church that was responsive to the external environment without sacrificing foundational truths. The existing first century religious establishment was a closed system and that was part of the problem. Few of the religious elites who were ensconced in the existing system were willing to look through new eyes. The apostle Paul is an exception, and he had to be blinded before he could see.

Dr. Dutta Roy says that it is impossible for a person who is in the system to be a diagnostician of the system he or she is in. In others words, neither members nor leaders will be effective at diagnosing the needs of their own organization. He argues that accurate diagnostics of the organization must come from an outside, objective, source. This is true both at the local and the organizational level.

Dealing with Dis-Appointments

"Disappointment". . . if you look at the word it suggests that an appointment was anticipated, but it was annulled, or it was canceled. It suggests a letdown, a setback, a frustration, if not a failure. Every leader will have to face his or her share of disappointments. A leader may hope for something to happen, may anticipate a certain outcome, may even plan for and make arrangements for an “appointment” only to be dis-appointed. How a leader handles such disappointments may ultimately determine how far he or she will go in leadership.

For some, the disappointment may result in a bitter retributive spirit that seeks to get even with the individual or the organization who denied the anticipated objective. Such retribution often takes the form of disparaing remarks concerning those that the leader perceives to have thwarted his or her would-be appointment. Another reaction is to retreat into lethargy, a “what’s the use” mentality that surrenders to mediocrity and sinks into complacency. A third and more productive response to disappointment is to assess the reasons for the disappointment, make adjustments and improvements, and then refocus for the next “appointment.” It may require that one change goals, it may mean a new focus, or it may mean that one must revisit the appointment with new skills, experience, resources, or education.

It is too easy to blame others for our disappointments. However, there may not even be need for blame. It may have simply come down to the fact that someone else could deliver a better product, or could produce it at a lower cost, or that they simply appealed to some intangible attraction on the part of those making decisions relative to the appointment.

Truthfully, sometimes it isn’t fair. That’s life. A good leader will roll with the punches and get back up off the mat to fight another day. Some punches will be below the belt and sometimes you get a thumb in the eye, but wallowing in self-pity and self-justification will not gain a victory, now or later.

The Apostle Paul faced his share of disappointments, but he never quit, he never backed down or gave ground. Instead, he continued to press toward the mark until, at the end of his life he could honestly say, "I have fought a good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith." Good leaders keep the faith.