Habits of effective ministers

A couple of weeks ago, our pastoral care group discussed the five habits of effective ministers. An effective minister is someone who remains in full-time, "professional" ministry until retirement (they don't burn out), has a sense of purposefulness in their ministry (they're not grumpy, miserable and constantly stressed), and has a balanced personal and family life (neither they nor their family are falling to pieces). Studies show that ministers who exhibit these characteristics tend to:

1. Be committed to lifelong learning – informally (personal research, personal projects etc); non-formally (workshops, seminars, conferences); and formally (higher degrees, continuing professional education etc);
2. Make leadership selection and mentoring is a priority – both being mentored, and mentoring emerging leaders;
3. Have a dynamic ministry philosophy, or personal mission statement, which normally emerges in their mid to late 30s;
4. Repeatedly and regularly renew their personal life with God, which overflows into the rest of their life and ministry;
5. See their ministry in terms of their whole life, and sense the providential hand of God upon them. They have a “growing awareness” of a “sense of destiny”.

This all intuitively makes sense. There seems to be a lot of wisdom in it.

But - is it a bit mechanical? That is, if I commit myself to practising these characteristics, does that necessarily mean I'll have a successful ministry?

Maybe that's not a fair question. "Effective" doesn't necessarily mean "successful". Someone could practice all these characteristics but not see much results - their church may be small, not many people become Christians, etc. But that's not the point. The point is - they've continued to be effective in ministry.

So I wonder if "faithful" is a better adjective than "effective"? That's what Jesus called for - see Matt 24:45-25:30 - and what Paul evaluated himself against - 1 Cor 4:1-5, 2 Tim 4:1-8. We have been entrusted with the gospel; we're called to be faithful in proclaiming it, passing it on (1 Cor 15:1-11; 2 Cor 5:11-6:2). And this means that a faithful minister isn't focused on techniques or checklists or processes, but on the gospel. It's an evangelical effectiveness.

Thoughts, anyone...?

Comments

Anonymous said…

A faithful minister should indeed be focussed on the gospel. Techiniques/tips/processes/checklists might be good tools to help practicing and honing the habit of faithfulness (for those of us who need extra help). So rather than dismiss them completely, perhaps we ought to limit their use as a means to an end, rather than an end in itself.

10 August 2008 at 18:20

A better understanding of nonbelief

The Nones Project is an ongoing study into the belief systems of people who call themselves non-religious. A few weeks ago one of the project leaders, Ryan Burge of Washington University, posted some really interesting preliminary results on his Substack. 1. We've probably heard of people who are spiritual but not religious (SBNRs). SBNRs were "the largest group of nones" in the sample. They believe in the supernatural realm but not necessarily in "a God." They are "deeply skeptical of religion but highly interested in spirituality," therefore individualistic and anti-institutional. 2. But this study differentiated SBNRs from people they called Nones In Name Only, NiNos. They different to SBNRs by being religious about their spiritual. They believe not just in the supernatural but in "God." And they tend to engage in traditional communal religious practices while SBNRs practice individualised eclectic bespoke spiritual practices. The s...

The different distractions of secularity and spirituality

There has been a lot of discussion about the recent 'vibe shift' away from radical atheism back towards an openness to the supernatural. I don't think this new spirituality is necessarily an openness to the unique claims of Christ. It will more probably replace one set of commonly-accepted misunderstandings about Jesus with another. Under radical atheism, people dismissed the Biblical claims about Jesus' resurrection because they 'knew' that it was impossible. Jesus hadn't really died. He just passed out (after being beaten and whipped and crucified) and then woke up in the tomb (and rolled away the stone himself and overcame several guards). Or the disciples hallucinated that they saw him (even though Jewish beliefs of the time didn't expect one person to rise possessing eternal life himself; they expected a general resurrection at the end of time - see John 11:24 ). Or something else. The so-called 'explanations' of Jesus' non-resurrectio...

TGC Australia recently published an analysis by Dr Sarah Quicke of whether we are experiencing a 'quiet revival' of interest in and/or conversion to Christianity here in Australia. It does it a good job of describing the difficulties involved in both gathering and interpreting data about religious beliefs and behaviours, e.g. the difference between the 44% who (still) call themselves Christian and the 8% of people aged 18-35 who actually "believed and lived out the gospel." Quicke refers to the very insightful McCrindle report An Undercurrent Of Faith , released in March 2025, which uses an analytical method called cohort analysis to try and work out how a particular group of people tend to behave over time. The purpose of this post is to draw attention to one element of that report which agrees with Quicke's analysis but also adds some detail to it. Here is what the cohort analysis showed about different age groups' identification with Christianity: As y...

Multicultural Ministry Matters

Search This Blog