A Missionary As General Superintendent?

The way the Assem­blies of God works, our next Gen­er­al Super­in­ten­dent will almost cer­tain­ly be or have been the pas­tor of a megachurch (I add “have been” because dis­trict offi­cials come pri­mar­i­ly from these ranks).

In fact, some are clam­or­ing for chang­ing our lead­er­ship mod­el to require that our Gen­er­al Superinden­dent be required to serve as pas­tor while serv­ing as our nation­al leader. There’s mer­it to the idea, but I’ve always had a notion in the back of my head that I’ve want­ed to see tried instead: elect a mis­sion­ary as Gen­er­al Super­in­ten­dent.

The Assem­blies of God is explod­ing world­wide, part­ly due to the lead­er­ship of our mis­sion­ar­ies. Turn­ing to these proven and capa­ble lead­ers seems like com­mon sense to me, espe­cial­ly since we are increas­ing­ly real­iz­ing that Amer­i­ca is a mis­sion field just like any oth­er. We need some­one who is able to sep­a­rate the way they want to do things from the way things need to be done — the very essence of an effec­tive mis­sion­ary.

Why not some­one who has led a nation to revival? None of our state­side lead­ers has that kind of resume, but sev­er­al of our mis­sion­ar­ies have rel­e­vant expe­ri­ence.

Why not some­one who has proven that they can func­tion with lead­ers they did not select them­selves? This, after all, is a key aspect of the Gen­er­al Super­in­ten­dent posi­tion to which megachurch pas­tors are unac­cus­tomed.

Why not some­one who is accus­tomed to train­ing and coach­ing lead­ers on the ground instead of try­ing to run the whole show them­selves?

The only oth­er can­di­date I think is as well-suit­ed for the job is a dis­trict super­in­ten­dent who has led his dis­trict to health and growth. I expect that Leslie Welk (North­west) and Don Gif­ford (Indi­ana) will both receive nom­i­na­tions on this basis. Jim Brad­dy (Nor Cal / Nev) might also — but I’m a mem­ber of his dis­trict and so I don’t have a good sense of how he’s per­ceived out­side our nar­row lit­tle world.

How­ev­er, I’m bet­ting that Alton Gar­ri­son (for­mer Sup of Arkansas) is ulti­mate­ly going to get the nod. He’s led a megachurch, led a dis­trict, and is pro­vid­ing lead­er­ship on the nation­al lev­el as the direc­tor of AG US Mis­sions.

So there’s a good chance that we’ll get some­one from AGUSM into the top spot — but not because of his con­nec­tion with mis­sions.

As to the oth­er spots I have no idea. In addi­tion to the nom­i­nees I men­tioned above, I’m pret­ty sure John Lin­dell will get nom­i­nat­ed. He may even let his name stand (although I sus­pect this depends on whether or not he can con­tin­ue to pas­tor at James Riv­er). Dary Northrop will prob­a­bly be nom­i­nat­ed. Dan Bet­zer will be nom­i­nat­ed. Bret Allen might get nom­i­nat­ed but he will decline. I would not be sur­prised at all if John Palmer gets nom­i­nat­ed (espe­cial­ly for the AGUSM lead­er­ship role if Alton is elect­ed Gen Sup), but I have no idea if he will accept.

Beyond that, I real­ly don’t know. There are a lot of poten­tial can­di­dates out there, and our desire to avoid the appear­ance of pol­i­tics means that we nev­er know for sure who will be nom­i­nat­ed and who will allow their names to stand.

Speak­ing of avoid­ing the appear­ance of pol­i­tics — the only way to real­ly avoid pol­i­tics is to select our lead­ers ran­dom­ly. Any solu­tion involv­ing vot­ing is extreme­ly polit­i­cal and the only ques­tion is whether or not those pol­i­tics will be pub­lic. In our move­ment we’ve decid­ed that hid­den pol­i­tics are prefer­able to trans­par­ent ones, and more and more of us are unhap­py with the result.

How­ev­er it shakes out, the Assem­blies is in for a wild ride at Gen­er­al Coun­cil this year. Too bad I’m going to miss it…

4 thoughts on “A Missionary As General Superintendent?”

  1. Hey Glen–

    Good pre­sen­ta­tion here– as we would expect.

    I think you raise an inter­est­ing pro­pos­al. I was won­der­ing the past day or two if we might see some­one like the head of AG World Mis­sions step into a post like this. While the cur­rent can­di­date in that case, John Bueno, would rep­re­sent the old guard, still it might lead to a new era of bring­ing the “two Assem­blies of God” move­ments togeth­er.

    They say there have always been 2 move­ments– one led by Thomas Trask and the oth­er led by John Bueno.

    As it is I think you are right that Alton Gar­ri­son will be the most like­ly choice. I base that on my obser­va­tions of how these kinds of things have gone in the past and the fact that he is very high­ly vis­i­ble in the move­ment as pas­tor, evan­ge­list and youth evan­ge­list for years.

    The thing with great guys like Les Welk is that they are NOT from the “heart­land” of the Assem­blies of God. I believe geo­graph­i­cal loca­tion of the GC has always play­ing into crit­i­cal issues and elec­tions. I also believe this is a rea­son the GC rarely makes appear­ances on the West Coast.

    This rais­es anoth­er issue that we, as a kind new guard of AG lead­ers should con­sid­er– is it time to change the way we elect lead­ers and move to a form of dis­tance bal­lot­ing? By mail or even inter­net?

    I feel this would be con­sid­ered a dan­ger­ous pro­pos­al for all those that like sta­tus quo (I’m sup­pos­ing that means those in “the heart­land”) because of the fact that I men­tioned regard­ing loca­tion of GC’s.

    Dis­tance bal­lot­ing would bring every­one into the process that for one rea­son or anoth­er can not or are not allowed to trav­el (church staff) . It prob­a­bly is the only way we would ever real­ly see sig­nif­i­cant change in our move­ment. It would also force us to do what the blog­gers are now doing– giv­ing us more infor­ma­tion to con­sid­er and a chance to process dia­logue.

    Any­one want to spon­sor a bylaws pro­pos­al for 2009?

  2. Inter­est­ing idea. It would be unlike­ly that John Bueno could do the job, as his health is not great and he is a bit old. Some of the younger mis­sion­ary lead­ers might be inter­est­ing choic­es.

    I found your blog today. I am enjoy­ing it.

  3. Glen, I like where this con­ver­sa­tion is head­ed. Tech­nol­o­gy and pop­ulism are mak­ing a fun­da­men­tal impact on the world and our fel­low­ship needs to posi­tion itself, if not for rel­e­vance, then at least for the oppor­tu­ni­ty to dia­log with the out­side world. A mis­sion­ary well-versed in life out­side the Spring­field vac­u­um would suf­fice.

    (side­bar: Did Jim Brad­dy emerge from a mega?)

  4. I am in total agree­ment that we should have a mis­sion­ary in the top seat of the move­ment. I’ll be hon­est, I was in SGF while get­ting an MDiv from AGTS and I am not too keen on the idea that Alton Gar­ri­son will the be the next Sup. It just does­n’t sit well with me and I was not too keen on his preach­ing abil­i­ties either — I’ll stop there. Indeed we are a mis­sion­ary move­ment and we need to maint­ian that focus. btw, I came to your site via the future ag site. I agree with oth­ers that cnada­cy should be based on skills and abil­i­ties as well as call­ing — not vis­i­bil­i­ty in the move­ment or hav­ing been from the “heart­land.”

Leave a Reply