Over the past two weeks, we’ve been looking under the hood at the role of a campus pastor at a multi-site church. If you’re a campus pastor at a multi-site church and want to be interviewed, just let me know. If you’re a LifeChurch.tv Network church pastor or a North Point Strategic Partner pastor and want to be interviewed, let me know.
Starting next week, we’ll look at a twist on this campus pastor concept: network or partner churches of a mother multi-site church. This may be a new concept for you.
These churches that we’ll look at are autonomous churches that have chosen to use a communicator like Andy Stanley or Craig Groeschel as their primary teacher and let the senior pastor of the church function in a role similar to a campus pastor at a multi-site church. I’m, personally, fascinated with these churches and again, I’m building up to a point.
I know my parent’s generation would say, “But that’s what we pay him for. We pay the pastor to preach. If he doesn’t preach, then what are we paying him for?” I’m seeing and advocating a switch in the way we view the senior pastor role and don’t think that the senior pastor has to be the primary communicator (I’ll write more about this in the future).
Another example of this being played out is at Mars Hill in Seattle. At Mars Hill, you’ve probably heard of Mark Driscoll, but may not realize or have put together that Mark is the teaching pastor, not the lead pastor. Jamie Munson is the Lead Pastor. That’s a healthy, working model of this concept that I feel strongly about. Jamie can be the lead or senior pastor and lead the church and someone else (Mark) can be the primary communicator (both live and via video at their multi-site campuses). See HERE for more info.
Today is the day to submit any questions, comments, feedback, thoughts you’re processing, etc. about what we’ve been dealing with the past two weeks. Have you enjoyed the interviews? Are you starting to grasp what I’m building up to – that’s there’s a difference between a preacher and a pastor and the two are notÂ synonymous. What do you think about that statement?