Content uploaded by Kimion Tagwirei
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kimion Tagwirei on Nov 11, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation: Tagwirei, Kimion. 2024.
From Fivefold to Five-in-One
Ministry: Mega-Ecclesiological
Leadership (Dis)Continuities in
Southern Africa. Religions 15: 1366.
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15111366
Received: 25 September 2024
Revised: 23 October 2024
Accepted: 8 November 2024
Published: 11 November 2024
Copyright: © 2024 by the author.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Article
From Fivefold to Five-in-One Ministry: Mega-Ecclesiological
Leadership (Dis)Continuities in Southern Africa
Kimion Tagwirei
The Unit for Reformational Theology and the Development of the South African Society, Faculty of Theology,
North-West University, Potchefstroom 2531, South Africa; kimion22tc@gmail.com
Abstract: In Southern Africa in recent years, the governance and ecclesiologies of mega-Pentecostal
churches have been drifting away from upholding collective and complementary fivefold ministries
to individualistic and selfish five-in-one ministries. Studies indicate that a fivefold ministry advances
inclusive ecclesiological leadership, edification, and transformational integral mission. At present,
mega and related forms of emerging neo-Pentecostalism have developed exclusive, prophetic, apos-
tolic, and executive ecclesial leadership, which are characterized mainly by authoritarian governance,
celebrity leadership, leader-centered ecclesiology, and congregational manipulation and exploitation.
Such church governance and ecclesiologies enable leaders to indoctrinate their subordinates and
congregants to submit to and depend on them for everything. The effect is that followers are rendered
dormant, under what this submission describes as five-in-one ministry, which leaves one person
claiming to possess all ministerial gifts and leadership capabilities and relegating everyone else to
being idle followers. Although much has been published about African Pentecostal leadership and
ecclesiologies, studies on African megachurch governance, leadership styles and ministries are few.
Through a literature review and participant observation, this paper uncovers and troubleshoots the
effects of five-in-one megachurch governance and ecclesiologies in Africa. It discerns and addresses
drivers of the five-in-one ministry and makes recommendations, such as reforming megachurch gov-
ernance, leadership styles, and ecclesiologies; integrating ecumenism with leadership development;
and developing inclusive economic sustainability.
Keywords: fivefold ministry; five-in-one ministry; mega; church; governance; leadership; transformation
1. Introduction
Unlike classical Pentecostal church leadership styles, which value collective leadership
and ministry, the majority of emerging Pentecostal churches tend to uphold individualistic
governance and ministry. Tagwirei (2023c, p. 5) reports that “the majority of African
neo-Pentecostal churches lack leadership accountability, stewardship of resources as well as
accommodate autonomy and the abuse of authority”. It is clear that most neo-Pentecostal
leaders are gifted and charismatic but untrained and unaccountable (White and Pondani
2022). As observed by Orogun (2023), many African neo-Pentecostal leaders have devel-
oped family dynasties and monarchical systems by which denominational ownership,
trusteeship, and royalty are retained within the founder’s family. Emerging Pentecostal
ecclesiologies suggest that most megachurch founders and leaders occupy all five ministry
duties—as apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers—and they appoint their
spouses, trusted family members, relatives, friends, and most loyal followers into pivotal
key leadership and ministerial positions, which exacerbates the leaders’ authoritarianism.
Examples of such five-in-one ministries include the Enlightened Christian Gathering of
Malawian prophet Shepherd Bushiri, the Good News Church of the British and Zimbab-
wean prophet Eubert Angel, Christ Embassy of the Nigerian pastor Chris Oyakhilome, and
Zimbabwe Assemblies of God in Africa, of the late apostle Ezekiel Handinawangu Guti,
whose governance and ecclesiologies are centered on their founders and their families.
Religions 2024,15, 1366. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15111366 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions
Religions 2024,15, 1366 2 of 13
According to Tagwirei (2023c), immediate family members, close relatives, and friends
of the leaders of several other emerging African independent neo-Pentecostal churches,
such as Power Chapel Worldwide (in Ghana), Alleluia Ministries (in South Africa), and Be
Free Church (in Botswana), are title holders and the signatories of all their denominational
ministries, accounts, and assets.
Much has been published about African Pentecostal leadership and ecclesiology. Kga-
tle (2024b) critiques the fivefold ministry in African neo-Pentecostalism; Biri (2016) reports
on neo-Pentecostal churches in Africa; McCauley (2012) discusses new big-man rule in
Ghanaian Pentecostalism; Biri (2020) studied Pentecostalism, authority, and accountability
in Zimbabwe; Matisi (2020) investigated the effects of African Pentecostal leadership styles
on growth and development; Mwenje (2016) reviewed Zimbabwean Pentecostal leadership
styles; and Orogun (2023) problematizes the hybridization of African Pentecostal leadership.
While appreciating the coverage of these issues, this paper fills a gap in the knowledge
related to biblical ecclesiological leadership and the contextual effects of discontinuing
the fivefold ministry and developing a five-in-one ministry in Africa. The paper starts by
conceptualizing the fivefold and five-in-one ministries, then troubleshoots the five-in-one
ministry, and ends with conclusions and recommendations.
2. Conceptualizing the Church
Various developments in evangelical, classical, and neo-Pentecostal ecclesiologies
have confused the identity of the Church in Southern Africa. This is why Tagwirei’s (2024b,
pp. 3–5) argues that the Church is currently a mixed and confusing entity because
“the Church is interchangeably equated to a workshop, marketplace, theatre,
Salvationist embassy, and burial society. With such depictions, churches conduct
themselves as Salvationist entities by being overly concerned with the soul. As
workshops, they publicise their ability to fix people’s lives, much like cars can be
fixed; as marketplaces, they trade miscellaneous ideas and goods for payment in
cash and kind. As theatres, they accommodate entanglements with comical and
controversial theatrics; and as burial societies, they provide financial aid, moral
security, and presence to members in times of illness or bereavement”.
In addition, this study reveals leader-centered ecclesiologies which further complicate the
identity of the Church in the Global South. Generally, the Church refers to believers who
follow Jesus Christ and gather (as Hebrews 10:25 instructs) to worship God with others in
their different denominations. While the Church must be identified as the body of Jesus
Christ (Eph 1:22–23; Col 1:24) under His leadership, mega-Pentecostal church members
also submit to their leaders generally because leaders teach their followers what Paul said—
‘follow me as I follow Christ’ (1 Cor 11:1). In order to explore the mega-ecclesiological
leadership (dis)continuities from the fivefold to five-in-one ministries, this paper uses the
term Church with reference to those who follow their leaders out of faith that their leaders
follow Jesus Christ.
3. Conceptualizing the Fivefold Ministry
The fivefold ministry is a church government concept that is based on Ephesians
4:11, and which refers to the leadership of apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and
teachers. Stephens (2018) reports that biblical scholars disagree about the intentions and
interpretation of Ephesians 4:11–12; some scholars take the fivefold ministry to be a model
for the priesthood of all believers, who should be trained to carry out the work of the
ministry, instead of reserving ministry for pastors only. The fivefold ministry has been
upheld in various classical evangelical and Pentecostal churches in Africa. Evangelicals like
the Evangelical, Baptist, and Brethren in Christ churches employ episcopal, Presbyterian,
congregational, and mixed polities and change their leadership through elections. Although
their ecclesiologies and governance structures differ, they all uphold the priesthood and
value of all believers as well as inclusivity, diversity, and complementarity. African classical
Pentecostal churches such as the Assemblies of God (AOG) and Apostolic Faith Mission
Religions 2024,15, 1366 3 of 13
(AFM) similarly apply mixed polities. According to Tagwirei (2023b), the AFM and AOG
churches combine attributes of both episcopal, Presbyterian, and some congregational
structures. They champion the priesthood of all believers and accommodate and promote
all gifts for the edification of their churches.
Kgatle (2024b) explains that the fivefold ministry fosters the functioning of the five
offices of ecclesial leadership of apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, and evangelists.
Wintoch (2003) explains that the fivefold ministry refers to offices that God gifted to mature
His Church into Christlikeness. Wintoch explains that the fivefold ministry has been
misinterpreted and abused, because
many Christian leaders have taken this verse out of context and elevated these five roles
above their rightful place. They emphasize the importance of these offices in a local
church–which is certainly true–but often serve their own interests, need for power and
recognition, denying others–the ‘laity’–any kind of involvement in church government
(Wintoch 2003, p. 2).
She adds that other scholars discard the verse altogether, and that Paul spoke in the
apostolic age, which has long passed, so that his words are not relevant to us at all any
longer. For Hartwell (2004, p. 18), “many think of the office of the apostle and the office
of the pastor as something to elevate instead of truly seeing how these are ministries that
serve the body of Jesus Christ”.
According to Resane (2008, p. 80), “generally, the fivefold ministry is a concept of
church leadership based upon the ministry of men and women who have been supposedly
divinely called and anointed with one of five ministry gifts listed in Eph 4:11”. It is seen as
a provision of divinely appointed leadership for the body of Christ. Leaders of the fivefold
ministry are raised up by God’s express will and are seen as Christ’s gifts (domata) to the
Church. The Church is expected to heed them and follow these leaders; they are leaders
with special offices and ministries for guiding and governing the Christian Church and
who draw on the leadership gifts present in believers other than the traditional Pentecostal
leadership roles of pastors, elders, and deacons. For Resane (2008), the fivefold ministry
is not ideal for the contemporary Church, because it was meant for an ecclesiology on
its journey towards maturity. Accordingly, the purpose of the fivefold ministry is the
building up of the Church. Harris (2022, p. 30) concurs: “For as long as humans are in these
corruptible bodies, they will never measure up to the complete standard of Christ; therefore,
the ministry must continue”. Since the Church is both an organization and organism that
requires leadership to govern its affairs and to steer it towards God’s purposes, contextual
administration, such as episcopal, Presbyterian, or congregational, can achieve its purpose,
while the fivefold gifts continue to edify the Church instead of governing it. Resane
(2008, p. 214) argues that “there is a need for a balance between democracy and hierarchy
in church polity”. Although contextualizing ecclesiologies and governance matter for
institutional relevance and sustainability, the Church remains a movement that never
matures as evangelization and discipleship continues under the overall leadership of Jesus
Christ. Yet, problematically, emerging Southern African neo-Pentecostal leadership is
becoming excessively individualistic, patrimonial, and authoritarian. I agree with Resane
(2008, p. 214) that “the Ephesians 4:11–16 passage was not intended to give a guideline on
church government or leadership, but to encourage and inspire the local community to be
self-developing and self-building”. The fivefold ministry portrays values of diversity and
complementarity and inspires servant leadership. This is why the common Presbyterian,
Episcopalian, congregational and mixed church polities carry some influences of the fivefold
ministry; they value the complementary roles of apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists,
and teachers. While the fivefold ministry does not inform ecclesial governance squarely,
especially in view of changing times and contexts, Christ-like, other-centered servant
leadership and complementarity cannot be divorced from Church leadership. The problem
is that the majority of emerging self-styed mega-Pentecostal, charismatic, and related
neo-Pentecostal governance and ecclesiologies exhibit leader-centered showmanship that
promotes the idea that founders and leaders are supreme authorities who do not report to or
Religions 2024,15, 1366 4 of 13
consult anyone. While these leaders sometimes claim to be accountable to God, participant
observations reveal that most of them only engage with others when it is required to
secure their personal interests. Some authoritarian leaders claim to be accountable to their
subordinates. As Tagwirei (2023c, p. 6) confirms, most emerging African neo-Pentecostal
leaders are patrimonial and nepotistic. They appoint their closest relatives, family members,
friends, and most loyal followers to be their subordinate leaders. These appointees are all
compromised and cannot question the leader as long as their personal interests are being
protected. Consequently, emerging Pentecostal leaders developed five-in-one ministries,
ecclesiology, and governance, which will be discussed in the following section.
4. Overviewing the Five-in-One Ministry
The five-in-one ministry hereby refers to leader-centered ecclesiology that is character-
ized by dominating, controlling, manipulating, hierarchical, authoritarian, and patrimonial
governance for personal gain and private kingdom-building. The five-in-one ministry is
common in neo-Pentecostal megachurches which were “born from classical Pentecostal
denominations” (Tagwirei 2024c, p. 3). According to Tagwirei (2023b) and Chitando et al.
(2013, p. 154), most contemporary megachurch leaders are modern protestants who moved
out of classical Pentecostals and evangelicals accusing them of bureaucratic governance
and ‘cold’ ecclesiologies that restrict gifts of the Holy Spirit. While claiming to be liberating
themselves and likeminded believers from dying spiritualities, they developed individ-
ualized, leader-centered governance and manipulative ecclesiologies. The evolution of
Pentecostal governance and ecclesiologies has been ongoing for the past few decades across
and beyond Africa (Amanze 2008) due to various factors which are overviewed in the next
subsection titled Troubleshooting the Five-in-One Ministry.
In agreement with Kaunda (2020, p. 222), African neo-Pentecostal pastors derive
their sacred authority from and abuse their claim to be called and set apart by God to
exercise all fivefold ministry duties—as apostle, pastor, prophet, evangelist, and teachers
of their respective denominations. While a few of them retain some tenets of the fivefold
ministry, most neo-Pentecostal leaders believe they are comprehensively powerful in view
of their nature. Neo-Pentecostalism is a new phase; it is contemporary and an exceptionally
dynamic manifestation of independent and charismatic Christianity that arose during the
1950s and 1960s with the aim of seeking more profound and miraculous experiences (Oro-
gun and Pillay 2021, p. 2). Tagwirei (2024c) clarifies that neo-Pentecostalism is exemplified
by megachurches. Presently, neo-Pentecostalism boasts of massive numbers of adherents,
strategic urban locations, massive edifices, glittering decorations, energetic preaching,
and worship- and leader-centric leadership. Denominations such as the Zimbabwean
Prophetic, Healing, and Deliverance (PhD) Ministries of the prophet Walter Magaya, the
Nigeria-based Synagogue of All Nations, founded by the late prophet TB Joshua, now
led by his wife Evelyn Joshua, and others are good examples of mega-neo-Pentecostal
churches. According to Kaunda (2020), neo-Pentecostal leaders reserve sacred authority,
individualism, fragmentation, and fundamentalism.
First, individualisation refers to the situation where sacred authority is individualised
by specific pastors. In this approach, sacred authority no longer rests with the institu-
tionalised church and indigenous communities; rather, the individual pastors claim to
have exclusive access to the divine realms. This also means that they have the ability
to autonomously and exclusively decide on specific Christian norms and values that
function as an obligatory control mechanism imposed on their members
. . .
Secondly, a
result of the individualisation of sacred authority is religious fragmentation. The more
sacred authority is individualised, the less Neo-Pentecostal pastors want to interact and
enter into dialogue with other Christian denominations, not to mention other religions.
The result is a mushrooming of Neo-Pentecostalism, as each pastor seeks to completely
break free from the influence of other religious authorities
. . .
Thirdly, the combination
of individuation and fragmentation of sacred authority has engendered fundamentalist
religious rivalry and destructive competition, which have contributed to the demographic
Religions 2024,15, 1366 5 of 13
explosion of Neo-Pentecostal churches
. . .
a reaction to the threat of any change that
includes secularisation (Kaunda 2020, pp. 222–23).
This explanation is reminiscent of what Magezi and Banda (2017) observed in Zim-
babwe, namely that neo-Pentecostal prophetic leaders are overzealously domineering and
overplaying their mediatory to an extent of competing with and usurping Jesus Christ’s
role over the Church. “Instead of being channels that lead people to depend only on
Christ for their spiritual security, prosperity Pentecostal prophets present themselves as
super spiritual authorities who must be relied upon by the believers in addition to Christ”
(Magezi and Banda 2017, p. 1). As “super spiritual authorities”, Pentecostal prophets
project themselves as uniquely anointed by God. This places them closer to God than
other people, and they receive spiritual power and authority over other believers. These
prophets mediate their presence in the lives of their followers through anointed objects,
such as pictures of themselves, anointed oil, and armbands. Ramantswana and Sebetseli
(2021) claim that neo-Pentecostal leaders have shifted ecclesiology and church governance
from institutional to personal brands. “The shift from church name brands to brand pastors
implies that it is no longer so much the name of the church that draws the crowds, but the
name of the pastor” (Ramantswana and Sebetseli 2021, p. 6). While that may be true, it is
also discernible that rebranding the ecclesial to a personal brand reserves authority for the
leader and disregards any forms of accountability and transparency. Although some church
leaders work with certain subordinates and committees, the fact that the brand of their
churches remains personal indicates possession. According to Ramantswana and Sebetseli
(2021), such neo-Pentecostal leaders have become personality cults and celebrities, and
their followers submit to them unquestionably. With the rise of brand prophets or pastors,
there is a shift from a place-centred pilgrimage to a person-centred pilgrimage. With some
brand prophets comes emphasis on the divine power that resides in the person, which in
turn is manifested through the person’s ability to prophesy, heal, cast out demons and
pronounce blessings (Ramantswana and Sebetseli 2021, p. 6).
Neo-Pentecostal leaders shun questionability and secure their position further by
literal interpretation of scriptures, such as 1 Chronicles 16:22, which states, “Do not touch
my anointed ones”, and by indoctrination of blind followership; nevertheless, everyone
remains fallible. Thus, leaders have commercialized and commodified the gospel by trading
in miracles, healing, deliverance, and blessings (Adedibu and Igboin 2019;Adamo 2021;
Kwateng-Yeboah 2017). They have masculinized and sexualized the gospel by abusing
their positional reverence and congregational gullibility and engaging in sexual molestation
(Dube 2018;Kgatle 2024a;Ndlovu et al. 2024). When leaders err, they continue to go astray,
receive no advice, and may only be subject to public criticism in print and electronic media.
Some African neo-Pentecostal leaders misread Philippians 4:13, where Paul says that “I can
do all things through Christ who strengthens me” as to mean, literally, that they should
undertake all five works of ministry; they claim it refers to all-in-one gospel ministers who
can do the work of apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and teachers. By doing so, they
disregard and close up the space for any other gifts in their churches.
Participant observations throughout this study revealed that neo-Pentecostal leaders
execute both pulpit and administrative duties. For example, the author attended four
conferences and five main Sunday services of two different megachurches in Zimbabwe
and South Africa and made the following observations. Founders and leaders of mega-
Pentecostal churches reserve their pulpits for themselves, their spouses, and their most
trusted subordinates. They disregard ordinary congregants who are gifted and trained in
various specializations and could be resourceful in edifying their churches. For example,
some of such leaders taught about COVID-19, HIV, and AIDS and related killer diseases
even though they lack adequate knowledge of medicine or epidemiology, instead of assign-
ing specialist doctors in their congregations to teach from informed positions. Similarly,
some of these leaders have been micromanaging their ecclesial financial administration and
building projects instead of utilizing the specialized services of technocrats in their ecclesial
pews. One such leader in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe, recently employed two young girls as
Religions 2024,15, 1366 6 of 13
secretaries of his church high school without taking them through proper employment
procedures. In an interview with a megachurch and its school administrator conducted
after one of the church’s conferences held at their high school in August, he said that
“Our founder operates as he likes. We just found two young girls in office
as secretaries without our knowledge. Yet procedurally, the headmaster and
administrator (myself) should have been engaged to interview them if we had
vacancies. But our founder is just all powerful and self-centred. In this case we
suspect that such girls are his mistresses”.
This is what this submission refers to as a five-in-one ministry that upholds indi-
vidualism, leader-centrism, authoritarianism, patrimonialism, and self-centeredness. In
contrast to the fivefold ministry, which could build up the Church through collective and
complementary ministration and servant leadership, the five-in-one ministry is destroying
the Church through self-serving ministry and authoritarian leadership.
5. Troubleshooting the Five-in-One Ministry
Considering that the problems of the five-in-one ministry have been ballooning over
time, they are difficult to resolve, because incumbent leaders who benefit from authoritarian
church governance and leader-centered ecclesiologies refuse to accept advice or corrections
from anyone and cannot reform themselves out of power. However, certain external
and internal measures can be taken to mitigate identified and possible problems. It is
recommendable to identify the drivers of the five-in-one ministry and to review and
improve church governance and leadership styles. Additionally, ecumenical koinonia
should be integrated with leadership development. Also, identifying and developing
successors while they are still young, teachable, and redeemable is important.
It is very hard, if not impossible, to find remedies for problems without first diagnos-
ing the causes. Therefore, it is imperative to determine what led some neo-Pentecostal
church founders and senior leaders to adopt authoritarian five-in-one ministries. After that,
ways to redeem them and their followers can be proposed. Although this single submission
cannot exhaust all the causes, it determines that the five-in-one ministry is driven by a
variety of factors, ranging from the demerits of their former churches’ collective gover-
nance and ecclesiologies; hard contextual questions relating to poverty, disease, witchcraft,
and related issues; a dire need for answers; educational, hermeneutical, and theological
ignorance; greed; and arrogance. The factors behind the development of a five-in-one
ministry differ from one context to another, but research and participative observation
indicate that the listed factors are common denominators of neo-Pentecostal developments.
Therefore, the following subsections unpack the determinations of and recommendations
for troubleshooting the five-in-one ministry.
5.1. Church Governance Gaps: Reforming to Curb Authoritarianism
Democratic and collective church governance, such as Presbyterian and congregational
polities, are complementary, because power is shared democratically by leaders and church
members, who participate fully in the life and administration of their churches under the
Lordship of Jesus Christ as the highest authority. Nevertheless, like all other ecclesial
polities, there are gaps. Tagwirei (2023b, p. 6) argues that
Presbyterian governance provides an equilibrium between the denomination and the
congregation by enhancing authority to flow from the congregation up and from the
denomination down. The congregation elects the leaders in the denomination in order to
prevent the emergence and development of dominant hierarchies under the command of
one person, which is toxic to the growth of the church.
Tagwirei (2023b) explains that Presbyterian and congregational pastors or parish min-
isters are not fully empowered to make decisions, because they tend to be subject to the
will of the elders. When pastors disagree with the will of their elders and committees,
insubordination can occur and cripple pastoral leadership and missio ecclesiae. Similarly,
Religions 2024,15, 1366 7 of 13
congregationalism “denies ministers freedom to exercise some authority, thereupon risking
to pursue the will of the people at the expense of Opus Dei (the work of God)” (Tagwirei
2023b, p. 7). Feeling restricted by shared leadership could lead some neo-Pentecostal
leaders to seek to secure maximum freedom to advance their calling and ministries without
limitation. Unfortunately, absolute power corrupts absolutely, hence claiming supreme
power develops authoritarianism and reduces accountability and transparency. So, al-
though all church polities exhibit certain weaknesses, leaders maximize their strengths
by incorporating philosophies from different polities. If a church borrows Presbyterian
principles of consultation with subordinate leaders, congregational appreciation and en-
gagement, and Episcopalian decisiveness, leadership could eventually achieve Christ-like
servanthood, consultation, accountability, transparency, and theocratic decisiveness in
relevant contexts. When servant leadership replaces authoritarianism, the Church will be in
a position to meet the needs of its membership and surrounding communities, as Zgambo
(2021) suggests.
5.2. Syncretic Contextualization: Winnowing Leadership with Scripture
Drawing from Tagwirei’s (2024c) re-factorization of the growth of neo-Pentecostalism
in Zimbabwe, it is observable that neo-Pentecostal churches from different African nations
have strategically adapted their ecclesiologies, messages, methods, and approaches to
address problems that people face in their lives to attract new believers, foster growth, and
secure their establishments. This contextualization has “facilitated the emancipation of in-
digenous ecclesiological principles, leading to the pursuit of adaptable, self-administrative,
self-sustaining, and self-determining structures” (Tagwirei 2024c, p. 11). However, some
neo-Pentecostal churches go to extremes in pursuing great works that John 14:12 promises
believers. In doing so, some of them have shelved ministering the gospel of eternal salva-
tion by over-exaggerating prosperity gospels that promise wealth and health. Although it
is needful to demonstrate that the gospel addresses people’s problems, Magezi and Banda
(2017) contend that it tends to verge on syncretism and self-glorification when leaders
assume the mediating role of Jesus Christ and incorporate authoritarian leadership and
ritualistic elements of African traditional religions. Countless African neo-Pentecostal
leaders have adopted traditional African monarchical, gerontocratic, and unquestioned
authoritarianism and hegemonic patriarchal leadership cultures for their leadership (Biri
2016;Dube 2018;Orogun 2023). It is important to contextualize leadership and ecclesiology,
in order to identify with and meet recipients’ needs. Nonetheless, it is prudent to winnow
leadership with scripture. By winnowing leadership, mentors, ecumenical leaders, and
anyone who has access to ecclesial leaders can acclimatize governance and ecclesiology
with scripture. Church leaders and followers can and should be nurtured, appointed, and
mentored, so that they are informed to live out scriptures and are able to withstand cultural
worldviews that inspire authoritarianism.
5.3. Ignorance: De-Secularizing Knowledge and De-Spiritualizing Ignorance
It is also discernible that the five-in-one ministry is affected by educational, hermeneu-
tical, and theological ignorance, as well as greed and arrogance. It is assumed that, if leaders
know God, scriptures, sound hermeneutics, and Christian theology, they can apply the five-
fold ministry correctly for the edification of the Church, and not for personal gain. In that
way, leaders can withstand temptations that accompany greed and arrogance. According
to Tagwirei (2023c, p. 4), “it is observed that most African neo-Pentecostal leaders take the
Bible literally, misinterpret it and ultimately develop wrong theologies”. Tagwirei (2023b)
mentions legalizing tithing, on the basis of the Old Testament, Malachi 3:6–12, and trading
of blessings through wrong theologies of seeding, whereby ecclesial leaders manipulate
their congregants into sacrificially giving monetary and materialistic gifts and expecting
corresponding blessings. In relation to church governance, Resane and Buitendag (2008)
assert that neo-Pentecostal church leaders misinterpret Ephesians 4:11 as a verse that refers
Religions 2024,15, 1366 8 of 13
to government, yet the fivefold ministry was never designed for ecclesiastic governance,
but for edification.
To treat Ephesians 4:11 in isolation without connecting it with the subsequent verses,
especially verses 12–13 is to do the hermeneutical injustice to the text
. . .
the purpose of
these fivefold ministers is threefold: for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the
ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ
. . .
The ultimate purpose of all these offices
and divisions of labour in the Church is the perfecting of the saints, and the way in which
the saints are to be perfected is through the gift of the ministry, the function of which is to
edify the body of Christ
. . .
The purpose of the passage was never to build a fivefold edifice
or to endow five offices with rare powers for the sake of the restoration of the church before
the Parousia (Resane and Buitendag 2008, p. 1533).
Resane and Buitendag (2008) further explain that misinterpreting scripture and reserv-
ing all powers and ministry for a few people threaten to ruin the doctrine of the priesthood
of all believers, which is one of the distinctive traits of evangelical faith. “It seems all pow-
ers, revelation, knowledge etc. is centered on the fivefold ministers” (Resane and Buitendag
2008, p. 1533). Furthermore, Tagwirei (2023c) asserts that most emerging Pentecostal eccle-
sial leaders are self-serving, mainly because they lack sound theological training. “Very
few of them hold diplomas and degrees in theological education”. As also alluded to by
Hadebe (2017) and Brunsdon and Knoetze (2021, p. 278), theological education and training
is important to prepare and enhance African gospel ministers, so that they are competent.
Of course, education does not guarantee ministerial and leadership effectiveness, because
theological training is also problematized by an exodus of lecturers from Southern Africa
to Europe and the West in search of greener pastures, leading to brain drain, worsening
economic recession, and a decline in financial and material resources. Nevertheless, even
minimum theological certificate training can improve hermeneutical skills, leadership
knowhow, and communication and other essential skills. Those who undergo biblical
and theological training are enlightened and empowered enough to research, interpret,
teach, preach, and apply scripture properly. Ephesians 4:11–16 and 2 Timothy 2:2 teach that
training and education augments the work of ministry. While factors behind authoritar-
ianism vary, lack of training is arguably one of the major causes of wrong hermeneutics
and theologies and selfish leadership. This is possibly why some of the incumbent leaders
of mega-Pentecostal churches have been developing authoritarian five-in-one ministries,
manipulating and exploiting congregants by trading in anointing oils, wristbands, stickers,
and handkerchiefs, and charging for one-on-one counselling, prophetic meetings, and
related schemes to enrich themselves. Theological education can correct their hermeneutics
and theology of mission, so that they work beyond kerygma to diakonia. Applying Tagwirei’s
(2023b) conclusion about African leadership succession, cleaning today’s mess may be
difficult, as most of the problematic leaders are arrogant and may refuse to submit to
ecumenical or theological voices. Nevertheless, the remnants of sound leaders, para-church
organizations, and theological colleges can still save tomorrow’s Church from authoritar-
ianism by doubling their efforts to develop young leaders. Reviewing the current state
of affairs, revising and exposing young and upcoming leaders to transformational and
other-centered governance, and undertaking leadership development and succession in
line with Jesus Christ’s model can change mega-Pentecostal church governance trajectories
in Southern Africa.
5.4. Authoritarian Precedence: Reforming Church Leadership Styles
Southern African neo-Pentecostalism is problematized by traditional poor governance.
While neo-mega-Pentecostalism arose from classical Pentecostalism, it should be remem-
bered that Africans were born in the context of African traditional religions (ATRs). ATR
leadership is characterized by patriarchy, hegemonic fatherhood, and instructional authori-
tarianism (Dube 2018). Although Christianity brought biblical principles of servanthood
and complementarity, the influences of ATR leadership culture foster authoritarianism in
contemporary mega-Pentecostalism. This is evidenced by various research studies that
Religions 2024,15, 1366 9 of 13
expose power struggles in the Pentecostal church government in South Africa (Matshobane
and Masango 2018;White and Pondani 2022) and confirm that most neo-Pentecostal leader-
ship hierarchies operate under the exclusive power of the top leaders. The founders and top
leaders of neo-Pentecostal churches centralize preaching, teachings, administration, liturgy,
operations, and human, financial, and material resources of their churches on themselves.
The majority of the rogue leaders within Neo-Pentecostalism and Neo-Prophetic Churches
have labelled themselves as “prophets”, insinuating the idea of “being led by spirit”;
hence, “all” is under the leader’s divine instruction and supervision. This position denotes
elements of hegemony, and it shuns the idea of accountability to recognizable apostolic
or ecumenical councils. Instead, up and coming prophets has chosen to submit to other
wealthier prophets, who are considered as “spiritual fathers”
. . .
This pattern shows that
the majority of these churches are primarily built on the personhood of the “prophet” rather
than doctrine or strong organizational structures (White and Pondani 2022).
This explanation echoes the findings of Nhumburudzi and Kurebwa (2018) in Zim-
babwe that neo-Pentecostal governance is individualized, pastor-centered, and vulnerable
to leadership manipulation. Neo-Pentecostal founders and leaders widely claim to be
liberating themselves from dying spiritualities and restrictive governance. As reflected
before, Chitando et al. (2013) explain that African neo-Pentecostal founders and leaders
often assert that they are breaking away from regressive bureaucracy and supposedly ‘cold’
spiritual practices to embrace a more dynamic approach that advances the missio Dei and
missio ecclesiae through expressive and demonstrative ministries. However, Tagwirei (2023a)
reports that they, paradoxically, end up becoming similarly, if not more, regressive. Instead
of being focused on serving others (being other-centered), they became self-centered in their
actions and priorities. Considering that mainline and evangelical churches are not really
experiencing problems related to authoritarianism, unaccountability, and institutional and
congregational resources, Pentecostals could learn from these churches. It should be noted
that mainline and evangelical churches employ either episcopal, Presbyterian, or congre-
gational polities. Although every church polity has certain weaknesses and strengths,
Tagwirei (2023a, p. 10) proposes that it is best to adopt a mixed church polity that
enhances the efficiency of the church, thereby bolstering its missionality
. . .
the Church
can, and should, consider transfiguring and missionizing her governance by blending
her polities, integrating principles from different systems towards empowering leaders to
enhance missio Dei while, at the same time, protecting them from falling into power-abuse
by incorporating accountability, transparency, and congregational involvement.
Accordingly, through all the polities, ecclesiological transfiguration can be realized
if governance is blended with ideologies that accommodate contextually relevant and
constructive leadership styles that enable leaders to promote Opus Dei bindingly.
5.5. Arrogance: Integrating Ecumenism with Leadership Development
Considering that some church leaders are deaf to internal advice from their subordi-
nates and associates about reforming their governance and ecclesiology, it is recommended
that ecumenical bodies deliberately develop and facilitate leadership development dis-
cussions and lessons in their fellowships. The Bible says iron sharpens iron (Prov. 27:17);
in the same way, ecclesiastical bodies can initiate governmental reflections for denomina-
tional leaders to review them in their own fellowships in the absence of their subordinates.
According to Hove (2022), ecumenical fellowship is a good opportunity for pastors and
leaders to learn from one another and share material and spiritual resources. Leaders can
eventually appreciate, enlighten, and empower each other towards improving their church
governance, ecclesiology, and ministries. This is why Tagwirei (2024a) recommends that
it is expedient for Church leaders to sit down, alone, and sometimes in consultation with
leaders of their respective ecumenical bodies, and Christian theologians of their choice,
in seminars or conferences and revise their hermeneutics, theologies, ecclesiologies and
governance regularly, to improve how they serve in their various capacities.
Religions 2024,15, 1366 10 of 13
Just as the Ecumenical Church Leaders Forum facilitates “capacity building of Church
leaders through training sessions and workshops to be able to teach and influence peace
building processes in Zimbabwe” (Peace Insight 2018), the Council for Churches in Africa
grooms and empowers clergy, bishops, apostles, prophets, and other spiritual leaders
with knowledge, skills, and resources to fulfill their divine calling. It would be wise for
all of them to integrate their programs with reflections on church governance. In view
of the development of authoritarian five-in-one ministries in emerging mega-Pentecostal
churches, ecumenical bodies can help ecclesial leaders who attend their programs. I am
well aware that some mega-denominational leaders may be too arrogant and feel too
big to attend ecumenical fellowships. However, those who do attend can be helped to
improve their denominational polities and ecclesiologies and influence their successors
to continue refining the same. Meanwhile, ecumenical bodies, para-church organizations,
and theological colleges can encourage and enroll young people to raise transformed
leaders. I agree with Kgatle (2022) that ecumenical bodies are in the best position to
facilitate reformation and transformation of church leadership in Africa. Reflecting on
considerations of the South African government to regulate churches, as it was done in
Rwanda, Kgatle (2022, p. 5) argues that
the best way for the church is not regulation by the government, but self-regulation
through ecumenical bodies. The role of government is, therefore, to assist churches to
formalise the councils and to create for these councils an environment conducive to pastors
and churches being accountable to one another. When the church is self-regulating, it will
be able to manage its internal affairs.
Even in the context of church governance, ecumenical bodies are best placed to engage
in reflective teachings and discussions with denominational leaders through conferences,
seminars, or general fellowship meetings. In cases where some members of ecumenical bod-
ies may have conflicts of interest with particular denominations or denominational leaders,
they can strategically deploy neutral leaders to facilitate teachings and discussions towards
improving church governance, leadership styles, ministerial practices, and ecclesiologies.
Self-serving leaders have rooted themselves in authoritarianism, and they are unlikely
to reform themselves out of power. Alternatively, para-church organizations, theological
colleges, and related institutions can and should fill the gap of leadership development
and succession and work on training, discipleship, development, exposure, enlightenment,
and empowerment of young leaders who will value and apply more consultative and
participative approaches. Unlike self-centered leaders who work only with their spouses,
children, close relatives, and friends, independent para-church organizations and theologi-
cal colleges can facilitate enlightening and empowering discipleship programs to develop
leaders who can serve the Church under Jesus Christ’s model. While Jesus Christ served
with 12 disciples, he deliberately developed, authorized, and sent them out on missions
(i.e., Mt 10:1–2; Lk 9: 1–27) to gain exposure and eventually released them to advance missio
Dei. Instead of raising dynastic teams which advance self-enrichment and security, new
leaders can be developed to foster inclusive missio Ecclesiae.
5.6. Poverty: Developing Inclusive Economic Sustainability
It is interesting to note that the establishment and growth of most neo-Pentecostal
churches of which leaders have become proponents of the prosperity gospel of wealth and
health coincided with economic crises in Africa (Tagwirei 2023c;Yong and Knoetze 2024).
While we would ordinarily argue that founders of neo-Pentecostal churches contextualized
their gospel and lived out integral mission to meet the needs of Africans, it should also be
noted that these founders and leaders used the same gospel to generate personal wealth
and meet their own and their families’ needs. This is evidenced by their accumulation of
massive wealth, which has occurred at the expense of poor congregants (Golo 2013;Guyson
2016;Orogun and Pillay 2021;Toulemonde 2024). It is challenging that conventional sources
of ecclesial income (such as tithes and freewill offerings) and local and foreign donations
are unsustainable in the context of political and economic volatility and global economic
Religions 2024,15, 1366 11 of 13
recession, while the cost of living and operating a church keep increasing. Economic
unsustainability continues to haunt millions of Africans and tempt some church leaders to
manipulate and exploit their followers in order to survive.
The adoption of authoritarianism, self-enrichment and selfishness, and the exploitation
of congregants by certain ecclesial leaders is driven by various factors, including greed,
bad hermeneutics and theologies, and, ultimately, poverty. Thus, it is recommended that
people who have access to incumbent and upcoming ecclesial leaders, such as staff at
ecumenical, theological, and seminary colleges, contribute their knowledge to develop
leaders and promote congregational economic sustainability. African economies, which
are rich in natural, human, and material resources, are impoverished by self-serving and
violent politics. Therefore, the collective voices of diaconal advocacy for responsible
citizenship, environmental stewardship, and integral missionary application of the gospel
must transform our politics and economics in Africa.
Thus, this submission calls everyone who has a voice to acclimatize others to remain
conscious—beyond being mere citizens of their respective nations—of their inclusive
positions as regional, continental, and global citizens. By doing so, everyone will be
sensitive to doing whatever they can, individually and collectively, by partnering with
others, and engaging their ecclesial and political leaders to develop their governance to
achieve inclusive economic sustainability.
6. Concluding Remarks
When church governance, leadership styles, and ecclesiologies are influenced by one
person, or few top leaders, authoritarianism, leadership showmanship, congregational
manipulation, and exploitation are likely to develop. While the effects may vary from
one denomination, congregation, location, and time to another, absolute power is abso-
lutely corrupting the governance and ecclesiologies of most mega-Pentecostal churches in
Southern Africa. Instead of serving the mission of God and the Church and transforming
society, centralizing leadership and ecclesiologies bind gullible believers to secure leaders’
political and economic interests. In view of this trend, the remnants of sound ecclesial lead-
ers, ecumenical bodies, and theological colleges can save present and future generations
from the perils of mega five-in-one ministries by engaging involved leaders, subordinates,
and their young followers. Proposed helpers can facilitate conferences and seminars for
reflection, discussion, and suggestions for contextually developmental hermeneutics, the-
ologies, church governance, transformative ecclesiologies, and sustainable economics. It is
believable that such initiatives will inform the edifying continuation of the collective and
complementary tenets of the fivefold ministry and discontinue the destructive authoritarian
influences of the five-in-one ministry in Southern Africa.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is
not applicable to this article.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
Adamo, David T. 2021. The African Background of the Prosperity Gospel. Theologia Viatorum 45: a71. [CrossRef]
Adedibu, Babatunde A., and Benson O. Igboin. 2019. Eschato-Praxis and Accountability: A Study of Neo-African Pentecostal
Movement in the Light of Prosperity Gospel. Verbum et Ecclesia 40: a1987. [CrossRef]
Amanze, James. 2008. From the periphery to the centre: The radical transformation of Pentecostal-charismatic Christianity in the 20th
century. Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae 34: 1–10. Available online: http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1
017-04992008000200003&lng=en&tlng=en (accessed on 10 September 2024).
Religions 2024,15, 1366 12 of 13
Biri, Kudzai. 2016. Neo Pentecostalism in Africa. In Anthology of African Christianity. Edited by Isabel Apawo Phiri, Dietrich
Werner, Chammah Kaunda and Kennedy Owino. Oxford: Regnum Books International, pp. 415–19. Available online: http:
//hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/166294 (accessed on 5 August 2024).
Biri, Kudzai. 2020. Man of God or God of Man? Pentecostalism, Authority and Accountability in Zimbabwe. In Religion and Social
Marginalization. Edited by Lovemore Togarasei, David Bishau and Ezra Chitando. Bamberg: University of Bamberg Press,
pp. 111–24.
Brunsdon, Alfred R., and Johannes J. Knoetze. 2021. Reflective Perspectives on Theological Education in Africa. In A Critical Engagement
with Theological Education in Africa: A South African Perspective. Edited by Johannes J. Knoetze and Alfred R. Brunsdon. Reformed
Theology in Africa Series. Cape Town: AOSIS, vol. 7, pp. 275–84. [CrossRef]
Chitando, Ezra, Molly Manyonganise, and Obert B. Mlambo. 2013. Young, Male and Polished: Masculinities, Generational Shifts and
Pentecostal Prophets in Zimbabwe. In Prophets, Profits and the Bible in Zimbabwe. Edited by Ezra Chitando, Masiiwa Ragies Gunda
and Joachim Kügler. Bamberg: University of Bamberg Press, pp. 153–70.
Dube, Zorodzai. 2018. Patriarchy reinvented? “Spiritual parenting” within African Pentecostalism in Zimbabwe. Verbum et Ecclesia 39:
a1777. [CrossRef]
Golo, Ben-Willie Kwaku. 2013. Africa’s Poverty and Its Neo-Pentecostal “Liberators”: An Eco-Theological Assessment of Africa’s
Prosperity Gospellers. Pneuma 35: 366–84. [CrossRef]
Guyson, Nangayi. 2016. Of False Prophets and Profits: Meet the Pentecostal Preacher Taking on the Prosperity Gospel. African
Arguments, September 12. Available online: https://africanarguments.org/2016/09/of-false-prophets-and-profits-meet-the-
pentecostal-preacher-taking- on-the-prosperity-gospel/ (accessed on 15 September 2024).
Hadebe, Nontando M. 2017. Commodification, Decolonization and Theological Education in Africa: Renewed Challenges for African
Theologians. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 73: a4550. [CrossRef]
Harris, Kara. 2022. Implementing and Equipping a Fivefold Ministry with Theological Education to Defend and Uphold Biblical
Doctrines in the Church. Ph.D. thesis, Liberty University School of Divinity, Lynchburg, VA, USA. Available online: https:
//digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/3987 (accessed on 20 September 2024).
Hartwell, Paul Davis. 2004. Restoring the Fivefold Ministry: Pastors or Elders for the Church Today. San Diego: Llumina Press.
Hove, Rabson. 2022. The Pastor as an Ecumenical Leader: Reflections and Pastoral Ministry Experiences at Bvumbura Parish,
Zimbabwe. Pharos Journal of Theology 103: 1–14. Available online: https://www.pharosjot.com/uploads/7/1/6/3/7163688/
article_28_vol_103_2__2022_ukzn.pdf (accessed on 27 August 2024). [CrossRef]
Kaunda, Chammah J. 2020. The Emptied Authority: African Neo-Pentecostalism, Modernisation of Sacred Authority, and Gendered
and Sexualised Constructions of Violence. Acta Theologica 40: 216–37. [CrossRef]
Kgatle, Mookgo Solomon. 2022. The role of ecumenical bodies in curbing abuses in new prophetic churches in South Africa. In die
Skriflig 56: a2901. [CrossRef]
Kgatle, Mookgo Solomon. 2024a. God-talk Rhetoric and the Abuse of Women in Neo-Pentecostalism: Developing the Pentecostal
Theology of Hearing from God. Pharos Journal of Theology 105: 1–9. [CrossRef]
Kgatle, Mookgo Solomon. 2024b. The Fivefold Ministry in African Neo-Pentecostalism: Constructing a Pentecostal Theology of
Edification. In die Skriflig 58: a3034. [CrossRef]
Kwateng-Yeboah, James. 2017. A Re-appraisal of the Prosperity Gospel in African Neo-Pentecostalism: The Potency of Multiple Moder-
nities Paradigm. Master ’s dissertation, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada. Available online: https://www.queensu.
ca/religion/sites/rlgnwww/files/uploaded_files/James%20Kwateng-Yeboah%20MA%20Essay%20(2017).pdf (accessed on 22
August 2024).
Magezi, Vhumani, and Collium Banda. 2017. Competing with Christ? A Critical Christological Analysis of the Reliance on Pentecostal
Prophets in Zimbabwe. In die Skriflig 51: a2273. [CrossRef]
Matisi, Margaret Nanjala. 2020. Effects of Leadership Styles in Pentecostal Evangelistic Fellowship of Africa on Growth and
Development. International Journal of Recent Innovations in Academic Research 4: 55–64. Available online: https://journals.
indexcopernicus.com/api/file/viewByFileId/1306386 (accessed on 20 August 2024).
Matshobane, Mangaliso, and Maake J. Masango. 2018. Understanding Power Struggles in the Pentecostal Church Government. HTS
Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 74: a4949. [CrossRef]
McCauley, John. 2012. Africa’s new big man rule? Pentecostalism and patronage in Ghana. African Affairs 112: 1–21. [CrossRef]
Mwenje, Judith. 2016. An Investigation of the Leadership Styles of Pentecostal Church Leaders in Zimbabwe. Africa Journal of Business
Management 10: 55–74.
Ndlovu, Sinegugu, Azwihangwisi Helen Mavhandu-Mudzusi, and Magezi Elijah Baloyi. 2024. Gender-Based Violence in Some
Pentecostal Churches—A South African Study. Religions 15: 679. [CrossRef]
Nhumburudzi, Loshick, and Jeffrey Kurebwa. 2018. Leadership Succession in Zimbabwe’ Pentecostal Churches: The Case of Zimbabwe
Assemblies of God Africa (ZAOGA) and Apostolic Faith Mission in Zimbabwe (AFM). Global Journal of Human-Social Science 18:
45–51.
Orogun, Daniel O. 2023. Hybrid Leadership in African Neo-Pentecostalism. Religions 14: 632. [CrossRef]
Orogun, Daniel O., and Jerry Pillay. 2021. African neo-Pentecostal capitalism through the lens of Ujamaa. HTS Teologiese Stud-
ies/Theological Studies 77: a6577. [CrossRef]
Religions 2024,15, 1366 13 of 13
Peace Insight. 2018. Ecumenical Church Leaders Forum (ECLF). Available online: https://www.peaceinsight.org/en/organisations/
ecumenical-church-leaders-forum-eclf/?location=zimbabwe&theme (accessed on 23 August 2024).
Ramantswana, Hulisani, and Ithapeleng Sebetseli. 2021. Prophets Competing Against Each Other in a Commercial Age: Have Some
Prophets or Neo-prophetic Churches Gone too Far? HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 77: a6340. [CrossRef]
Resane, Kelebogile Thomas. 2008. A Critical Analysis of the Ecclesiology of the Emerging Apostolic Churches with Special Reference
to the Notion of the Fivefold Ministry. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa. Available online: https:
//repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/29227 (accessed on 22 August 2024).
Resane, Kelebogile Thomas, and Johane Buitendag. 2008. The Temptation of Realpolitik and vox populi in the Ecclesiology of the
Emerging Apostolic Churches with Special Reference to the Fivefold Ministry. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 64: a79.
[CrossRef]
Stephens, Nick Francis. 2018. Fivefold Ministry: An Expressional Church Model for Releasing 21st-Century Disciples Into Their
Missional Potential and Design. Doctoral thesis, Bethel University, St Paul, MN, USA. Available online: https://spark.bethel.
edu/etd/607 (accessed on 25 August 2024).
Tagwirei, Kimion. 2023a. Battling with the Baton: (Dis)Connecting Today and Tomorrow’s Leaders in African Pentecostalism. HTS
Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 79: a9179. [CrossRef]
Tagwirei, Kimion. 2023b. Missionizing Church Governance: Transfiguring Pentecostalism in Zimbabwe. Religions 14: 1278. [CrossRef]
Tagwirei, Kimion. 2023c. Serving the Needy From the Greedy: Reviewing Diakonia in African neo-Pentecostalism. In Die Skriflig 57:
a2981. [CrossRef]
Tagwirei, Kimion. 2024a. Developing African Christian Leaders for Global Transformation. E-Journal of Religious and Theological Studies
(ERATS) 10: 206–17. [CrossRef]
Tagwirei, Kimion. 2024b. Rebuilding the broken walls of Zimbabwe with the Church, leadership and followership. Verbum et Ecclesia
45: a3054. [CrossRef]
Tagwirei, Kimion. 2024c. Weeding Syncretism from Pentecostal Wheat in Zimbabwe. Pharos Journal of Theology 105: 1–21. [CrossRef]
Toulemonde, Marie. 2024. Africa’s Megachurches: A Glorious Business. The Africa Report. February 27. Available online: https:
//www.theafricareport.com/338268/africas-megachurches-a-glorious-business/ (accessed on 24 August 2024).
White, Peter, and Simbarashe Pondani. 2022. Church-Franchise: Missional Innovation for Church Planting and Leadership Mentorship
in Neo-Pentecostal and Neo-Prophetic Churches in Africa. Religions 13: 698. [CrossRef]
Wintoch, Claudia R. 2003. A Biblical Understanding of Fivefold Ministry. Kansas: World Revival School of Ministry. Available online:
http://healing2thenations.net/papers/fivefold.htm (accessed on 28 August 2024).
Yong, Amos, and Johannes Knoetze. 2024. Many Tongues, Many Economic Practices: Socio-Economic Opportunities and Challenges
for African Pentecostal Christianity. Religions 15: 832. [CrossRef]
Zgambo, Humphreys Frackson. 2021. Redefining a Relevant Church Government Model for the Contemporary Church: An Analysis
of Church Polity Principles in the New Testament Church. Pharos Journal of Theology 102: 1–20. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
