When a pastor is under attack inside his church, he begins to suffer from a condition I’d like to call Damaged Pastor Syndrome.
DPS strikes a pastor when he picks up signals that an individual or a group are laying the groundwork to force him from office.
These signals include church members:
*Making inquiries about church attendance and giving patterns.
*Requesting copies of the church constitution and bylaws.
*Calling district or denominational headquarters.
*Visibly gathering before and after church … even if they don’t travel in the same social circles.
*Increasingly making negative comments on social media about the church and/or pastor.
In addition:
*The governing board may call itself into executive session without the pastor’s foreknowledge.
*Staff members may begin to resist the pastor’s directives.
*Staffers may become secretive while talking on the phone.
*Some church leaders may limit or avoid social time with the pastor altogether.
*Certain board and staff members may stop coming to worship … especially when the pastor is preaching.
Most pastors – nearly 80% – are very sensitive individuals, and when they sense an attack is coming, they quickly acquire DPS.
Let me share a story from my own ministry to illustrate this more concretely.
During my second pastorate, the seniors’ Bible class rebelled against me.
They didn’t like the new music the board had approved for worship. They didn’t feel I was paying them enough attention. And the class’s teacher – a former pastor who couldn’t find a job anywhere in Christendom – began to feel powerful as his class focused on the source of their discontent: their pastor.
Before long, rumors of discontent became reality.
A board member found out that a group of seniors were going to hold a secret meeting at a specific time and place. He told me about the meeting.
I was afraid and anxious. I couldn’t think. And I wondered, “Why doesn’t this group like me? What have I done to offend them?”
My wife and I went to a movie – a Disney cartoon, as I recall – just so I could focus on something other than that meeting.
In the end, it didn’t come off because the supportive board member showed up at the meeting unannounced and took away all their fun.
But that didn’t stop them. They rescheduled and reloaded.
Because I didn’t know what was happening … and could only imagine the worst … I shifted into survival mode.
In the end, they created a two-page list of complaints against me, my wife, our son (who was 9), and our daughter (who was 6).
When I found out about this, I called a special board meeting and informed the entire group about the plot.
To a man, they stood with me … even though my district minister recommended that I resign.
But for weeks, I was a wreck. I couldn’t sleep … couldn’t carry on a decent conversation … couldn’t trust people … and couldn’t think about anything other than the attack.
Because I had shifted into fight or flight mode, I was pumping adrenaline at a furious rate to handle the emergency.
The conflict went on for months … until the seniors and their buddies all left the church en masse … forming a new church one mile away.
Now here’s how DPS becomes relevant: when a pastor is under attack, he will be further attacked for responding to the attack like a human being.
For example, when a pastor is under attack:
*If he becomes depressed, he will be attacked for looking gloomy.
*If he becomes fearful, he will be attacked for not appearing strong.
*If he becomes anxious, he will be attacked for not trusting God.
*If he becomes isolated, he will be attacked for being aloof.
*If he becomes ill, he will be attacked for appearing unhealthy.
In other words, the very people who abuse, betray, and criticize the pastor will kick him around even more for not handling himself the way they think he should.
They will ask people in the church: “How can he be our pastor if he isn’t going to set a better example for the rest of us?”
DPS may be the primary reason why pastors end up resigning after enduring a sheep attack.
It took me six months to recover my energy after that group left the church. The pastor of one of America’s largest churches told me that after he survived a similar attack, it also took him six months to recover, so this may be a pattern.
The group attacking the pastor is correct: the pastor may not be very effective for a while due to anxiety, depression, and fear.
But the group is wrong about why the pastor quickly wilts. It’s not because he’s a poor example … it’s because shepherds are never prepared for sheep to turn on them and stomp them into the ground.
Since pastors are attacked while on the job, it only seems fair for the congregation and/or church board to assume responsibility for the pastor’s care while he recovers. This includes a reduced workload … extended time off … funds for counseling … a visit to a retreat center … and creating safeguards to resist another attack.
Because most of the time, it’s not a weakness in the pastor that causes him to collapse under pressure … it’s a weakness in the church system that allows the attack in the first place.
Think about it.
Dismissing the Coach, Dismissing the Pastor
Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged church board and pastoral termination, pastoral termination, the aftermath of pastoral termination on January 30, 2015| 6 Comments »
Jim Harbaugh is a great football coach.
He’s won everywhere he’s gone as a head coach: the University of San Diego, Stanford University, and the San Francisco 49ers.
And he’s not only won, but quickly turned failing programs around, which is why his alma mater, the University of Michigan, hired him immediately after Harbaugh and the 49ers parted ways.
The 49ers have been my favorite National Football League team since 1981 when quarterback Joe Montana connected with Dwight Clark in the end zone for “The Catch” in the last minute of the NFC title game against the favored Dallas Cowboys.
So I’ve followed Jim Harbaugh’s four years in San Francisco pretty closely.
To put it mildly, Harbaugh is a very intense individual … but he’s also a winner. He took the 49ers to three straight NFC Championship Games and one Super Bowl after the team experienced years in the football wilderness.
But the team’s owner and key front office personnel decided they wanted to get rid of Harbaugh months before the 2014 season ended, even though he had an additional year left on his contract. (The 49ers finished 8-8.)
The 49ers just hired a new coach: Jim Tomsula, their defensive line coach. The columnists in the Bay Area are not happy about the hire. In their view, Tomsula is NOT Harbaugh … or even close.
In fact, Tim Kawakami, columnist for the Mercury News in San Jose, recently wrote a column in which he makes the following statement:
“What was the 49ers’ plan here? Now it’s clear: Letting go of Harbaugh was the plan. That’s it: Get rid of the guy who gave them all palpitations. Nothing more. There was no other thought put to this beyond dumping their nemesis and for that they planned and plotted and leaked for months and months.”
Kawakami goes on:
“They knew they wanted Harbaugh out. They knew he was popular. They had to go backwards to figure out WHY they would publicly announce he was out.
Their solution:
-Talk about ‘winning with class’;
-Declare that any season ending without a Lombardi Trophy is a failure and a potential fire-able offense;
-Pretend it was a ‘mutual separation’;
-Let it be known that you’re talking to a lot of great candidates;
-Hire Tomsula, the comfortable in-house candidate who basically is the opposite of Harbaugh in all personal ways, especially in dealing with ownership;
-And, most fatefully of all, communicate to all that you don’t think the coach is that important, anyway.”
Does all of this sound familiar?
When a church’s governing leaders or a powerful faction decide they want to push out a pastor, they usually focus all their energies on getting rid of him.
And in turn, they don’t have much of a plan … if any … as to how the church will fare without him.
Getting rid of him is their goal.
What’s their plan beyond that?
Zilch.
I once attended a spring training baseball game with a friend who served with me on a church board for many years. While talking about church leaders that plot to get rid of their pastor, I asked my friend, “Don’t church boards know how much they will destroy their church when they run off their pastor?”
My friend stated matter-of-factly, “They don’t care.”
In these situations, board members give their best energies to making sure the pastor leaves. But when the dust settles, now they have to:
*Hire an interim pastor.
*Form a search team to find a new senior pastor.
*Placate the departing pastor’s supporters.
*Assign other staff/lay leaders to handle the departing pastor’s work load.
*Address the multitude of complaints that will come their way.
In addition, they’ll have to deal with:
*Reduced attendance as the pastor’s supporters leave.
*Cutting back the number of worship services to hide all the empty chairs.
*Decreased giving as donors walk out the door.
*Keeping the staff intact with that decreased giving.
*Preventing the staff that supported the pastor from leaving.
*Plunging morale as the church gradually enters an entropy phase.
*Answering questions from churchgoers such as, “Why did the departing pastor leave?” and “What’s going to happen to our church?” and “When are we going to get a new pastor?”
The temptation is for the board to blame everything on the departing pastor. After all, he’s not around to defend himself.
But when church boards do this … and all too many do … they can ruin a pastor’s reputation and choke his ability to find a new church ministry … forever.
I’m not arguing that every pastor should stay in a church regardless of his behavior. As I’ve said many times, heresy, sexual immorality, and criminal behavior disqualify a pastor from leadership, and it’s a thankless task to sit on a church board that has to clean up such a theological or moral mess.
But much of the time in churches, the pastor is forced out because he’s earned too much authority for the board and/or staff to control.
Tim Kawakami makes this observation in his article on Harbaugh and the 49ers:
“My point is that [the 49ers’ brain trust] set themselves up for this by treating Jim Harbaugh—and his achievements—as cavalierly as they did all last year and for convincing themselves that there would be no ill effects from it. Wrong.”
A far better solution … one that all too few churches try … is to hire a consultant … or a conflict manager … or a mediator … anyone both the pastor and board can trust … who will help them learn how to work together more favorably.
Rather than forcing out the pastor and sending the church into a descending spiral, wouldn’t it be better for everyone concerned if the board at least tried to bridge their differences with their pastor first?
The future of many pastors and churches is at stake.
Share this:
Like this:
Read Full Post »