Restoring Kingdom Builders

A pastor friend who reads this blog told me a story recently that seems paradoxical.

My friend became the pastor of a church several years ago that averaged 45 people on Sundays.

Three years later, the attendance had tripled and the ministry was going great … except that the rapid growth upset some key leaders.

They began making accusations against the pastor … who was shocked by what they were saying and how they started treating him.

So he eventually resigned … those who came to the church because of him left … and the church reverted to its original size.

This pastor was asked recently to attend a function where many of his pastoral colleagues were present … and many of those men pastored congregations on the small side … even smaller than 45.

But they still had their jobs, and if history is any indication, most of them will remain as pastors for a long time.

We might put this ministry paradox this way:

If a pastor grows a church too rapidly, he can find himself unemployed … but if someone pastors a stagnant church, he may keep his position for years.

For an existing church to grow in 2015, a pastor must institute change … which usually involves risk … which creates anxiety among some people … which leads to complaining … which can lead to antagonism, plots, secret meetings, charges, demands, threats, and the ultimate resignation of that pastor.

Let me give you an example of this scenario from my own ministry:

Many years ago, I pastored a church that was growing at a steady pace.  I initially focused primarily on teaching and shepherding … and the ministry went very well.

We crowded out two services in our worship center, so I had to put on my leader hat and make plans to build a new worship center on our property.

This meant putting together a building team … allotting special funds to hire an architect … letting the architect explain his ideas to the congregation … letting the congregation respond to the architect’s proposal … hiring a contractor … starting a capital funds drive … collecting pledges … overseeing construction … dealing with the planning commission … dealing with resistant neighbors … calling in a federal mediator to help with the resistant neighbors … holding a groundbreaking ceremony … overseeing construction for a year … getting final city approvals … and holding a dedication Sunday.

And I’m sure I missed at least a dozen other steps!

I kept the congregation informed at every key juncture.  Every vote that our church took on every building-related issue was unanimous.  In my view, I handled the changes well.

But there was still fallout.  We lost around 8% of our regular attendees.  Some didn’t want to contribute to the building.  Several leaders tried to sabotage the entire project.  And when the building was finally unveiled, some people complained about colors … furnishings … room functionality … you name it.

I once heard that 70% of all pastors resign soon after completing a building program.  I can see why.  You’re so worn out by the time the building goes up that you have little energy left to grow the church.

But just constructing a worship center (called “architectural evangelism”) never attracts new people.  The pastor still needs to exercise leadership to fill the building, and when he begins taking risks again, the whole anxiety/complaining/antagonism/plots/threats cycle starts all over again.

If a pastor chooses to exercise true leadership in a church, then someone is going to attack him.  Most pastors instinctively know this, and because so many pastors are sensitive individuals, most opt not to lead, which is why 80-85% of all churches in America are stagnant or declining.

But when a pastor does lead, he invariably makes some enemies.

If those people perceive that the pastor is strong, they will probably leave the church.

If they perceive the pastor is weak, they may organize to try and force him to leave.

But if a pastor chooses not to lead … but to focus on administration and teaching and shepherding instead … the chances are much greater that he’ll keep his job for a long time … even if his church never grows.

I visited a church several years ago where the pastor had been there for more than three decades.  The church had been in decline for years (the attendance was half of what it once had been) but the pastor was allowed to stay because he functioned best as a teacher and a shepherd rather than a leader.

Although the boat was taking on water, at least the pastor wasn’t rocking it!

By contrast, Dennis Maynard mentions in his book When Sheep Attack that the 25 clergy he interviewed for his study were all leading growing churches when they were forced to resign.

Maynard states that “… several of our participants noted that they believed that returning the parish to its former state of mediocrity was what they thought the antagonists really wanted.  They observed that the antagonists often objected to the increase in attendance and new members.  They resented the expanded program.  They particularly objected to having new leadership raised up in the congregation.  Once the parish is returned to its former size and activity the antagonists are in a better position to, as one priest wrote – ‘run things themselves.'”

The idea that many of the pastors of rapidly growing churches lose their jobs while the pastors of stagnant/shrinking churches keep their jobs isn’t based on a scientific study.  It’s just a personal observation.  But in my mind, it seems to ring true much of the time.

All of this leads me to ask four questions:

First, is it better for a pastor’s career prospects for him to focus on teaching/shepherding rather than leading in any meaningful way? 

In other words, should a pastor focus on a few things and leave the leadership to the staff … the board … or other influencers?

Second, at what point do a church’s lay leaders begin to turn on the pastor of a growing church?

Is it when their friends/spouses threaten to leave?  When the church grows beyond their control?

Third, to what extent can a pastor be run out of a church for doing too much good?

Can a pastor be too successful?  How does a pastor know when he’s in career jeopardy?

Finally, why do Christian leaders permit this kind of sabotage in our churches?

Why aren’t our seminaries teaching prospective pastors that church success can very well lead to eventual unemployment?  Why don’t our denominations support productive pastors over against damaging antagonists?

Jesus wasn’t executed because His following was insignificant, but because His influence and popularity were expanding.  He was crucified for being too effective.

Twenty centuries later, the careers of many pastors end for the same reason.