I just dropped a final payment and a sharply-worded letter in the mailbox to my former cable company (let’s call them Corrupt Cable) a few minutes ago.
Last April, Corrupt bought out my previous cable company (which I was very happy with) and immediately began alienating their new customers.
The bills were higher than they had been. When I called customer service – which I did every month – the reps would tell me I owed one amount, but the subsequent bill would be larger.
When my bill in July was double what the customer rep said that I owed in June, I immediately cancelled (I was on a month-to-month contract) and contacted another company, which came the next day and exceeded my expectations with their professional attitude and performance.
I called Corrupt’s customer service again, asked how much my final bill was, and sent in that amount. But Corrupt later billed me twice the amount the rep said I owed.
That was it for me. I sent Corrupt management a strongly-worded two page letter along with a check for the amount the rep said I owed. Corrupt countered with a letter threatening my credit if I didn’t pay them the remaining balance immediately.
I have never written the word “Corrupt!” on a check before, but I just did.
Now here’s the deal: I don’t want to hurt Corrupt’s CEO or force him from office. I don’t want to destroy the company or its shareholders.
I just don’t want to think about them or talk about them anymore. I am done with the Corrupt Cable Company forever.
But in many churches, when someone becomes upset with the pastor, they want to hurt him. They want to target him. They want to force him from office.
And they want revenge.
It’s my contention that many pastoral terminations are really the result of one or more church leaders seeking retribution against their shepherd.
More and more, I’m hearing stories of pastors and staff members who are forced out of their positions, and when they’re done sharing, I say to them, “You know what this sounds like to me? Revenge.”
Let me share with you a composite of situations I’ve heard about firsthand.
Tom (who is now in his early 60s) has been the lead pastor of New Life Church for fifteen years. The church has grown steadily and has a weekend attendance of 1100 people. Tom and the board hired an associate pastor named Joe five years ago, and the first several years went well, but over the past two years, Joe has made Tom’s life a living hell.
Joe (who is in his mid-40s) is surrounded by family and friends who think that he’s a better leader and preacher than Tom and that he’s more culturally relevant. Joe’s wife has been especially vocal in this area.
Some members of Joe’s group (which numbers about thirty) have started to make snide comments about the church and its leadership on social media. Though they don’t mention Pastor Tom by name, it’s obvious they’re aiming their barbs at him.
By contrast, when Pastor Joe does anything in public, he’s praised on Facebook and Twitter by the FOJ Brigade.
At this point, the ideal solution is for the official board to intervene and tell Joe that (a) he still works for Pastor Tom; (b) he needs to tell his supporters to knock off their social media campaign; (c) if Joe has any concerns, he should discuss them with Tom first; and (d) any deviations from their instructions will result in Joe’s dismissal.
But because most church boards are afraid of conflict, and because some board members like Joe more than Tom, this solution isn’t likely to be implemented.
If Pastor Tom does nothing, he’s going to be driven from his position within a short while, because Joe’s followers are starting to smell blood.
But if Tom goes to the board and enacts too heavy-handed an approach, some board members will turn on him and back Joe instead.
So Tom decides that he will talk to Joe in private first. Tom will tell Joe what he’s seeing with his attitude and ask Joe what he plans to do about it.
Tom’s plan doesn’t work and, in fact, upsets Joe greatly. Ten minutes after their meeting, Joe is texting and calling his group, telling them, “How dare the pastor talk to me like that!”
Tom comes out of their meeting dazed and confused, while Joe calls a couple of board members that he senses are sympathetic and negatively exaggerates both Tom’s tone and words.
The verdict? Pastor Tom can’t get along with the staff (even though he gets along with everybody but Joe) and he can’t get along with important people (like Joe’s followers).
So Tom has to go.
I wrote the following paragraph in my book Church Coup:
“I have a theory about the mentality of those who seek to target a pastor they don’t like. Because they sense that what they’re doing is wrong, they have to (a) exaggerate any charges to the level of a capital crime; (b) find others who agree with them to alleviate their guilt; (c) justify their actions by convincing themselves it’s for the common good; and (d) work up their hatred so they follow through with their plan. While this progression sounds like the kind of diabolical rage one might find in politics or war (or the prelude to a murder), the last place we’d expect to find such irrationality is inside a church.”
Over the next three months, Joe’s revenge against Tom manifests itself in five ways:
*Joe lets scores of people know – both directly and through his minions – that Tom should no longer be the pastor at New Life. Joe details Tom’s inadequacies for anyone who will listen, including veiled swipes at his age. As news spreads through the church underground, people add their own grievances against Pastor Tom to Joe’s list. Some people start saying that if Tom doesn’t leave, they will.
*The church board absorbs Joe’s complaints against Tom and calls a special meeting to deal with the conflict. Since nobody on the board has a clue how to handle matters, the easy way out is to dismiss Tom, even though he isn’t guilty of any major offense. Because the board lacks any impeachable offense, they decide to justify their actions by “gunnysacking” Tom – listing as many faults and petty offenses against him as they can create in a single meeting. They come up with seventeen reasons why Tom must leave but make a pact they won’t tell Tom anything.
*Keeping Joe informed at every turn, the board then ambushes Pastor Tom at their next regular meeting and informs him that he has a choice of resigning (with a small severance package) or being fired (without a severance package). When Pastor Tom asks for the charges against him to be read, the board declines. When Tom pleads for them to let him defend himself, they refuse. The charges against Tom are merely a smokescreen for personal hatred. When Tom becomes upset, they add that to their list.
*Pastor Tom resigns and receives a three-month severance package. However, he’s told he must (a) clear out his office (and all his books) in two days; (b) turn in his keys immediately afterward; (c) never set foot on the church campus again; (d) not discuss his dismissal with anyone or his severance will be curtailed; (e) cut off all contact with everyone at the church.
*After Tom’s resignation is read to the congregation, Joe and his minions want to make sure that Tom’s supporters (at least 95% of the congregation) won’t cause any future trouble, so they spread rumors that (a) he was having an affair; (b) he was using drugs; and (c) he had trouble in previous churches that never came to light. Several of Joe’s supporters also call the local district office and exaggerate the charges against him to make sure that no church in the denomination ever hires him again. The district minister complies.
Some quick observations:
First, this whole situation was handled politically, not spiritually.
When revenge is involved, church politics rule. It’s all about maximizing power … counting noses … denying the pastor due process … and checkmating him personally and professionally. It may not look or sound like revenge, but it is. Where’s the Bible in all this?
Second, the church board wimped out.
Had I been on New Life’s board, I would have recommended that Pastor Joe be confronted for challenging Pastor Tom’s authority. If he wouldn’t repent, I would recommend his dismissal instead. Tom didn’t do anything wrong; Joe did. And it’s far easier to get a new associate than a new lead pastor. But the board went with the squeaky wheel rather than any semblance of fairness or righteousness.
Third, the church lacked a predetermined process for handling complaints against the pastor.
Every church needs such a process. It automatically kicks in whenever dirt starts being thrown at the pastor. Because church boards often operate politically, I believe that another group in the church needs to monitor this process: a CRG (Conflict Resolution Group). It’s not their job to make decisions about a pastor’s future. It’s their job to make sure that the board and the church treat the pastor fairly: according to Scripture, the church’s governing documents, and the law. And if the CRG’s directives aren’t followed, the entire board should be asked to resign rather than the lead pastor.
Fourth, treating Pastor Tom badly will come back and bite the church … hard.
Yes, people will leave the church, even if they never find out the details surrounding Tom’s departure. But more than this: unless Pastor Joe and the complying board members repent, do you really believe that God is going to bless New Life Church in the future? If so, you and I worship a different God.
Finally, God seeks redemption for His leaders, not revenge.
Allow me a personal word. When I left my last church ministry nearly seven years ago, the entire church board resigned because they initiated a coup that failed. They wrote and signed a resignation letter that was cruel and demeaning and intended to provide me with the maximum amount of pain. (I have read it only three times.) They obviously were upset with me about some issues, but they never sat down and talked with me about them. Instead, they concocted a plan designed to checkmate me at every turn, and when their plan backfired, they left enraged.
There was never any attempt at restoration or redemption. It was all about retribution and revenge.
Several weeks ago, I found out that two couples from my former church who had been friends for forty years severed their friendship over the way I was treated. One couple bought into the gunnysacking charges the board made against me, while the other couple – which never heard from me directly – defended me to the hilt based on the pettiness of the charges themselves. While this new information made me sad, I thought to myself, “This is what happens when people seek revenge against their pastor.”
When church leaders hear complaints about their pastor, they have two options:
First, they can lovingly bring the charges to their pastor’s attention, let him face his accusers, ask him for explanations, and remain open to his staying. That’s redemptive.
Second, they can angrily spread charges behind the pastor’s back, refuse to let him face his accusers, insure that he’s not permitted any kind of defense, and remain determined to get rid of him. That’s revenge.
We all know these verses, but they’re a good reminder during such times:
“Do not repay anyone evil for evil…. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written, ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord…. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Romans 12:17,19,21).
What are your thoughts on what I have written?
Restoring Kingdom Builders 
Hello Jim, I type this response to your most recent post as I am reeling on the heals of yet another pastor that has been driven from his ministry, his ordained mission, and his life’s work. Having been on the receiving end of unjust, and ungodly church members who are bent on having their way regardless of the casualties, and any collateral damage that is done to the pastor, his family, or families within the church body, I felt it my responsibility to reach out to this pastor in his greatest time of need.
I came across this particular pastor’s story through a very good friend of mine who was ministering with him in the same church, and was moved to call him despite us never having previously met. It is the same tired story of several church members who are more concerned with having their own way and express almost all of their energy, and resources insuring they get their way, rather than use that energy to reach people for Christ. I have been in ministry long enough to know that these types of people have no interest in reaching people for Christ, as a matter of fact they have driven far more people away from Christ than they have attracted people to him; they will answer to God for that.
This pastor has had a stellar ministry and pastorate serving in the ministry, but met his demise in coming to this particular church in Sacramento California. The pastor who I will refer to as “Dave” followed the denominational protocol much in the same way that I did, and after trying to reason, and biblical principles, which were not received by the church board, or Dave’s antagonists, he went to the denominational district supervisor for assistance. It was no surprise to me when he told me that he received absolutely no help from the denomination. As a matter of fact, they placed much of the blame upon him for the discord. It was his fault that there were mean spirited people in the church who would yell at Dave in front of his family. It was Dave’s fault that some members of the church board would show up at Dave’s house unannounced and express their discontent with his pastorate. It was Dave’s fault that his antagonists did not want to reach the community for Christ and resisted Dave at every turn and made his life a living hell.
Having been dealt the final blow, Dave purchased plane tickets for his wife and children, and had his family flown back to Colorado where they came from while he stayed behind to sell the home they had only lived in for 3 months, and tie up final loose ends. Dave had sold his house in Colorado, uprooted his family, moved them to California, had his children change schools, and say good-bye to friends they had know for years to come to this church in Sacramento that most likely left a traumatic impression on his and his family’s life for years to come. When speaking with Dave, he was a broken man, and other than returning to Colorado, did not know what his next step in life would be. He did however state to me that he did not think he would ever again enter into the ministry; he was done. Another pastor bites that dust, his family is severely traumatized, his ministry gone, and he is left to pick up what remains of his life and start over.
What amazes and disgusts me is that this is allowed to happen by church members, church boards, and denominational leaders and there doesn’t seem any end to the hemorrhage. People who call themselves “Christians” who warm up pews from Sunday to Sunday, who show up for church services, but never resemble anything other than legalistic religious zealots devoid of the character and nature of Christ. These people are emotional terrorists, use the shock and awe of anger and rage outbursts when you least expect it to catch you off guard so that you have no planned defense. I am angry that this continues to happen to pastors and there doesn’t seem to be any support that helps to alleviate the problem. One of the worst offenders in my opinion is the DS (District Supervisor) who represents the denomination, they do absolutely NOTHING to help. You were a tremendous help to me as me and my family went through what was the most difficult experience in my life 3 years ago, and I pray I NEVER have to go through that again. I pray for pastors, church members, boards, and denominational leaders that they would support their pastor, and use their energy to work towards fulfilling the mission God has given to his church.
LikeLike
Gil, you have a quick understanding of what is going on in our churches today. Maybe you could write an article on the forced termination phenomenon for publication. It’s difficult to get believers to have the right sense of moral outrage about this issue, and you, my brother, have it in spades! There are a few district supervisors out there who stand behind their pastors, but not many. But here’s the deal: what would it take for that district supervisor to stand behind any of his pastors? If the pastor was murdered in cold blood, would he stand behind him and against his critics? If the pastor’s wife was abducted? If the pastor’s kids were assaulted? What does it take for a district supervisor to blame the assaulters rather than the assaulted?
By the way, I’d love to speak with your friend if he feels like it.
God bless you, Gil. Keep speaking out!
Jim
LikeLike