One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. Deuteronomy 19:15
Nothing hurts a pastor more than false accusations. Nothing even comes close.
Several years ago, I spoke with a small church pastor who told me his story. There was an opening on the finance team for one person, and somebody volunteered for the job. The pastor did not want this person to serve, but after a while, this individual appointed himself to the position … and then began reviewing financial records that went back many years.
The finance person found small checks that were written to the pastor that did not include any notation. The pastor said he was paid for doing non-pastoral work outside his normal duties. The finance person claimed the pastor had embezzled funds … and then contacted the local authorities.
As you can imagine, the situation did not end well, and the pastor was forced out of office. The pastor and his wife were devastated, not just by the lies, but by the fact the congregation did not defend them effectively.
Pastors have to deal with various kinds of false accusations. Let me share five common ones:
First, there is hearsay.
This occurs when someone who didn’t see or hear the pastor commit wrongdoing firsthand makes serious accusations against him anyway.
To a large degree, I am no longer in church ministry because someone stood up in a public meeting and made accusations against me that he did not witness himself.
An attorney was present on the stage and had to know that the accusations were hearsay. He should have said, “Do you have firsthand knowledge of these accusations? If not, please sit down or you are guilty of telling untruths.”
But the attorney went silent … as did the rest of my supporters … because they were more stunned by the accusations (nearly all of them blatantly false) than by the fact they couldn’t be corroborated.
I really think that pastors need to take time when they teach to condemn hearsay. If you’re going to make an accusation against a pastor, that’s serious business. You better have seen or heard something yourself and be willing to go on the record. Telling church leaders or an entire congregation, “Well, I heard from a reliable source that the pastor said this or did that” should never be allowed in a church … but it is … all the time.
It certainly wasn’t allowed in ancient Israel (Deut. 17:6-7) … nor in the early church (Matthew 18:15-17; 2 Cor. 13:1; 1 Tim. 5:17-19).
There has to be more evidence than that.
Notice in Deuteronomy 19:15 that not only is hearsay not allowed among God’s people, but a single witness to a crime or offense is insufficient testimony to convict anyone either. At least two or three witnesses are required. Yes, that’s a high standard, but it’s divinely-ordained … and provides valuable protections for the accused.
Second, there are rumors.
During my first year in college, a rumor began circulating in my church that I was no longer getting along with a friend. Since I had a day off, I decided to see if I could track down the source of the rumor.
I visited several people unannounced one day … told them the story I had heard … and asked them what they knew about the rumor. When the day was done, I could not track down the source of the rumor.
Jesus called Satan “a liar” and “the father of lies” in John 8:44. I honestly believe that some rumors do not have a human point of origin but are started by the devil and his angels … who probe a congregation for “a false witness who pours out lies” and “a man who stirs up dissension among brothers” (Proverbs 6:19). How this is done I do not know. That it is done I know all too well.
Most pastors quickly learn who the gossips are in their church … and they don’t trust them with any valuable information.
In my first pastorate in Silicon Valley, there were four older women who didn’t work and who spent a lot of time together on the telephone. Those four women had too much power because they could make or break their pastor with their words.
Reminds me of Adele’s song Rumour Has It:
All of these words whispered in my ear,
Tell a story that I cannot bear to hear,
Just ’cause I said it, it don’t mean that I meant it,
People say crazy things,
Just ’cause I said it, don’t mean that I meant it,
Just ’cause you heard it,
Rumour has it
Third, there is misrepresentation.
When I began my ministry in one church, a board member asked to meet with me to find out what my plans were for the church’s future. During our two hours together, it was evident that we did not agree on the church’s direction.
A few days later, I discovered that this board member had dinner with some church friends and completely distorted things I had said to him. He heard what I said emotionally but not accurately.
What should I have done: confront the man about his lies or choose not to trust him again?
I opted for the latter approach (it would have taken an independent investigation and multiple interviews to prove what he said), and in the end, it proved to be the correct one.
How could I trust him again? I couldn’t.
In the end, he turned on me with a vengeance with a power play designed to make him look like a victim.
After this man left the church in a huff, a woman came up to me the following Sunday and said, “It’s a shame you and So-and-So couldn’t get along.”
I bit my tongue.
After years in ministry, my wife and I came up with a policy: I won’t speak for her and she won’t speak for me.
People often came up to her on Sundays and either (a) told her something so she would tell me or (b) wanted her to explain something I had said or done. She always had the same reply: “I can’t do that. You’ll have to talk to him yourself.”
That way, she didn’t misrepresent me, and I didn’t misrepresent her.
Rather than speaking for others … no matter how well we know them … church leaders have to let people speak for themselves.
Fourth, there is exaggeration.
In my book Church Coup, I quoted church conflict expert Speed Leas:
“A person being charged or condemned by others should have the right to know what those charges are and [have] an opportunity to respond to them. Denying this opportunity plays into the hands of real or potential manipulators, allows untrue or distorted information to be circulated and establishes a precedent that the way to deal with differences is to talk about rather than to talk with others. I have also found it true that individuals who talk about others out of their presence tend to exaggerate their charges, believing they will not be quoted.”
Read that last sentence again.
Let’s imagine that I’m upset with my pastor about something, and I tell two friends over Sunday lunch how I feel. One of my friends then tells the wife of a board member, and a few days later, that board member calls me on the phone and wants to hear what I said directly from me.
If I want to hurt the pastor or persuade the board member to become an ally, I may dress up my charge a little bit … and then ask the board member to keep everything I said “confidential.”
The board member should refuse.
Why?
Because it’s often the “confidential charges” that end up forcing out pastors from church ministry … because the pastors don’t know (a) who is making the charges against them, (b) what the charges are, and (c) aren’t given the ability to hear them firsthand so they can explain or defend themselves.
The charges spread across the church like wildfire, and by the time the pastor hears them for the first time, key leaders and members have already turned against him … without ever hearing his side of things.
Someone once made a strong charge against me that resulted in an investigation … which I welcomed. When my accuser recounted their story, the person made three exaggerations that I was able to refute. I’m convinced this person didn’t exaggerate to hurt me … they knew I’d share my side of things … but to save face because the accusations themselves were so flimsy.
If I could choose one major sin that churches commit when a pastor is accused of wrongdoing, it’s not giving the pastor due process to face his accusers and defend himself.
And for some reason, the more some people exaggerate a pastor’s offenses … or how he made them feel … the less likely it is that the pastor will be given a forum for explaining his actions.
So, in many churches, exaggerating charges against a pastor pays off … but it never should.
Finally, there is speculation.
Speculation occurs when God’s people aren’t given enough information about a pastor … especially why he’s under attack or why he’s departed.
When I left my last church nearly nine years ago, I did not share with the congregation the specific reasons why I was leaving. The board members and associate pastor had all resigned weeks before, and they were out there pounding on me pretty good, but the vast majority of the church did not know why I had left.
So people began making things up.
The worst rumor was that my wife was having an affair and that I was having an affair. My wife was on staff and worked down the hall from me. We had one car and rode together to church and back every day. We were then and are now madly in love with each other … even after 43 years of marriage.
Who started that speculation … and who allowed it to pass through the church without correction?
I believe that when false accusations spread through a church, the official church board has the responsibility to protect the pastor … his family … and the church by refuting those accusations as quickly and as clearly as they can.
This should be done both if the pastor is still ministering in that church or if the pastor has recently departed.
If a pastor is truly innocent of the charges going around about him, and the board refutes those charges, they are not only protecting the pastor’s reputation and future livelihood … they are also protecting their own congregation.
Because the longer a pastor serves in one place, the more the pastor and the church become identified together, as in “That’s Pastor Bill’s church.”
Because if Pastor Bill is forced out of office … the church may eventually collapse.
_______________
I’ve dealt with five types of false accusations against a pastor.
But what should God’s people do with false accusers themselves?
Moses put it this way in Deuteronomy 19:16-20:
If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse a man of a crime, the two men involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the Lord before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time. The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against his brother, then do to him as he intended to do to his brother. You must purge the evil from among you. The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you.
Let me make five quick observations:
First, malicious witnesses have always existed among God’s people. They’re in every culture … and in every church. Whether it’s to get attention or to get revenge against someone, they will destroy individuals and families if their charges are automatically believed. But according to Scripture, they must first be tested.
Second, God mediates His judgment to human leaders, in this case, “the priests and the judges.” In our day, this would likely refer to the official board. These individuals may be fallible, but God uses them anyway.
Third, the judges must investigate a witnesses’ charges and determine if the witness is truthful or lying. If a witness proves to be lying, then they are to receive the same punishment the accused would have received.
Why don’t we ever do this in our churches? Why are the false accusers … and those who have successfully destroyed a pastor’s reputation … allowed to not only stay in a church, but sometimes be promoted to even greater leadership positions?
What is wrong with us?
Some Christians say, “Oh, we need to forgive each other so we can all move on.” But to forgive false accusers when they’ve never been confronted or repented of their sin? Read Jesus’ words in Luke 17:3-4 where He talks about not forgiving certain people.
Fourth, God considers false accusations … not just against a leader, but against anyone in His covenant community … to be evil … and He says it twice. It is evil to lie about someone … to harm their reputation … and in Israel’s case, lying about someone could result in the death of the accused. (See Deuteronomy 17:6-7.)
Finally, if God’s people would institute a process like this, maybe we’d have far fewer false accusations among God’s people … and directed toward God’s leaders. “The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you.”
“Never again will such an evil thing be done among you.”
How I love those words.
Restoring Kingdom Builders 
The Ninth Anniversary of a Church Coup: Snapshots of a Pastoral Termination
Posted in Church Conflict, Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged church conflict, Church Coup, pastoral termination on October 24, 2018| 9 Comments »
Today is the anniversary of a day that changed my life forever.
Nine years ago this morning, after returning from a mission trip overseas, I entered the office of the church I served as pastor for an 8:00 am meeting with the official board. We were supposed to discuss our plans for the next year’s budget.
Instead, the board announced that they had terminated our most valuable staff member: my wife. Their sole charge against her was that she had overspent her missions and outreach budgets by a wide margin.
But she wasn’t their eventual target. I was. The board didn’t have enough evidence against me that they could take to the congregation for a dismissal vote, so they went after her instead, assuming I’d resign if she did.
I’ve recounted the story of the fifty-day conflict that ensued in my book Church Coup (which may be the most detailed and complete account of a pastoral termination ever written). I revisit the story in this blog every October 24. As one of my advisors told me, “You never want to forget what it felt like to go through that awful experience.”
The purpose of telling my story is for pastors, board members, and churchgoers to learn what to do and what not to do during a conflict with the pastor. I am not telling my story to garner sympathy or to gain followers. By relating my experiences, I still hope to teach.
So let me share some snapshots of what I experienced over the seven weeks of the conflict. Many stories are outtakes from my book while some are based on information I received after the book was published in the spring of 2013.
After more than 35 years in church ministry … I still can’t believe the following events happened to me … but they did.
_______________
The board told me that they would give my wife a choice: she could resign or be fired. They said they felt so strongly about their decision that they were all willing to resign, the implication being that if she didn’t resign, they would.
And the following week, because she didn’t resign, they did. (To this day, I wonder who advised them to try that tactic.)
If she resigned, that would take the pressure off them … and that was her initial reaction: to just quit.
But when she thought more clearly, she didn’t believe she had done anything wrong … and she was positive she had not overspent the amount the board claimed.
So she didn’t quit immediately, as the board hoped she would. We both decided to wait and see if we could discover the truth behind their decision first.
Kim’s dad (a former pastor and Christian university professor) told her, “If you didn’t do anything wrong, don’t quit.” A Christian counselor who had advised us for years told me, “If she resigns, that would be a lie. Make it a battle.”
We didn’t want to make it a battle, but the board had not made enough of a compelling case for my wife to say, “You’re right, I messed up, I will resign.” We needed more information.
In my wildest dreams, I never thought the church board would take such drastic action.
But they did.
_______________
For years, my wife worked for a pace setting company in Silicon Valley, and she sometimes had to fire employees … but always by the book. She was upset with the board because they had not followed any kind of protocol. She kept telling me that her rights had been violated.
Several months ago, my wife visited that company again, and briefly told her story to the organization’s founder and president, who agreed that my wife had every right to sue the church/board for wrongful termination.
On the one hand, Paul commands Christians not to sue other Christians in 1 Corinthians 6:1-8. I get that.
On the other hand, too many Christian organizations … especially churches … do violate the rights of staff members and pastors when they terminate them … and they do deserve to be sued.
But the separation of church and state usually protects such churches.
I wish some churches would be sued successfully … if only to teach church leaders to use biblical procedures … and due process … when they’re thinking about terminating pastors and staff members in the future.
Because if those same leaders were treated in a similar fashion at their workplaces, they would probably sue the pants off their companies.
_______________
On the night after the board met with me, they convened a meeting of the church staff to announce my wife’s termination. Not only did the board add several more charges to their list, but such a meeting was probably illegal.
An advisor who later became my mentor told me that in our state, if my wife had been in a secular company, she could have sued them for four to six million dollars for telling her co-workers why they had fired her.
Five nights later, when my wife finally met with two board members at my request … so they could tell her to her face why they had terminated her … she told them that she could sue them for the way they had handled things. This wasn’t merely an emotional outburst … this was based on the careful way she fired employees for years at that Silicon Valley company.
A former board member from that church told me emphatically over a period of years that the board violated the church constitution and bylaws when they terminated my wife. The governing documents clearly stated that staff members could only be fired upon recommendation of the senior pastor to the official board. When the church voted to approve those documents, my wife was already a staff member.
One night, while walking along the Bay on a very dark night, I ran into another former board member who told me it was going around that my wife and I were planning on suing the church. It wasn’t true … we weren’t planning on suing anybody … but many churchgoers believe the first thing they hear without confirmation.
The church board totally bungled the way they handled things, and when my wife called them on it, we became the bad guys … and had to be destroyed.
All too often, this is the way Christians handle their conflicts. We’re godly … they’re ungodly.
_______________
When my predecessor retired and left the church in December 2000, he and his wife moved to another state. But they eventually moved back to California … and settled in the very city my wife and I have made our home the past six years.
My predecessor became the president of a parachurch group, and that group’s founder also lived in our city at the time. The founder told me that several years before 2009, while they were playing golf, my predecessor told him that he was going to return to the church I was pastoring. The founder told him, “No, you can’t do that!” But my predecessor seemed determined.
This information tells me that the plot to get rid of me went back months … if not years … before the board acted against my wife. As a megachurch pastor who knew my predecessor told me eleven days after the conflict surfaced, “You have no idea how much you have been undermined.”
That same pastor told me that he had heard my predecessor make the exact same charges against my wife using the exact same terms that the board used. To what extent did my predecessor formulate or refine the charges against her?
Because my predecessor had been in ministry for years, his counsel seemed legitimate to the board. They most likely trusted him without questioning his motives or strategies.
But in the process, the previous pastor clearly violated pastoral ethics … which the board undoubtedly knew nothing about.
A year after I left, guess who returned to the church to preach at the Christmas Eve and Christmas Day services?
That’s right … my predecessor … who had his fingers in the church board, the church staff, and the congregation for many years.
God rest his soul.
_______________
I’ve never given a moment’s thought to returning to my former church. I served there ten-and-a-half years, resigned, and left it for good. How wrong would it be for me to interfere in the church’s governance so many years after leaving?
Why did my predecessor even want to return? My guess is that his Fan Club were telling him that things at the church were really bad and that only he could save the church.
In fact, several years before the conflict surfaced, I heard a report attributed to my predecessor that our church was losing attendees … when the opposite was true … and I informed the church board of the rumor without naming its source.
But we had grown steadily and were the largest Protestant church in our city. We had a positive reputation for miles around. We had built a new worship center. My wife and I had both been keynote speakers at the area Sunday School Convention. In our community, where a church of 150 stood out, we were like a megachurch. A Navy chaplain once told me that when he was stationed near India, and knew he was going to move to our community, someone recommended that he attend our church.
Why did things seem so bad to a tiny group of people? Because they didn’t have positions of power … and that was intentional on my part. They were not behind our mission and vision. They were not behind me as their pastor … and I knew it. They were able to serve … just not in positions of influence.
But they thought that because they were founding members, they deserved preferential treatment.
One time, my predecessor visited the campus and told me that a woman from our church was calling him constantly to complain about me. I figured as much. While I was pleasant around her, I couldn’t let her be a leader because I didn’t trust her.
And I felt the same way about some of my predecessor’s other fans.
When people once held power in a church, but no longer do so, they will sometimes do anything to get that power back … even if they have to violate half the New Testament to do it.
_______________
One woman did her best to disguise her opposition to me, and I had to interact with her on a regular basis. After a while, pastors develop a sixth sense about such people.
After the board and associate pastor resigned, I called two public meetings of the congregation to announce their decisions. During one of the meetings, a friend went into the women’s restroom and this woman was crying because, she said, she was afraid they weren’t going to get rid of me.
After we left, this woman openly bragged about how she and some others in the church worked the plot that sent us packing.
I could never plot against a pastor. I’d leave the church first.
God calls a pastor to lead and teach. He doesn’t call anyone to force out an innocent pastor. So why is it so easy for many Christians to join a coup against the person that God called?
If you have a good answer, I’d like to hear it.
_______________
The primary charge against my wife concerned finances. I continue to maintain that the numbers that were verbally announced to me at the board meeting had been massaged.
For example:
*My wife had committed funds to some vendors for our annual Fall Fun Fest on Halloween … but we hadn’t yet held the event to recoup any of our expenses.
*As I mentioned in my book, several thousand dollars were mistakenly sent overseas … and undoubtedly counted against her mission budget … when she had nothing to do with that decision.
*When my wife was putting together a team for a mission trip to Eastern Europe, we had to buy the plane tickets in advance … and one person backed out. We tried, but weren’t able to recoup the funds for one leg of his journey.
*When our mission team flew to Moldova, we brought along extra suitcases filled with items for poor people and the vulnerable children … but even though we were told in advance by an airline executive that we wouldn’t have to pay extra for each leg of our journey, we were overcharged for the suitcases anyway.
My wife or I could have explained these decisions had we been given the opportunity … but no one on the board asked us or the bookkeeper anything about these expenses.
The budgets of two unrelated ministries were thousands of dollars in the red … but to my knowledge, no one ever addressed those deficits with the leaders that managed those budgets.
No, my wife … our most effective staff member … was singled out for special mistreatment.
In the spring of 2009, I went to the board and asked for funds to visit two churches in Southern California to learn about their multi-venue services. The board approved those funds … and then they were charged to the worship budget without the leader’s knowledge or consent … sending his pristine budget into chaos.
Were other unrelated expenses charged to my wife’s budgets without her consent or knowledge?
When I finally asked for the board’s accounting, I received something incoherent from the bookkeeper. When my wife asked to see the board’s numbers, they did not give them to her.
When my wife finally met with the bookkeeper a month after the conflict surfaced … and the board members had all quit … the numbers told a completely different story. When a nine-person investigative team examined matters a month after that, they concluded that “there was no evidence of wrongdoing” on our part.
Was the financial charge against my wife a bluff to prompt us both to resign?
_______________
Someone made a public charge that I mismanaged church finances. That was an outright lie.
What’s ironic is that even after the conflict erupted … and even after I left the church … I was still a central person concerning church finances.
*When the board refinanced the loan for the worship center, I had to sign the document. If the credit union had known the board’s plans, they might not have approved the refinancing. When companies make loans to organizations, they want to know in advance that the leadership is going to remain stable.
I wonder what the board told them about their pastor’s long-term prospects?
*During the conflict, the church bookkeeper stopped by my house once or twice a week so I could sign checks, which I’d do on top of her car on the street.
*Months after I had left the church, I was still the key person concerning the church’s credit cards. The bookkeeper was still contacting me, asking me to call the company and give them directions.
If I had really mismanaged funds, would I have been able to do any of those things?
When a pastor mismanages funds at church, it’s often because his own financial house is in disarray … but our personal finances were and are pristine.
It’s so easy to throw general charges around without being specific and without doing it to the face of the accused.
_______________
When the composition of a church board changes, it can throw the entire congregation off-balance.
For years, I had worked with three men on the board who were all older than me. We had been through a lot together. I trusted them, and their actions indicated that they trusted me.
One moved away about six months before the conflict surfaced. He was the person who always had my back. The other two termed out but stayed in the church.
Had even one of those men still been on the board, the coup never would have taken place. They would either have stopped it or exposed it.
In the end, the new board in 2009 was composed entirely of people younger than me. They lacked the experience and maturity of the older men … one of whom had experienced a church split years before in another church and would never have tolerated the tactics used by my opponents.
Someone on the board ended up leading the coup. I always knew his identity. May God forgive him for all the lives he harmed in his attempt at personal payback.
_______________
The board never attempted anything resembling restoration. It was all about punishment. As Charles Chandler from the Ministering to Ministers Foundation told me, the board members were personalizing matters.
As a Christian counselor asked me, “Where’s the redemption in all this?”
There wasn’t any pathway to redemption. Coups don’t involve restoration. They can be bloody or bloodless, but they are always about one thing.
Getting rid of the leader at all costs.
If you can show me where in the New Testament we find such behavior commended, I’d be grateful.
I’ve been searching for years … and I still can’t find it.
_______________
Wherever you find deceit and destruction, you find Satan. Jesus called him “the father of lies” and “a murderer from the beginning” in John 8:44.
Based on some of the stories I’ve heard, I don’t believe Satan is centrally involved in every church conflict. Some believe that he is. I don’t.
I look for deceit and destruction. Someone in ministry suggested adding “doubt” to the calculus as well.
There was definitely deceit in our conflict. There were a lot of falsehoods going around: exaggeration, character assassination, misrepresentation, false allegations … it was all there.
And there was a lot of destruction as well. Satan’s aim in most church conflicts is to destroy the pastor’s well being … reputation … and career … but ultimately, to destroy the church itself.
Although I was not personally destroyed, my effectiveness for future ministry was. I don’t claim to know if that was the aim of anyone in the church. Maybe so, maybe not.
But I do know this: Satan gained a foothold in the lives of too many of God’s people in that church. Hatred and two-faced hypocrisy are not from God.
_______________
Most pastors who are forced out of a church are never exonerated. Their reputations are ruined, at least inside their former church.
But I was exonerated … twice.
The first time, a consultant the transition team and I hired during the conflict issued a report that the board had acted “extremely and destructively” and that my wife and I had been abused.
The second time, an investigative team of nine people from inside the church claimed that “there was no evidence of wrongdoing” on our part.
But some people could not allow those verdicts to stand.
When I left the church in December 2009, I was told that 95% of the church supported me. A year later, I was told that support was down to 20%.
I don’t know the truth of either percentage. But I do know that throughout 2010, there was a whispering campaign inside my former church to pin the blame for the entire conflict on me.
When an interim pastor (a friend of my predecessor’s) came to the church several months later, he convened a meeting of the old and new boards, and made everyone who knew the truth about the conflict promise that they wouldn’t discuss it with anyone. So when people attacked my reputation, those leaders were told not to counteract any lies and to remain silent.
But what about the people who were spreading falsehoods inside the church? Why didn’t anyone warn them to stop destroying the reputation of their previous pastor?
Because unity is based on truth … not lies … such diversions do nothing to heal people’s souls.
Even though I urged people to stay, scores of people eventually left the church and either changed churches … changed faiths … or sat at home for years because nobody had the guts to tell the church the truth about what happened.
Just another Christian cover up. Business as usual.
_______________
One day, I met with the rookie district minister to share my side of the conflict. He listened politely and later helped reveal the part my predecessor played in the coup.
Several years later, when I was in New Hampshire, the DM called me out of the blue one Sunday morning to tell me that “I respect you and admire you.”
While that was nice, there was evidence to the contrary, so I didn’t know what to think.
But I had once served in the same church as an executive from that same denomination, and when he heard about the conflict … not from me … he told a friend, “[The church] owes Jim an apology.”
While I would welcome any kind of apology, nobody has ever apologized to me for their role in forcing me out of office.
Because if I’m innocent, they’re wrong … and I’ve learned that many, if not most, Christians hate to admit when they’re wrong.
_______________
This is the last blog article I plan to write on what happened to me in 2009 unless there is some major future development.
The accusations against Judge Kavanaugh brought back a truckload of hurtful memories because the same tactics used against him were used against us.
My wife and I live in Southern California and are content with our lives.
We live about an hour from our son, his wife, and our three grandsons. I wouldn’t trade being near them for anything in this world.
Our daughter – who was so strong for her dad and mom during the conflict – still lives in the Bay Area and leads a fruitful life. We love her dearly.
God gave me a ministry to pastors and board members who are going through conflict, and I’m grateful for all the people I’ve been able to help.
Just last year, I advised a pastor from the East Coast who was able to beat back his own church’s coup attempt. He stayed … and his opponents left.
I pray that happens more often.
I’ve written 596 blogs over the past eight years. I plan to write four more and then take a break … maybe a long one.
As always, thanks for reading.
Share this:
Like this:
Read Full Post »