Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Church Conflict’ Category

Repeat Offender Churches

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , , on September 12, 2012| 5 Comments »

Someone recently asked me the following question:

“What is the likelihood that a forced termination or major conflict could happen at the same church more than once?  (Let’s say within a 10-15 year span.)  Are there any statistics on that subject?”

Yes, there are.

Leading Edge, a resource for leaders of healthy churches, reported the following statistics in September 2003:

*25% of US pastors have experienced a forced exit at some point in their ministry.

*33% of US churches have had a pastor leave due to a forced exit.

*62% of ousted pastors were serving a church that had forced one or more pastors to leave in the past.

And the most chilling statistic of all:

*10% of US churches have forced three or more pastors to leave in their past and are considered “repeat offenders.”

The driving force behind a pastor’s forced exit is usually a small faction inside the congregation … composed of only 3-4% of the people.

The second largest catalyst is a member of the church’s governing board.

The typical size of the small faction is 7-10 people.

Once a faction or a board forces out their pastor, they know the template and may feel free to use it on the next pastor … and the one after that.

Let’s freely acknowledge that a small percentage of pastors should leave due to heretical teaching, sexual immorality, or a criminal offense.

But in most cases, the pastor hasn’t done anything worthy of banishment.

Presuming that a pastor is innocent of any major offense, how can the people of a church that has experienced this tragedy prevent the forced exit of their next pastor?

First, identify the perpetrators by name.  A congregation needs to know the identities of those who forced their pastor to leave.  If you don’t know who did it, you won’t be able to stop them from doing it again.  This is biblical.  (Paul fingered Hymenaeus, Philetus, and Alexander the coppersmith as troublemakers, while John cast a spotlight on Diotrephes.)

Second, confront the perpetrators for their divisive actions.  Even if a congregation identifies the perpetrators, little has been accomplished if those same people are quickly placed into leadership positions.  See Titus 3:10-11.

Let me say this as emphatically as I know how: it is spiritually and morally wrong for a congregation to place people into leadership who used deception and destruction to force out the previous pastor.

If you doubt me, read the Book of Numbers sometime soon.  Moses and Aaron were frequently criticized by various leaders and factions in Israel … but God always sided with his chosen leaders and always disciplined those who attacked them.

And God never said to the perpetrators, “You know, you guys are right.  Moses shouldn’t be in leadership.  I’ll open up the earth and swallow him up … and let you guys lead Israel instead.”

In fact, in Numbers 16, God opened up the earth and swallowed the 250 people who stood with Moses’ three critics instead.

Third, prayerfully ask the perpetrators to repent for their actions.  However, this rarely happens.

I know a church where four staff members tried to force out their pastor many years ago.  The pastor threatened to expose them … and three of them quickly resigned.  (The perpetrators in such cases fear public exposure more than anything.)

About five years later, one of the four wrote the pastor a letter of apology, admitting that what he had done was wrong.  The other three?  He’s still waiting to hear from them.

I don’t know why this is, but some people demonize their pastor and then believe that they are justified using any and all means to force him to quit.

Such methodology damages more than the pastor, though: it damages a church’s soul.

Finally, realize that pastors are most vulnerable between years four and five.  Most pastors enjoy a honeymoon of a year or two when they first come to a church, especially if they don’t initiate much change.

During year three, the pastor’s critics begin to emerge.

Between years four and five of a pastor’s tenure, the pastor typically announces and promotes a specific agenda for the church’s future.  Because change provokes anxiety, some people will rebel against the pastor’s agenda.

The pastor’s critics will begin to question everything he does and says.  They will talk to others who feel the same way.  If a leader emerges, they will form a faction to take back their church.

If the pastor is a strong individual … and especially if he has board support … he will continue to communicate the direction he believes God wants him to take the church.

And this will force much if not all of the faction to leave the church.

But if the pastor collapses emotionally … or his family wilts under the pressure … or the pastor’s health is affected by the constant criticism … and especially if the board caves on him … then the pastor will choose to resign instead.

And a tiny, vocal faction will privately take credit for getting rid of their minister.

This information is contained in Carl George’s brilliant article called “The Berry Bucket Balance.”

Many years ago, I did a study of pastoral tenure in my district.  I examined the tenures of 60 pastors.

The average tenure of those pastors was 4 1/2 years … midway between years four and five.

This is a time to be hypervigilant … but an attack can come at any time.

A few years ago, I wrote my doctoral project at Fuller Seminary on church antagonism.

During my research, I analyzed five major conflicts that my church at the time had experienced over the years.

I discovered that the church’s culture was one of non-confrontation.  When people acted up … or committed evil … nobody did anything about it.

The perpetrators felt free to attack, criticize, and even destroy people because they knew that nothing would happen to them.

We have to hit this issue head-on or there will be even more repeat offender churches in the future.

Your thoughts?

Read Full Post »

Four Observations About Pastoral Termination

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment! on August 27, 2012| 2 Comments »

I’m in a celebrating mood today because this blog just reached a milestone!

After nearly 20 months and 216 postings, we finally hit 20,000 views last night … an average of just under 100 views per article.

My top 5 articles according to readership are:

*If You Must Terminate a Pastor

*When to Correct a Pastor

*Pastors Who Cause Trouble

*Facing Your Accusers

*When You’re Upset with Your Pastor

The articles I’ve written about my family members (especially my son’s wedding) and about music also have lots of views, but this blog is primarily about pastor-church conflict.

And as you can tell from the above titles, I write primarily for lay people – board members included.  I’m trying to help them deal with their feelings about their pastor when they’re frustrated with the way he’s leading, preaching, or acting.

After talking with pastors and researching this topic for years, I have four observations to make about pastoral termination:

First, few believers know how to terminate a pastor sensitively and wisely.

If a pastor works for the governing board of a church, and the board decides to fire him, the board will probably:

*Ignore biblical principles for correcting a spiritual leader.

*Brush aside the governing documents of their church.

*Skip any kind of due process for the pastor.

*Fail to anticipate how the congregation will react to the pastor’s ouster.

Instead, they’ll just put their head down and remove the pastor using any means at their disposal … even unchristian ones.

I recently talked with a pastor who told me what happened with his church board.

The pastor heard about a conflict training program at a Christian university.  He invited the board to go along.

One board member attended with the pastor.  The other two declined to go.

One week later, those two board members met with the pastor and fired him.

Why didn’t they want to attend the training program?  Because they didn’t want to learn new skills that might prevent them from forcing their pastor to leave.

It’s important that we train boards how to handle conflicts with their pastor before they choose to fire him … because most people … even Christian leaders … cannot control how messy things become when they forcibly terminate their pastor.

Second, boards usually blindside their pastor when they fire him.

I recently spoke with a pastor who had been at his church for nearly two decades.  The church had a large impact in their community and the pastor thought he was doing a great job.

One day, the board called a meeting with the pastor and fired him.

The pastor wasn’t guilty of heresy, or immorality, or any major offense.

And to this day, he has no idea what he did to deserve being terminated.

Here’s the typical scenario:

*Nobody on the board ever sits down with the pastor and talks to him about any concerns they have.

*Nobody confronts or corrects him.

*Nobody allows the pastor to face his accusers and their charges.

*Nobody loves him enough to carry out Matthew 18:15-20 or 1 Timothy 5:19-21.

*Nobody asks God what they should do … but ask God to bless them after they’ve made their decision.

Instead, the board meets in secret, negatively evaluates the pastor’s performance, and fires him without ever giving him the chance to (a) know the complaints against him, and (b) make any necessary adjustments.

Is this legal?  It is if the governing documents of a church say the board can act that way.

Is this moral?  No.

Is it spiritual?  Hardly.

It’s an indication that the board views the church as a business … instead of a spiritual organism … and that they view the pastor as an employee … instead of someone called by God to lead that church.

It’s also an indication that they either lack the time or expertise to correct him … or that they feel the pastor is unredeemable … which seems like a contradiction for people who claim to believe that the gospel of Jesus Christ can transform anyone.

Third, the congregation never hears the truth about why the pastor left.

Under the guise of “confidentiality,” the board makes a pact to refuse to tell anyone the reasons why the pastor has departed.

This may be because the pastor did something immoral and the board is protecting the pastor’s career.

This may be because the pastor did something illegal and the board is protecting the church.

This may be because the board handled things unwisely and they’re covering up their mistakes.

If the pastor was allowed to state publicly why he was forced to leave, he might persuade people that he was treated poorly, which might provoke sympathy for him, turn people against the governing board, and cause people to leave the church.

If the board was allowed to state publicly why they forced the pastor to leave, they would undoubtedly blame everything on him, take no responsibility for their own failures, and have to explain themselves to the congregation.

Because boards just want the pastor gone, they often grant “severance for silence.”  They give the pastor a small compensation package if he’ll leave quickly and quietly … and not tell anyone how badly they handled things.

In fact, because this is such a common problem, I toyed for a while with calling my new book Bungled.

Finally, the perpetrators almost never admit they’ve done anything wrong.

When an individual sins, he or she may or may not admit it.

When a pastor sins, he may or may not admit it.

When a board sins, they almost never admit it.

It is the nature of groups to make a decision and, even if they’re wrong, protect and defend each other afterwards.

How often have you heard the White House … a news organization … a corporate board … a sports team … a school board … a homeowners association … or a state government agency … admit together that they did something wrong?

It rarely if ever happens.

In fact, if even one member of an organization admits that their group has done something wrong, the other members will invariably disown that person or try to remove them altogether.

This is why once a board decides to terminate a pastor, they act like they’re 100% faultless and he’s 100% blameworthy.

And this is why that board and the pastor never reconcile.

I recently spoke with a top Christian leader who told me about a church that called a new pastor.

The pastor wanted to see God renew the church, and he did everything he could to make sure that happened.

But there was just one thing remaining … he wanted the church to reconcile with some of its former pastors who had been mistreated.

The new pastor wasn’t around during the years these pastors served, and the church had many newcomers who had no idea what had happened in the past.

But this pastor called all these men back, and one Sunday, he stood up and confessed that the church had wronged these men of God and asked for their forgiveness on behalf of the church.

I wish this sort of thing would happen more often.  There are too many wounded pastors and churches in our country.

But this kind of thing is rare because of pride.  We convince ourselves that if we did or said something, it was right … but if the pastor did or said something … it was wrong.

Is life really that black and white?

If you’ve been reading for a long time, thank you.  Some subscribers have told me they’ve read every article I’ve written.

If this is your first time here, check out some of the categories on the right side of my blog.  You might find an article or two that will help you deal with the way you feel about your pastor.

And even if you’re an occasional reader, thanks for visiting this site.  We’re honored when you come around.

I love it when people ask questions and leave comments, even if you disagree with something I’ve said.  Since this is the way we all learn, feel free to give me feedback.

I’m still learning a lot about pastoral termination, church conflict, and conflict in general.

And I invite you to keep reading as we learn together.

Read Full Post »

“Lord, I Don’t Want to be a Prophet!”

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Fighting Evil, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories, Please Comment!, tagged , , , on August 22, 2012| 15 Comments »

I have a spiritual gift I wish I didn’t have.

The gift of prophecy.

I wish the Lord had given me the gift of exhortation, or giving, or healing instead.  But I wasn’t consulted in the matter, because the Lord distributes the gifts as He wills (1 Cor. 12:11, 18).

I’ve taken many spiritual gift tests … and asked others to take those same tests with me in mind.  In fact, I took a class called “Discerning Your Ministry Identity” for my doctoral program, and the results always come out the same.

Teaching is my top gift.  Prophecy is second.

I can’t foretell the future, so please don’t ask me who’s going to win the World Series or the election in November!

But I do sense the freedom to speak openly and candidly about cultural and personal issues from a biblical standpoint.

Here’s how this gift – featured in 1 Corinthians 14 – manifests itself in the life of a modern-day prophet:

First, prophets are drawn to controversy.  I first discovered this at age 19.  When I taught publicly, I wanted to talk about issues that others wouldn’t talk about.

Stephen Brown, author, pastor, and radio preacher, lived by this motto whenever he preached:

WHEN IN DOUBT, SAY IT.

Brown believed that whenever a pastor said something unplanned, those words would be more memorable and impactful to a congregation.

Maybe so … maybe not.

Some of the best things I’ve ever said … and some of the stupidest … occurred when I practiced that motto.

But like the prophets of old, sometimes I have to say things … because God’s word is like a fire in my bones.

Second, prophets feel free to talk about any subject.

Over the years, while having conversations with pastor friends, I’ve discovered that many of them are uncomfortable talking about certain issues from the pulpit.

Examples?

Giving to God’s work.  Sex … even inside marriage.  Homosexuality.  Couples who live together outside marriage.  Hell.  The wrath of God.  Intelligent design and creationism.

And you don’t know how many times I wanted to wade into politics … but didn’t.

But a pastor with the gift of prophecy says to himself, “If I don’t speak about these issues from Scripture, how will people know God’s mind on these topics?”

This is why I’m drawn to people who do talk about these issues.

It’s why I thought the late Chuck Colson was the best Christian speaker I’ve ever heard.  When the Jim Bakker scandal broke in the late 1980s, I heard Colson publicly critique the prosperity gospel in a biblical, succinct, and devastating way.  He was a modern-day prophet.

It’s why I’ve appreciated Bill Hybels’ ministry over the years.  I used to become quite upset when Christians would criticize Hybels for watering down the gospel because I never found it to be true.  He gave the best messages I’ve ever heard on substitutionary atonement … and hell … and abortion … and homosexuality … and he never pulled punches in the process.

I’m currently writing and talking about the devastating effects that the forced termination of pastors has on Christians,  churches, and pastors and their families.  This is not a topic most believers want to hear about, but this problem is becoming an epidemic in our country … and people are leaving their churches … and even their faith … because of the way these situations are being handled in local churches.

Someone has to speak up … and pray that God’s people will pay attention.

As a wise man once told me, some practices inside Christian churches can only be changed by people who are angry enough to speak out.

Third, the prophetic gift can go against one’s personality.

My two favorite Bible characters are Jeremiah and Timothy.

They both shrank from their calls to ministry.

They both felt unsuccessful.

They both felt like quitting at times.

And they were both sensitive men.

God took a sensitive man like Jeremiah … called him to be a prophet … told him in advance that his ministry would fail … and then insured that he was always alone!

That’s how it feels at time to have this gift.

If God gives someone the gift of prophecy, shouldn’t He give it to a person with an iron will and nerves of steel?

But sometimes He gives this gift to a person with a tender, bleeding heart.

You feel like a spiritual schizophrenic.

Prophets may feel fear before they speak … but they go out and speak anyway … with the authority of God Almighty behind them.  As Paul said to the church at Corinth: “I came to you in weakness and fear, and much trembling” (1 Cor. 2:3).

But he still preached Christ to them … in the power of God’s Spirit.

Finally, prophets always pay a price when they use their gift.

Some prophets are abrasive and obnoxious when they exercise their gift.  Keith Green … whose music I love … believed God had given him the prophetic gift, but he had a habit of slamming people when he used it.  Before he died, he apologized for the way he used his gift.

Prophets are free to speak the mind of God to the people of God … they just have to do it in love.

Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13:2, “If I have the gift of prophecy … but have not love, I am nothing.”

Four years ago, the state of California was getting ready to vote on the definition of marriage … that marriage was between one man and one woman.

I have pastor friends who chose not to speak on that topic, stating that they weren’t going to change anybody’s mind about it.

But I believed … and still do … that we preachers had the opportunity to clearly delineate what God’s Word says on this issue.  But as Paul says about prophecy, we needed to do it for people’s “strengthening, encouragement and comfort” (1 Cor. 14:3).

So I talked on “Defending Biblical Marriage.”  Gay marriage proponents loudly proclaim their position … and if we Christians are silent, don’t they win the argument by default?

When I gave the message, I knew some people would applaud me … some would attack me … and some would abandon me.

But I had to do it … and would do it again in a heartbeat … even though I believe that message angered the enemy … and that he gradually began to cause damage from that moment on.

The church of Jesus needs prophets who proclaim the whole counsel of God.

And when they do, we need to pray for them, encourage them, and stand behind them … even when they say something that others don’t like … or even we don’t like.

The alternative is for the church of Jesus Christ to be biblically illiterate, culturally irrelevant, and spiritually impotent.

I am not the body.  You are not the body.

I need your gifts … and you need mine.

Even the gift of prophecy.

Follow the way of love, and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.  1 Corinthians 14:1

Read Full Post »

Beware the Rightists Among Us

Posted in Change and Conflict in Church, Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, tagged , , , on August 17, 2012| Leave a Comment »

I got lectured yesterday by a man three times younger than me.

My wife and I took a leisurely drive toward the ocean.  We followed the signs to the harbor, when suddenly, I didn’t know whether to turn left or right.  I turned right … and was headed straight toward a military installation.

Oh, man … I didn’t want to endure the guard at the gate giving me the third degree.  Since no cars were around, I tried to make a U-turn, figuring the guard wasn’t going to send Uncle Sam’s finest after me.

But my wife said, “He’s waving you on.”  So I stopped my turn and drove toward the gate instead.

But when I got there, a young man in uniform asked me if I had a driver’s license and knew what the double yellow lines in the road signified.

He told me that I could have gotten in a serious accident and that people could have been killed. (Going 10 mph?)

He verbally dressed me down.

I just looked at him and smiled the whole time.  What else could I have done?

With cars stacking up behind me, he let me go.  I finally drove ahead, turned around, and peeled rubber leaving the installation.

Just kidding!

But that soldier … just doing his duty, mind you … reminded me of some Christians I have known.

These believers are, in the words of a Christian leader I once knew, rightists.

A rightist is a person who believes there is only one right way to do things … and they always do everything right.

And it’s their duty to tell you when you’re doing things wrong.

How can you spot a rightist?

First, the rightist lacks a breadth of experience in church life.

One rightist I knew was always telling me how ministry was carried out in his previous church.  He would preface his remarks by saying, “At _____ Church, we always did things this way.”

He said this dozens of times.  At first, I told him, “Feel free to share your ministry experiences with me.”  But after a while, I asked him to stop sharing because he never seemed to like the way our church did anything.

(As Rick Warren once told someone, “If you like that church so much, why don’t you go back to it?”)

But this leader kept it up.  He couldn’t help himself.

And when I didn’t want to hear it anymore, he went underground and continued to tell others the right way to do church.

Know how many different churches this leader had attended before ours?

That’s right: one.

The more churches you’ve attended … the more churches you’ve visited … the more churches you’ve read about … the less likely that you’ll become a rightist.

Second, the rightist canonizes methodology.

The rightist believes that he has thought through most church practices and that his way is always the best way.

In fact, he acts like his methods are divinely approved while yours do not count.

Take music, for instance.

When Bob Dylan came to Christ in the late 1970s, it was huge news.  The greatest popular songwriter of our day – who was Jewish to boot – had embraced Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior.  (As enigmatic as Dylan’s lyrics can be, he still incorporates an amazing amount of biblical imagery in his songs.)

I remember discussing Dylan’s conversion with a leader in my church at that time over dinner.  The leader remained unimpressed.  I quoted the chorus of Dylan’s song “Gotta Serve Somebody” to him: “It may be the devil, or it may be the Lord, but you gotta serve somebody.”  (Chuck Smith from Calvary Chapel loved the song.)

The leader told me, “I’ve heard the song, but it still has that beat.”  (I wanted to say, “That’s the point!”)  But this leader embraced the teachings of Christian guru Bill Gothard, who had biblical proof that any beat in a song was wrong.

(By the way, Dylan had the guts to sing “Gotta Serve Somebody” both on Saturday Night Live and on the Grammy Awards … and won his first Grammy for the song.)

I had a conversation recently with a professional musician who is also a pastor.  (No, it wasn’t Jimmy Swaggart.)  He told me there are only two kinds of music: good music and bad music.

I happen to agree with him.  Some secular music is excellent … and some Christian music just doesn’t cut it.  (Carmen, anyone?)

Can’t Christians have broader categories for music than secular and spiritual?

(By the way, Christian journalist Cal Thomas became great friends with the late composer Marvin Hamlisch and wrote this tribute to his friend in World magazine.  It’s worth reading: http://online.worldmag.com/2012/08/08/one-singular-sensation/

Finally, the rightist judges others not by biblical absolutes but by his/her own preferences.

When I was in my teens, the youth wanted to have their Sunday night youth group meeting in a home one year.  They were expected to stay on the church campus for four other meetings every week and wanted to enjoy the relaxed atmosphere of someone’s living room.

Our church called a public meeting to discuss this issue … and the church secretary – who insisted the youth meet on the church campus – became so irate that she walked down the aisle toward the back of the church, slammed the door … and was never heard from again.

It was fine for her to express her opinion.  But when she couldn’t have her way, she stomped out of the meeting and left the church for good.

She acted like a rightist.

Jesus had to contend with the rightists of His day: the Pharisees.

They emphasized external compliance rather than inward obedience.

They emphasized the minutae of the Law rather than its broader aims (love God … love others).

They demanded that people conform to their behavioral codes (which were plentiful and super-strict) rather than God’s.

Jesus once said the following about the Pharisees to the crowds/His disciples in Matthew 23:4:

“They tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulder’s, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.”

The Pharisees were bureaucrats … bean counters … self-appointed critics … and fun stoppers.

Jesus once said, “Do not be like them.”

I served for many years with a Christian leader named Wendell.  Several weeks ago, the Lord called him home.

Wendell used to say to me, “Don’t play the Holy Spirit in someone’s life.”

Resist the rightists among you … and resist becoming a rightist yourself.

Because rightists are dead wrong.

Read Full Post »

Is There Only One Way to Do Church?

Posted in Change and Conflict in Church, Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, tagged , , on August 13, 2012| 2 Comments »

When do you open your Christmas presents … on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day?

I once asked a congregation this question.  The overwhelming response was that people opened their presents on Christmas morning.

My wife and kids opened our presents on Christmas Eve.

I don’t know why we did it that way.  Maybe it was our reward for attending two services on Christmas Eve … or our kids clamored for opening “just one more present” and we parents gave in … or we just felt like breaking tradition.

Most likely, the truth is that my wife likes to stay up late and sleep in the following morning … and how many kids are able to wait until past noon on Christmas to open their gifts?

You may think my family is weird, or unconventional, or even a wee bit impatient … but is it wrong for a family to open its gifts on Christmas Eve?

It’s not wrong … it’s just our preference.

The reason I bring this up is because way too many Christians still believe there is only one way to do church, and if church isn’t done their way, they complain and protest and scream … and eventually launch major conflict.

For them, everything is either black or white … or right or wrong.

Let me share an example.

When I was a kid, most worship services on Sundays started at 11 am … and many people expected that the pastor would quit preaching by noon.  If the pastor was still preaching at 12:01, some people became angry … and if he went until 12:10, they hit the roof.

We only become angry when we feel we’ve been violated.  In other words, every person who became angry when the pastor preached past noon believed he was wrong for doing so.

But where did that idea come from?  The Bible is silent on the beginning and ending times for worship.  (In fact, you can’t find even one instance in the New Testament of a Sunday morning worship service.)  Unless a church’s governing documents specify that services will dismiss by noon … and I’ve never heard of such a thing … it’s not wrong for a pastor to preach past noon.

It may go against local culture, or that gnawing feeling in one’s belly, but it’s not wrong.

(Some pastors solved this problem by moving their service time to 10:30 or 10:45 so they always got out by noon.)

Here’s another example:

Many of us grew up in churches that used only two instruments: a piano and an organ.

From infancy through my late twenties, every church I attended had those two instruments.

Modern rock instruments like guitars, bass, and drums were not permitted … only a piano and an organ.

The worship wars that were fought in churches in the seventies and eighties revolved around not only music style (hymns vs. praise music), but also musical instruments (piano/organ vs. guitars/drums).

Is it wrong for a church to have a piano and organ?  Of course not.

Is it wrong for a church to have guitars and drums?  Of course not.  (Did you know that the very first and very last musical instruments mentioned in the Bible – in Genesis 4 and Revelation 15 – can both be translated “guitar?”)

Then why did so many people act like the presence of those instruments in church was wrong?

It simply wasn’t their preference.

Here’s my point: many … if not most … church conflicts are really about preferences rather than absolutes.

The conflicts are about “what I like and don’t like” rather than “what God commands or doesn’t command.”

Here are some more examples:

*Should a church list its order of service in the bulletin/program or not?

*How many praise and worship songs should a church do in a service?  2?  4?  7?

*How long should a pastor preach?  20 minutes?  30?  45?

*How loud should the drums be?

*Should the worship center temperature be on the cold side or the warm side?

*How involved should women be in a worship service?

*How should a pastor dress when he preaches?  In a suit and tie?  In a coat without a tie?  In dress pants or jeans?

*How many times should a public prayer be offered in a Sunday service?  2 times?  3?  5?  10?

*During communion, must the congregation be silent?  Can music play in the background?  Can people sing?

*Should a pastor greet people at the door after a service, or stay up front to pray with people?

*Should a church use name tags … and if so, should everyone be asked to wear one?

*Should the pastor project Scripture references onto a screen or expect that people will bring their Bibles?

*Should adults have Sunday School as opposed to small groups?

*Should adults have Sunday School in addition to small groups?

*When the youth go to camp, should they go on a bus or in cars?

*Should church leaders promote and attend every meeting/event in their district and denomination?

Believe it or not, I have experienced minor or major conflict concerning every issue I’ve listed above.

I have been criticized, condemned, and vilified because my preference in one of these areas clashed with the preference of someone else.

People became angry with me … and complained to their friends … and wrote me critical notes … and threatened to leave the church … not because I had violated Scripture, but because they didn’t like what I was doing.

I visited a church a while back where a musician on stage wore a nose ring and was covered with tattoos.

It was hard for me to look at him.  I can take an earring … and long hair … and even bare feet … but a nose ring makes me feel ill.  I can’t help it … I have a visceral reaction to it.

Was it wrong for the pastor to allow that musician on the stage?

Not at all.  And if I chose to attend that church, I would never tell the pastor, “Get rid of the guy with the nose ring or I’ll leave.”  For all I know, it’s a new convert … or the pastor’s son … or the boyfriend of the pastor’s daughter!

There is only one way to God, and that’s through Jesus Christ … but there are many ways to bring people to Jesus.

So the next time you’re upset about something at your church, ask yourself:

Is this a violation of Scripture?  (In which case it’s an absolute.)

Or … is this just something I don’t like?  (In which case it’s a preference.)

I’ll write more on this topic next time.

Your thoughts?

Read Full Post »

Selecting a Church’s Governing Leaders, Finale

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , on August 10, 2012| Leave a Comment »

The single greatest human indicator of a pastor’s success in a church is his relationship with the governing board.

A pastor can be a visionary … and a great Bible teacher … and an insightful counselor … and a superb administrator … but if he does not work well with the board, his ministry will go nowhere.

For most of my ministry life, the boards I served with let me know they were there to support my vision for the church … although they reserved the right to tell me when I was suffering from temporary insanity.

But if a pastor wants to take a church in one direction, and the board wants to go in a different direction, the eventual aftermath will be heartbreaking for everybody involved.

This is why the selection process for church leaders is so crucial.

How should the process be managed?

*The selection process should begin months before leaders are approved.  If you wait to the last minute to select leaders, you will pay for it by securing people who are available but not necessarily competent.

*Nominations can come from the congregation, a nominating team, the board itself, or the pastor.  However it’s done, you can’t allow yourself to be pressured by lobbying.  I’ve found that the best people are initially reluctant to serve and that some who appear eager just want power.

*There needs to be some kind of vetting process for each nominee, including a criminal background check.  Some churches require the written approval of a supervisor at work and/or people in the community (consistent with 1 Timothy 3:7) as well.

*I don’t know how far to push this, but the pastor needs to find out the giving levels of all prospective board candidates in general terms (not specific amounts), especially if the board oversees church finances.  You cannot allow someone on the board who does not give generously to the church.  Board members need to set a financial example and can’t be managing tens of thousands of dollars when they haven’t invested in their own local ministry.

Besides, giving is always an indicator of a person’s spiritual temperature.

I once read that about half of all pastors know how much the people in their church give every week, and that half do not.  (Some pastors come into the office on Monday and the giving records from the weekend are already on their computer.)  While I was one of those pastors who never wanted to know (and never did know) how much people gave, I would make one exception: the pastor has to know whether any prospective board member is already a generous giver … or that person should be dropped from consideration.  (This suggestion came to me from a former district minister.)

*Before board members are officially approved, the pastor and/or chairman should sit down with each candidate and let them know what is expected of them in writing … maybe asking them to sign a document to that effect.

*I believe that if a church votes on/ratifies its board members, the percentage necessary for election should be greater than a simple majority.  In fact, I believe it should be the same percentage that a senior pastor candidate has to receive (usually 75%).

When I was still a teenager, I was selected to count the votes for elders and deacons at my church two years in a row.  Out of 95 votes cast the first year, one man had 20 votes against him.  The second year, one man had 11 votes against him.  Since a simple majority was all that was required for election, both men were put into office … and both men later crashed and burned morally.  I always felt that the people who voted against those men knew something they weren’t sharing.

However, my former church in Phoenix never votes on elders.  The board nominates three men every year, and their brief biographies are placed in the program.  Then the men are introduced in each worship service, and the congregation is encouraged to write down how they feel about the nominees.  If you think they should be elders, or you have reservations, you can write those down … and I assume someone follows up those responses.  (The basis for this process is Titus 1:5 where Paul tells Titus to appoint – not elect – elders in every city.)

*I do not believe that a staff member … with the possible exception of an executive pastor … should sit on a church board.  If the pastor supervises the staff, as in most churches … and the board supervises the pastor … how can a staff member be put in the position of supervising the pastor?  When the staff member is having problems with the pastor, the staffer will inevitably share his concerns with a board member, who may very well take the staffer’s side against the pastor … a classic recipe for a major conflict.

This scenario blurs the lines of accountability.  Who supervises whom?

I’ve tried it both ways, and believe that allowing a staff member to sit on the church board eventually results in one of two scenarios: either the staff member aligns himself with the board and pushes out the pastor, or the pastor aligns himself with the board and pushes out the staff member.

If you know of cases where this works well, please let me know.

*There needs to be some kind of an installation service for new board members … maybe with former board members laying hands on them and praying for their ministry.

*The board needs to find a way to report to the church on a regular basis about what they’re doing, whether orally or in writing.  A board that resists accountability will claim that everything is confidential, which is often an excuse for cloaking things in secrecy.

Whenever I placed a priority on the selection of governing leaders, the ministry went forward at a steady pace.

But whenever I neglected to select leaders carefully, the board, the church, and their pastor paid a heavy price.

Your thoughts?

Read Full Post »

Book Excerpt: What Happens to Clergy Killers? Part 2

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , on August 3, 2012| 3 Comments »

This article is the second half of the answer to the question, “What happens to clergy killers?”  In other words, when a group attacks and consequently “takes out” a pastor, how do the people of the average church respond to such an attack on their minister?

The answer might surprise you.  Here’s part two from my upcoming book:

In some situations, mature Christians hang around to see if church leaders will correct the instigators. But if nothing happens after a while, these believers may leave the church permanently, especially if they see the perpetrators serving in visible positions. During such conflicts, a church is going to lose somebody. Isn’t it better to lose divisive people than mature believers?  Anderson comments, “The result is that the church keeps the dissenters and loses the happy, healthy people to other churches. Most healthy Christians have a time limit and a tolerance level for unchristian and unhealthy attitudes and behaviors.”[i]

I had a conversation recently with a Christian man.  We were discussing what should be done (if anything) to churchgoers who join forces to push out their pastor.  This man believes that a church should remain passive toward perpetrators because God will eventually punish them.  He told me about an associate pastor who engineered the ouster of his senior pastor.  The associate later contracted cancer and his wife died a horrible death.  Christians don’t need to address the perpetrators, he said, because “God’ll get ‘em.”

It is true that God may get them.  The law of sowing and reaping still applies in this life (Galatians 6:7) and God promises to repay us all according to our deeds in the next life (2 Corinthians 5:10).  There are cases in the New Testament where God executed swift punishment against professing believers like Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) and staunch unbelievers like King Herod (Acts 12:19-23). Most pastors can tell stories about the eventual demise of attendees turned into attackers.  For example, a man who led an attack on one of my pastors died of a heart attack the day he was moving out-of-state.  While God may not “take out” every perpetrator, how are twenty-first century believers to interpret all the biblical admonitions to confront divisive individuals in a local church?  Have God’s words now become irrelevant?

When I was a rookie church staff member, I witnessed an event that I have never forgotten.  A few hours before a Sunday evening service, the elders met to discuss what to do about three church leaders who were involved in sexual immorality.  I watched as the door to the pastor’s study swung open and various elders piled into cars to drive to the homes of those leaders and confront them. The serious looks on the leaders’ faces told a story – they didn’t sign up for this – but to their credit, they did it.  Eventually, one offending leader made a public apology (without naming his sin) but all three families affected chose to leave the church.

Where is the courage today that those elders displayed?

        [i] Leith Anderson, Leadership That Works: Hope and Direction for Church and Parachurch Leaders in Today’s Complex World (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1999), 31.

Read Full Post »

Excusing People Who Misbehave

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Forgiveness and Reconciliation among Christians, Jim's Ten Favorite Articles, tagged , , on June 13, 2012| 2 Comments »

Ever make excuses for those who misbehave?

I do – all too often.

It’s not something I readily do with strangers.  If someone cuts me off in traffic, I’m liable to hurl some anger in the driver’s direction.  There’s no excuse for being uncivil – and downright dangerous – in my driving world.

But if someone I know and care about wrongs me, I tend to search for ways to excuse their behavior.

“I’ve called her twice, but she hasn’t called me back.  She must be busy.”

“He promised to be here by 4 but hasn’t arrived yet.  It’s probably due to traffic.”

“He borrowed my tools and said he’d get them back to me by now.  He’s probably forgotten.”

Sometimes making excuses for others might be termed sensitivity.  We put ourselves in someone’s place and imagine how life might be if we were them.  We certainly understand what it’s like to be so busy that we fail to return calls or return items that people have loaned us.

But sometimes, we make excuses for people when we shouldn’t … because we’re unwilling to utter one simple phrase:

“What they did or said to me was wrong.”

And we might add, “And there’s no excuse for their behavior.”

When I was 16, my first job was working at a butcher shop.  I came in for a couple hours every day and boned meat, cutting myself repeatedly with sharp knives.

I was supposed to arrive at work by 4:00 pm sharp, but sometimes I arrived a minute or two late.  When I tried to explain why I wasn’t there on time, my boss would say, “I don’t want excuses.  I want reasons.”

I had plenty of excuses … but few good reasons why I was late.

We all have plenty of excuses for our own misbehavior, don’t we?

“I’m grouchy today because I stayed up late last night.”

“I didn’t go to the bank because there’s too much going on in my head right now.”

“I swore at her because she made me mad.”

“I haven’t accomplished anything this week because I can’t get motivated.”

Comedian Steve Martin used to say there were two words that would get you out of any predicament:

“I forgot.”

When you’re 16, there might be excuses for using excuses, but when you’re 31 or 47 or 58, it rings hollow.

We have to learn to say:

“You’re right.  I told you I’d pick up the clothes at the cleaners and I didn’t.  I’ll go do that right now.”

“I messed up and shouldn’t have said what I said.  Will you forgive me?”

“Please accept my apologies for ignoring you yesterday.  It was wrong of me to do that.”

“I feel like offering you an excuse right now, but the truth is that I blew it.  Let me make it up to you.”

Whenever we mess up, the healthy way to handle things is to admit it in an appropriate fashion … without taking too much responsibility (“It’s all MY fault!”) or denying any responsibility (“He did it.  It’s all HIS fault!”)

And hopefully, when we sincerely apologize for our mistakes, those we have hurt will grant us forgiveness.

And we need to use the same principle when others make mistakes … because making excuses for the behavior of others is not the way of Jesus.

In Luke 17:3, Jesus said, “If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him.”

But most of us read the verse like this: “If your brother sins, excuse him.”

Why?  Because we’d rather make an excuse for someone’s behavior than rebuke or confront them.

We explain away what they did so that we don’t have to do or say something uncomfortable that might risk the relationship.

Our culture has mastered this art of excusing people:

“He acts like that because he’s the middle child.”  (That might explain a few things, but every misbehavior?)

“She throws things because she was raised by her aunt.”  (Does that mean she’s going to throw things for the rest of her life?)

“He yells at people because he can’t help himself.”  (He can’t help anybody if he keeps yelling like that.)

“She overspends to compensate for her sad life.”  (But plenty of sad people don’t overspend.)

In fact, every biblical command (love your neighbor as yourself … do not judge … pray without ceasing … do not repay anyone evil for evil) implies that the hearer has both the ability and the responsiblity to carry out the command.

Would God ask us to do what we can’t do?

Every person comes to a point in their life when they’re either going to remain a child or grow toward adulthood.

They key is to take responsibility whenever you mess up … and to hold others accountable whenever they mess up.

Christians need to master the art of the apology (“I was wrong – will you forgive me?”) as well as the art of holding others accountable (“I love you, but you crossed a line when you said that”).

And when people admit they’ve done wrong, it’s not our job to excuse them, but to forgive them.

Let me share a relational secret with you.  When someone you care about misbehaves … or hurts you with a comment … or does something you believe is wrong … address it right then and there.

Don’t wait three months, work up your courage, and then address it.  Deal with it in the moment … or try and let it go.

In Matthew 16, when Peter tried to warn Jesus not to go to the cross, Jesus didn’t wait a year and then say to Peter, “You know, Peter, you really hurt me with that remark about the cross.”  Instead, Jesus dealt with it immediately.

Jesus did this consistently throughout His ministry.

Think about it: if we addressed people’s misbehavior immediately, would we proceed to excuse it later on?

What are your thoughts about this topic?

Read Full Post »

Fingering Church Powerbrokers

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Fighting Evil, Jim's Ten Favorite Articles on June 11, 2012| Leave a Comment »

My pastor was under attack.

He couldn’t sleep.  He couldn’t study.  His personality turned inward.

He was a wreck.

Why?

Years ago, in my third church staff position, a small group of vocal members began to criticize the church’s pastor … who was also my supervisor.

Their main claim?  That he didn’t preach often enough, an indication that he was lazy.

35 years ago, many Protestant churches had:

*Sunday School

*Sunday morning worship

*Sunday evening service (with youth group meetings before or after)

*Wednesday night prayer meeting

That’s a lot of teaching time to fill!

My pastor’s main gift was shepherding – not teaching – so he utilized a team of teachers on Sunday nights and Wednesday nights.  I was happy with the arrangement because I enjoyed hearing others speak … and because I got to speak once a month as well.

I can’t recall what set off the grumbling, but many of us started feeling heightened anxiety around the church campus.  One night, someone caught me in the parking lot and told me that 10% of the church was going to leave if the pastor didn’t start preaching on Sunday nights.

Now what would you do with that information?

Some Christians would keep it to themselves.

Some would tell family and friends from the church.

Some would throw in their lot with the 10%.

Honestly, I wasn’t sure what to do.

I had a friend in the church – a man who went on to become an evangelist – and he and I discussed the situation.  We decided to visit the most influential man in the church … a layman known for his teaching, integrity, and straight talk.

My friend and I sat in his living room and said something like this, “There are people in this church who are attacking the pastor.  They are threatening to leave if he doesn’t start preaching on Sunday nights.  The pastor is devastated by this news and seems paralyzed to do anything about the situation.  What can we do to help him?”

Looking back, I don’t know whether or not this man was supportive of the pastor, but we had to take the risk.

He told us, “Gentlemen, when Paul talked about troublemakers in the church, he named names.  Who are these people?”

Wait a minute.  If we mention the names, isn’t that gossip?  Aren’t we tattling?  Couldn’t we get in trouble if we said too much about what was happening?

And some of those people were our friends.  How could we single out friends like that?

But this man was right.  Paul did name names – along with John, the apostle of love:

Some have rejected these and so have shipwrecked their faith.  Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme.  1 Timothy 1:19-20

Their teaching will spread like gangrene.  Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have wandered away from the truth.  They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some.  2 Timothy 2:17-18

Alexander the metalworker did me a great deal of harm.  The Lord will repay him for what he has done.  You too should be on your guard against him, because he strongly opposed our message.  2 Timothy 4:14-15

I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will have nothing to do with us.  So if I come, I will call attention to what he is doing, gossiping maliciously about us.  Not satisfied with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers.  He also stops those who want to do so and puts them out of the church.  3 John 9-10

With biblical precedent upholding us, my friend and I divulged the names of the troublemakers we knew about – especially the ringleaders.

I learned an important lesson that day.  Sometimes church powerbrokers are successful in making threats and demands because nobody has the courage to identify them by name.

Think about this:

Last night, my wife and I watched a recently-produced film on Solomon’s life.  The film opens with King David near death – but he hadn’t yet chosen his successor.

So one of David’s sons engaged in a pre-emptive attempt to be anointed as king –  in league with David’s top general.

Their names?  Adonijah and Joab.

Not “one of David’s sons” – but Adonijah.

Not “a high-ranking military officer” – but Joab.

They were both executed for committing treason against David’s choice for king … Solomon.

One of Jesus’ 12 disciples betrayed him.

His name?  Judas from Kerioth.

Not just “one of the Twelve” – but Judas.

Before anyone could finger him, Judas took his own life.

Paul wrote in Romans 16:17:

I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned.  Keep away from them.

If you’re in a church, and you hear that someone is plotting against your pastor … do something about it.

Warn the pastor.  If you sense the board is supportive, talk to the board member you know and trust best.

Believe me, the pastor and/or board may have no idea of any division inside the ranks.  Your information may give them time to head off an attack before it ever takes place … or give them a key piece of information they lacked.

If you know that an individual or a group is planning on “going after” your pastor, speak to someone in authority – even if the plotters are your friends.

Because if you don’t, your church will eventually experience months of tension, division, and ugliness.  Friends will separate, donations will plunge, and people will leave.

If you know something, tell somebody!

Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.  James 4:17

Read Full Post »

Blaming Others for My Mistakes, Part 2

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Current Church Issues, Fighting Evil, tagged , , , , , on June 6, 2012| 2 Comments »

I once got thrown out of Dodger Stadium.

It’s true.

When I was in eighth grade, my uncle took his son, my brother and me to a Dodgers-Mets game at Chavez Ravine.  It was the last Friday game of the season, Game 160.

We sat where we always sat at Dodger Stadium: in the general admission deck at the very top of the stadium.  Back then, I think it cost 75 cents for a kid to sit there.

My brother, cousin and I all sat in the front row of the top deck.  My uncle sat a few rows back.

The Dodgers weren’t very good that year, and the game was boring.  My brother and cousin would do anything on a dare, so I dared them to do something.

Expectorate over the railing and try and hit a certain bald guy in the head.

The two of them tried to hit him.  Oh, how they tried.  And when the guy below turned around and looked up at them, they pulled back and hid their faces.

But when he angrily stormed up the aisle – presumably in search of an usher or a policeman – the three of us hid in the men’s bathroom … where we were quickly caught … and discharged from the stadium.

My uncle was not happy.

“Honestly, I didn’t do it.  I didn’t do anything.  They did it all.”

But I suggested the idea … even if no fluids ever left my mouth.

I certainly bore at least some responsibility for our having to leave the ballpark that night … and I never tried a stunt like that again.

Does my little story have a familiar ring?  Remember what happened in the Garden after the first couple ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?

Adam told God, “The woman you put here with me – she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

Eve told the Lord, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

Wanting to maintain the illusion of perfection … before both God and each other … the parents of humanity did not claim any responsibility for their sinfulness.  They chose to say instead, “She’s the one to blame!” and “The devil made me do it.”

The two stories above are just a microcosm of what’s happening today in our culture.

A woman hates everyone … and blames her parents for her isolation even though they’ve been dead for years.

A man gets divorced … and blames his wife for her controlling ways.

A boss gets reprimanded … and blames three of his subordinates for all his troubles.

A church member is corrected for gossipping … and blames her misbehavior on her husband.

A president is overwhelmingly elected … and still blames many of his problems on the previous administration.

Maybe the woman’s parents were abusive … and the man’s wife was controlling … and the boss’ employees were problems … and the pastor did overreact a bit … and the previous president did leave things in a mess.

But does this mean that the accusers bear no responsibility for their failures?

Thirty years ago – can it be? – in his classic work The Road Less Traveled, Scott Peck wrote a chapter called “Neuroses and Character Disorders.”  Peck writes:

“Most people who come to see a psychiatrist are suffering from what is called either a neurosis or a character disorder.  Put most simply, these two conditions are disorders of responsibility, and as such they are opposite styles of relating to the world and its problems.  The neurotic assumes too much responsibility; the person with a character disorder not enough.  When neurotics are in conflict with the world they automatically assume that they are at fault.  When those with character disorders are in conflict with the world they automatically assume that the world is at fault.”

The statistics indicate that an increasing number of people are developing character disorders.  They fail to take responsibility for their actions, blaming others for their misbehavior.

When I was a pastor, I suspected that some of the people I had difficulties with had character disorders.  The tipoff was that they would never admit that they made a mistake or did anything wrong.  Even when they were caught redhanded telling a lie, they didn’t say what I heard them say.

In other words, it was all my fault.

It’s one thing to deal with someone with a character disorder occasionally at church.  It’s another thing to have a person with this condition as your parent, your boss, or your spouse.

Peck concludes his brilliant chapter this way:

“When character-disordered individuals blame someone else – a spouse, a child, a friend, a parent, an employer – or something else – bad influences, the schools, the government, racism, sexism, society, the ‘system’ – for their problems, these problems persist.  Nothing has been accomplished.  By casting away their responsibility they may feel comfortable themselves, but they have ceased to solve the problems of living, have ceased to grow spiritually, and have become dead weight for society.”

If you recognize such a person in your life, how can you relate to them?

First, realize you cannot get close to them.  We can only become close with people who display authenticity.  If you admit a weakness in your life to this person, don’t expect them to reciprocate.  They will disappoint you because they cannot be vulnerable.

Second, avoid working with them if at all possible.  When things go poorly, guess what?  They’ll blame you as a way of diverting the spotlight away from themselves.

Third, understand that you cannot work for them.  Some supervisors are sociopathic.  (There’s a lot of literature online about this problem.)  They charm their superiors while demeaning those who work underneath them … and divert any and all responsibility for failure to those they supervise.  When they make a mistake, they find someone else to blame.  It’s a sickness, and it can’t be resolved through prayer, office politics, or going to HR.  You can either quit, seek a transfer, or visit a counselor.

Finally, realize that people with character disorders will not change.  Why not?  Because somewhere along the line, they stopped taking responsibility for their choices.  Neurotics can change because they take responsibility – albeit too much – for their lives.  But people with character disorders are frozen in immaturity.  They may have the intellect of someone 42, but they’ll forever have the emotional intelligence of someone 13.

My guess is that you have a co-worker, a neighbor, an acquaintance, a supervisor, or a family member in this category.  Pray for them … and protect yourself and your family from them.

Imagine that you and the team you’re leading at church fail to meet a project deadline.

A healthy person does not say, “I’m 100% innocent … and my team is 100% to blame.”

A healthy person does not say, “I’m 100% to blame … and no one else bears any responsibility but me.”

The healthy person says, “I bear some responsibility for that mess-up.  Others do as well.  But I’m going to admit my part first … whether or not others admit theirs.  And I’m going to learn from this experience and not repeat my mistakes.”

Our Savior said it perfectly in Matthew 7:3-5:

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?  How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?  You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »