Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Church Conflict’ Category

There is a plague that continues to make its way through Christian churches in our day: the forced termination of pastors.   The same church board that carefully checks out a prospective pastor over time discards that same pastor overnight.  The same people that act like loving Christians in hiring a pastor act like Satan’s messengers in forcing him to leave.  The same individuals who want a pastor to meet biblical qualifications before he’s called use crass political games to get rid of him.

And when a pastor is forced to leave a church, there are usually people who do their best to destroy his reputation.

This is an excerpt from a book I’m writing about what happened to me – and what happens to my fellow pastors – when a group in the church decides you need to leave for good:

When I first became a pastor in my late twenties, I was shocked at how many pastors in our district were forced to leave their ministries because they were opposed by a handful of antagonists.  As a rookie pastor, I met on a monthly basis with our district minister and other area pastors for lunch, and whenever a pastor was forced to resign, I wanted to know why it happened and how he was faring, especially since some of those pastors were my friends.  The dominant impression I received at those ministerial gatherings was that those ministers were forced to resign their positions because the pastor did something wrong and the lay people – usually the church board – reluctantly handed out the treatment he deserved.

For example, I once heard about a pastor in our district who told his congregation in frustration that they “didn’t give a damn” about a certain issue, but because this pastor used the word “damn” in a public meeting (not a church service), the person who relayed this news to me believed that the pastor had disqualified himself from office.  In other words, if a Baptist pastor can’t control his tongue in public, then he shouldn’t be a pastor at all.  But I wanted to know why this pastor used such strong language in public.  Was this the first time he had ever done that?  What might have caused him to use such language?  When I first came into the district, this pastor took a special interest in me.  One Sunday morning, he called me at home just to pray with me over the phone.  He seemed to be a good man, and if he became so incensed that he used strong language inside the four walls of his church, then maybe he had a good reason.  Maybe a few less than spiritual individuals in the church pushed him over the edge.  But in district circles, we rarely heard about unhealthy congregations.  Instead, the implication was that if a man was forced out of the pastorate, you could trace his departure to something he did or said.  In essence, he was a loser.

So early in my ministerial career, I learned how the district (and by implication our denomination) viewed pastors who experienced forced termination.  In general, the pastor became the scapegoat and was blamed for whatever conflict occurred.  Upon hearing the news that another colleague had bitten the dust, I would call that pastor and let him know that I cared for him.  I would also ask him about the factors that conspired to force him to resign, and every man I called was transparent enough to tell me.  Then I’d ask this question: “How many other pastors from the district have called to express their concern for you?”  The answer was always, “No one has called me.  You’re the only one.”  As I recall, in my first several years as a pastor in our district, seven pastoral colleagues were forced to leave their churches, and every one told me I was the only one to call.  That information broke my heart.  I later did a study of pastors who had served inside our district and discovered that out of sixty pastors that had left their churches, fifty were no longer connected to the denomination.  I felt so strongly about this issue that I wrote an article for our denominational magazine entitled “Who Cares For Lost Shepherds?”

Why don’t pastors seem to demonstrate concern for their colleagues who experience forced termination?  Maybe pastors have enough on their plates inside their own congregations to reach out to their peers.  Maybe some pastors are better leaders or teachers or administrators than they are shepherds and wouldn’t know what to say to a colleague undergoing crisis.  Maybe some pastors just don’t want to become embroiled in another church’s issues.  It also might be true that a lot of pastors know very few of their colleagues.  But my guess is that many pastors don’t want to associate with their terminated brethren because they are stigmatized as losers.  In other words, if you’re a pastor and you’re forced out of your church, the perception is that you are either incompetent, guilty of immorality, or don’t know how to play church politics properly.  There is something wrong with you, not the church, and in rare cases, that’s true.  But it’s not always true.  Jesus wasn’t crucified because He was unhealthy but because the political and religious leaders of His day were spiritually dysfunctional.  Paul wasn’t chased out of European cities because something was wrong with him or his message but because his hearers were hostile toward the gospel.  It’s popular to say, “If the team isn’t winning, fire the coach,” but some pastors have led their churches to growth and yet are forced to leave anyway because the old-timers feel insignificant as the church expands – and they wish to feel powerful once again.  While there are always pastors who deserve termination, the great majority who are forced to leave their churches have not done anything worthy of banishment.  But whether or not a pastor deserves termination, the church board should always treat him with dignity and respect.

Years ago, I sat with a pastor friend at a restaurant.  My friend had been forced to leave his former church exactly one year beforehand.  His daughter had been falsely accused of something she hadn’t done and the pastor chose to resign to protect her.  (The truth came out sometime later.)  The “clergy killer” in his congregation was both a church board member as well as member of the trustee board in our district.  Guess whose story got out first?  One year later, my friend had no idea why he had been mistreated so badly.  What had he done wrong?  I gave him a book called Forced Termination by Brooks Faulkner, and after reading it, my friend told me that he now understood what had happened to him.  But how much did our district help him?  According to my friend, they didn’t help him at all.

Several months ago, I was having a meal with a pastor, and I asked him if he knew how an old pastor friend of mine was doing, and this pastor told me that my friend left his church “because he was having some problems.”  The implication was that my friend left because of problems he had, not problems that were lodged inside the church family.  The pastor who told me that my friend “had problems” probably figured I would never reach out to my friend and discover his side of the situation.  Pastoral reputations can be ruined with a few key phrases or awkward pauses.

In my opinion, we can handle these situations much, much better.

Read Full Post »

Every Sunday, millions of Americans discuss what happened after they leave their church’s worship service.

Maybe Mom will say, “I really liked today’s performance song.  The lyrics really inspired and comforted me.”

Just then Bill, the family’s 16-year-old son, chimes in and says, “Yeah, but I didn’t understand the message at all.  That talk had nothing to do with me.”

Then Rachel, the 14-year-old daughter, complains, “Mom, I’m glad you liked the song, but I’m not getting anything out of the youth group right now.  I try to listen, but these two girls are always goofing off and they’re so distracting I can’t hear the lesson.”

Then Bill adds, “Well, I heard it, but I thought it was lame.  I’m thinking about not going back to the youth group – maybe try out a new one.  In fact, my friend Steve has invited me to attend the group at his church and I’m thinking about checking it out.”

After listening to his family’s opinions, John wonders aloud, “I wonder if we should leave our church and look for a new one?”

What are the signs you should leave your church?

First, you can’t support the vision.  Maybe your church pours all its efforts into worship, and you think it should be engaging in evangelism.  Or your pastor is passionate about missions, but you care most about hurting people.  If you can get behind your pastor’s vision for your church, then by all means, stay!  But if you find that you and your church are going in opposite directions, then you should seriously consider leaving or you’re going to be frustrated all the time.

Please don’t say what some people say at this point: “Well, I don’t like the pastor’s vision for this church, so we’re going to make life unpleasant for him until he leaves.  Then we’ll hire a pastor who will do things our way.”  That is the epitome of selfishness and indicates that you think your views are more important than those of your pastor.  Don’t try and manipulate matters so that he leaves.  You leave.  In fact, if you and those who are opposed to the pastor’s vision would leave the church, the church would probably grow a lot more rapidly.

Second, you don’t like the pastor.  I’ve written about this issue before because it’s a huge factor in whether people stay or leave a church.

My wife and I visited a church a year ago where the music was so awful that after ten minutes, she turned to me and asked, “Can we leave?”  I told her, “We’re going to stay to the end,” but after a few more minutes, I wanted to leave with her.  The pastor screeched when he preached.  (He was a “screecher preacher.”)  It was awful.  And then during his message, he complained to the technical people about a hum on the stage and, in my view, humiliated them in the process.  When the service was over, my wife and I practically ran to the car and our tires screeched as we left the parking lot.

I am sure that pastor is a nice man and that many people love him, but his personality and style just didn’t work for us.  Rather than stay and eventually force him to leave, we left and he stayed put.

I believe this with all my heart: if you don’t like your pastor, leave your church.  Why?  Because you will invariably tell someone in the church about your feelings, and then you’ll find people who agree with you, and you’ll be tempted to form a group of likeminded people, and if a leader emerges, your group will try and force the pastor to leave, and it will all get ugly and nasty and divisive.  So when you’ve tried to like your pastor, but you just can’t pull it off, then find a church where you do like the pastor.

But it’s at this point that people say, “But I love the ministry I’m leading.  And I’ve been at this church a long time.  And all my friends are here.”  But the way you feel about the pastor will override all those other considerations – I guarantee it.  Find a church where you like the pastor and can follow his leadership or you will be miserable for a long, long time.

Third, the church is starting to embarrass you.  Maybe you have a new pastor and you find his jokes offensive.  Maybe your worship director sings flat or the band plays every worship song in a disco style.  I’m not talking about occasional mistakes or experiments gone awry.  That happens in every church.

But if you’re consistently cringing to the point where you’ve stopped inviting friends to your church – and you won’t even invite your mother on Mother’s Day – then maybe you need to look around for another fellowship.  You should feel proud of your church.  And when you don’t, consider finding another place to worship and to serve.  And that leads to the next factor:

Fourth, you can’t use your gifts anymore.  Years ago, I was in a church where I sensed that I could no longer teach youth.  That job was reserved for the new associate pastor.  So I looked around for a church where I could teach, and we ended up in one where I already knew  many people.  Before long, I was teaching a high school class, and due to God’s grace, I was eventually hired to be that church’s youth pastor.

A church may be growing, and the pastor’s messages may be top-notch, and your kids may be thrilled with everything, but if you can’t use your spiritual gifts there, you may need to find another church.  If you’re a singer and you can’t sing, find a church where you can.  If you’re a leader and you can’t lead, then look around.

Finally, ask God what He wants you to do.  There are times when we’re sitting in a worship service or standing in the church lobby and the Holy Spirit says to us, “You’ve stopped growing spiritually in this place, haven’t you?  And you really aren’t able to help others grow, either.  You’re stagnating spiritually right now.  I want you to think about leaving.”

Or whenever you think about your church, you either become angry (because you’ve been violated in some way and there is no recourse for reconciliation) or you become depressed (because the memories have become too painful).  When your emotions overrule your thinking, and you can’t see the way ahead, it may be that God is leading you to look for a new church home.

When I was a pastor, I usually tried to encourage people to stay in our church, but there were times when it was better for them to go somewhere else.

One well-known pastor became weary of all the people who attended his church and complained about it, so he obtained brochures from ten other churches in town.  He stood up one Sunday morning and said, “If you want verse-by-verse Bible teaching, then check out this church.  And if you want a choir, then visit this church.  And if you want a certain kind of youth program, then try out this church.”  He left the brochures in the lobby.  As I recall, attendance was down by 700 people the following Sunday, but three weeks later, attendance was right back where it had been.  The church said goodbye to those who were disgruntled and welcomed those who were thrilled to be there.

Maybe we need to add a “Musical Churches Sunday” to our Christian calendar!

What are your thoughts about when it’s time to leave a church?  I’d love to hear them!

Read Full Post »

My wife and I recently visited a church that meets in a high school.  When we drove into the parking lot, we had no idea what to expect.  As we walked toward the front door, we wondered: What’s this church all about?  What kind of service will they have?  Will the pastor’s message be something we can relate to?

At the church we’ve been attending for the past ten months, people arrive early to get a good seat.  That wasn’t necessary at this church, so the place largely felt empty until well into the worship time.  When the service did start, worship was led by a guy wearing a cap who told us that those on the stage were “stoked” that we were present.  Although the worship leader and his band sounded okay, there wasn’t as much dignity during the worship time as I would have liked.

When the pastor got up to speak (at 11:02 am – I always time the preacher), he looked like a friend from my former church.  His message was a bit paradoxical to me.  While his written notes were intricate and extensive, he didn’t spend much time interpreting Scripture and spent most of his time making rambling applications.

At one point during the message, the pastor asked how many people were watching the NBA Playoffs.  I think three people raised their hands.  (If the Phoenix Suns aren’t in the playoffs around here, basketball doesn’t exist.)  He then asked if there were any Lakers’ fans in the house.  Even though I am a HUGE Lakers’ fan, I kept my hand down.  (I’m a low-profile kind of guy.)  But my wife instantly raised her hand and went, “YEAH!”  She was the only one in the whole place with her hand up.

Oh, no.

The pastor wanted to launch into an anti-Lakers tirade (evidently quite a popular pasttime in Phoenix churches), but after looking at Kim, he said, “Maybe I shouldn’t say anything.  It looks like her husband can take me.”  (I looked that way because I knew he was about to disparage my second-favorite all-time sports team.)  The pastor then criticized Kobe Bryant for something and moved on.  As a first-timer, I did not like being singled out, but what can you do when your wife expresses her undying support for your team in front of strangers?

The pastor’s message lasted slightly more than an hour.  When Kim and I got into the car, we quickly discussed the church and the message for a few brief moments, and then we talked about something else.  We haven’t talked about that experience since.  We instinctively knew that church was not for us.

However … it perfectly met the needs of the people who attend it.  They absolutely love their church and their pastor, as well they should.  There was obviously a connection between the shepherd and his flock.  It wasn’t one that I understood, but it was palpably real.  After all, the guy has been there forever.

Based on our little experience, let me share a few comments about criticizing pastors:

First, find a church – and a pastor – you like.  When a pastor stands in front of a congregation week after week, he can’t hide who he is.  It just emerges.  Sooner or later, you’ll learn how he relates to God, his wife, and his kids.  You’ll learn what he thinks about politics and social issues.  (And the Lakers.)  You’ll even learn how he feels about himself.  Discerning listeners could write a brief biography of their pastor after hearing him speak for a while.

To remain under a pastor’s teaching ministry, you have to like and respect him.  You don’t have to agree with everything he says.  But if you cringe every time he preaches, then find a church where you’re comfortable.  Because if you stay in a church where you don’t like the pastor, you will inevitably tell others about your feelings.  If you tell 50 people, 48 might disagree with you, but even if only two agree, you’re starting to form a critic’s coalition – and you’ll start lobbying for more members.  (And that’s how conflicts begin.)  Although I’m sure I could be friends with the pastor I mentioned, I didn’t resonate with his preaching.  If I stayed, I’d become a critic, and that wouldn’t be healthy for either one of us.  So I need to visit enough churches until I find a pastor I can listen to consistently.

Second, pray for your pastor before he preaches.  It is amazing how prayer can turn critics into supporters.  If you pray for your pastor’s teaching ministry during the week – and especially right before he speaks – you’ll have formed an alliance with God on your pastor’s behalf.  Rather than nodding off during the message, you’ll eagerly listen for God’s voice.  Rather than picking apart the pastor’s logic, you’ll be rooting for him to make sense.  Praying frequently and fervently for your pastor will not only make you a better listener – it will make him a better preacher.

When I first started preaching as a young man, a group of people always stood around me and prayed for me right before the message.  At times, I sensed God’s power coming upon me during those prayer times.  I became more energized, passionate, and courageous  because I knew that those who prayed for me were interceding on my behalf.  When Aaron and Hur held up Moses’ arms in Exodus 17, Israel prevailed in battle over the Amalekites.  When the two men took a break, and Moses’ arms fell to his side in exhaustion, the Amalekites gained momentum.  Pastors can only hold up their arms for so long.  They need solid supporters who will stand next to them and hold them up before the Lord.  If you’ll do that for your pastor, I guarantee that he will preach better – and you’ll criticize him less.  You’re invested.

Third, realize your pastor is all too human.  He will screw up on occasion.  He will screw up in his preaching, his leadership, and his pastoring.  Count on it.  He may execute his duties flawlessly 97.3% of the time, but he will goof up – sometimes badly.

A few years ago, I was asked to speak at a memorial service for a man I did not know well.  The service was scheduled to be held in the middle of a Saturday afternoon.  I had prepared my remarks well in advance and was positive I knew the time the service started.  So I casually made my way over to the local retirement center, thinking I’d be early.  But when I entered the public assembly room, I discovered I was half an hour late instead … and everybody was waiting for me.  (And not all of them were happy.)  I know why I was late: the wife of the deceased kept changing the time over the  phone, and I latched onto one of the times without double-checking.  (My fault.)  Naturally, I apologized to everyone present.  But I didn’t look prepared that day, and I was a sitting duck for criticism.

If you were in that room, would you have forgiven your pastor or criticized him to others?  If the deceased was your husband or father, would you have been tough on him?  If the pastor was late to every memorial service, okay, he’s got a problem, but if he’s only late to one in his life – and this was the only one in my three decades plus career – it’s an anomaly, not a pattern.  (By the way, the wife of the deceased told me that she was just glad I made it, and our friendship never missed a beat.)  When a pastor makes a mistake, and he apologizes for it, forgive him and let it go or else you’re the one in the wrong.

Finally, keep most criticism to yourself.  The pastor of the church Kim and I have been attending is a terrific preacher.  He’s prepared, passionate, relevant, and courageous.  But he’s been letting someone else preach more recently, and while this person appeals to a younger crowd, my wife and I don’t enjoy listening to him.  Instead of interpreting a passage accuarately and then doing creative applications, he prides himself on doing creative interpretations – some of which do violence to the text as well as the history of the Christian faith.  We’re both so uncomfortable listening to him that we plan to check out other churches on the Sundays he preaches.

I don’t know this pastor, and I will probably never meet him, so I haven’t earned the right to criticize him to his face.  While I don’t think he’s a heretic, he’s an emerging church guy … and that’s all I’m going to say right now.  His views of Scripture, Jesus, and the church are vastly different than my own.

We won’t lobby to have him removed.  (Nobody would listen to us anyway.)  We won’t share our feelings with our friends.  (Unless he starts teaching heresy.)  So instead of insisting that he leave (and how selfish that would be), we plan to look for a pastor and a church whose vision and preaching we can fully support.

What are your thoughts on criticizing pastors?  I would love to hear them.  Thanks!

Check out our website at www.restoringkingdombuilders.org  You’ll find Jim’s story, recommended resources on conflict, and a forum where you can ask questions about conflict situations in your church.

Read Full Post »

I’ve been writing this blog about pastor-congregational conflict issues over the past five months.  Every day, I’m given the terms that people type into their search engines to find the blog, and the top two phrases have been “how to terminate a pastor” and “facing your accusers.”  Evidently there is a lot of confusion among Christians as to how to handle the correction and termination of a pastor.  (And pastors don’t help because they rarely teach on this issue.)  Take a moment to imagine how differently pastors would be treated if every church took Moses’ words in Deuteronomy 19:15-21 seriously:

“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.  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.  Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.”

Please notice several things about this passage:

First, an accuser must be a witness.  An individual had to see someone committing a crime before they could report it to the authorities.  You were not allowed to say, “Well, I heard that Joshua stole a cow” or “some of my friends told me that Seth assaulted the high priest.”  If you reported what you heard from someone else, that might make you a prosecutor but not a witness.  There’s a big difference.  You had to witness the events firsthand for someone to be tried.  If you didn’t, you wouldn’t even be heard.  J. A. Thompson notes in his commentary on Deuteronomy that this section deals with “the false witness who has been a menace to society in every age and among many peoples.”

How differently matters are handled in our churches.

Can you imagine going to a meeting of the governing board or standing up in a public meeting and accusing your pastor of a litany of charges without ever having witnessed any of his offenses yourself?  And yet this is exactly what happens in many churches.  Rather than instantly believing (or disbelieving) the charges, someone should ask the accuser point blank, “Have you personally seen or heard the pastor commit any offenses?  If so, when and where?”  If not, the person has been disqualified as a witness and should be silent.  Then those who have seen the pastor say or do something wrong should come forward.  If nobody does, the charges – according to Scripture – should be dismissed.

One of the best features of American jurisprudence is that a plaintiff is able to face his or her accusers.  In other words, a witness cannot make charges against someone – resulting in their arrest – and then be able to hide out as the accused is tried and sentenced.  The accused must be able to face their accuser in court and have his or her attorney cross-examine them.  Many Christians believe that this legal principle comes straight from passages like this one.  It would be a shame if unbelievers obeyed biblical principles in a greater way than believers.

Second, one witness is not enough to establish guilt.  What does Scripture say?  There must be “two or three witnesses” to a crime, not just one, because one person could easily misrepresent an event.

When I was in high school, I was walking home from school one day with a friend when we both witnessed an accident between a motorcycle and a car.  The motorcyclist ran a stop sign, hit the car broadside, and then flew over the car, landing on the pavement.  (He was okay.)  While I told the police what I saw, my friend saw things a bit differently – and probably more accurately – because he planned to become a policeman (which he eventually did).  We both saw the same accident and yet came to several different conclusions.  Several witnesses are able to give a more complete version of events than a single witness could ever do – and this protects the accused from a personal vendetta by one person.

Both Jesus and Paul later quoted from this passage when they mentioned the necessity of having “two or three witnesses” establish the facts in a confrontation (Matthew 18:16; 1 Timothy 5:19) – and Paul’s words to Timothy deal specifically with Christian leaders.

Third, every charge against an individual must be investigated by an impartial body.  While I’m stating the obvious here, a witness cannot say, “I saw So-and-So commit such-and-such an offense” and be instantly believed.  Their charges must be tested.

The other night, I was watching a dramatic depiction of the trial of Sir Thomas More, who served as Chancellor under King Henry VIII of England.  Henry had More (a Roman Catholic) arrested for high treason and confined to The Tower of London.  More’s Protestant opponents (sad to say) continually accused him of denying the right of the king to be the head of the church in England.  While More successfully beat back the initial wave of charges, he was finally accused by Richard Rich (the king’s Solicitor General) for denying the king’s right to lead the church during a personal conversation.  Based on the testimony of one man, a jury required a mere fifteen minutes to pronounce More’s guilt and arrange for his execution.

Regardless of how you might feel about Henry VIII and Thomas More, isn’t there something inside of us that recoils when we hear that a private conversation with a single person could result in the death of a Christian leader?  By the same token, how can the wild accusations of one person result in the besmirching of a pastor’s reputation in our day?  And rather than just take one person’s word for it, shouldn’t an impartial body be appointed to check into the charges?  Isn’t this what Paul had in mind when he told the church in Corinth (in 1 Corinthians 6:1-8) that they should be able to handle their own affairs without involving the secular court system?

Finally, if the charges proved to be false, then the witnesses were to receive the exact punishment the accused would have received.  What Brown writes about societies applies even more stringently to Christian churches: “Any society is sick if people within it will lie deliberately in order to inflict harm on others.  The Lord is a God of truth; he does not deceive us by anything he says.  Therefore, the word of those who belong to the covenant community must also be reliable and trustworthy.”

Please note that the law of lex talionis (known as “an eye for an eye”) specified the limit of punishment (if Joseph harmed your eye, you could harm his eye but not his ear) rather than demanded punishment (if he harmed your eye, you had to harm his eye).

Several weeks ago, I had lunch with a veteran Christian leader who told me about his church’s policy when it comes to accusing staff members of wrongdoing.  Two women in the church claimed they had seen a staff member engaging in inappropriate behavior.  Their claims came to the attention of my friend and he did a thorough investigation of the matter.  While he concluded that the staff member did not use his best judgment, he exonerated him from any serious wrongdoing.  One of the women was dissatisfied with the decision and began to repeat her charges to others.  My friend then contacted her and told her that if she did not stop her accusations, then discipline would be exercised against her.  Her accusations ceased.

This step is missing in Christian churches today.  We have created a climate where people can make accusations with impunity – whether they’re true or not – because they know that nothing will happen to them.  These accusations are often passed around the church in the form of gossip and are believed before the accused leader even hears about them or can respond to them.  Because the leader is then perceived to be in the wrong, he or she is asked for their resignation.  What a travesty!

I recommend that Christians find ways to include the principles embedded in this Deuteronomy passage (not necessarily the penalties!) into church life so we can protect our Christian leaders from false and malicious charges.  As Moses said, “You must purge the evil from among you.”

But the truth is that this passage is a safeguard for everybody – including leaders.  Isn’t this the way you would want to be treated if you were accused of an offense?

What do you think about this passage and these principles?

Read Full Post »

Do pastors ever intentionally target specific individuals in the congregation when they preach?

Yes.

And in the process, they also provoke conflict.

When I first started preaching, I was only nineteen.  When I prepared a sermon, I was just trying to put together some coherent thoughts based on the Bible so I could fill the half hour or so I had been assigned.  It wouldn’t have dawned on me to scold anyone in particular from the pulpit.  I had a hard enough time just trying to make sense.

As time went on, I became more issue-oriented when I preached.  If I detected a topic that wasn’t being addressed in our church, I’d talk about that.  My thoughts were centered on content, not people.

But that all changed when I became a pastor.

I was 27 years old in a church where the average age was sixty.  (Doesn’t sound so old anymore.)  When I stood up to speak, I looked out on a congregation of … 30-40 people.  I quickly got to know them all, and I didn’t like some of them.  (You wouldn’t have, either, but that’s another story.)

These people were ultra-fundamentalists, hyper-critics who wanted the church to go back in time three decades.  The music reflected that, as did the way the church was governed.  I grew not to like some of those growling faces when I got up to present the Word of God.

So when I prepared a message at home – and I spoke three times a week – I’d say to myself, “So-and-so really needs to hear this point.  I will tailor it to her specifically.”  Then I’d go to church and let it fly.

Only much of the time, whenever I aimed a portion of the message at someone … they didn’t show up!

For example, whenever I got on people for not attending church on a regular basis, I was saying that to people WHO WERE ALREADY IN ATTENDANCE!  (The people who weren’t there never heard the message anyway.)

There were other times when I’d say something for the benefit of one person, and I’d look out, and they’d be asleep, or talking to someone, or not paying attention, and I’d realize that I had just wasted my time.

And, of course, even if they heard me loud and clear, they probably thought I was talking to someone else, not them!

So it didn’t take me long to learn that preaching to one person was a colossal waste of time.  Maybe it was therapeutic for me, but it didn’t do anything to visibly change the person I was “aiming” at.  Besides, how would I even know when my missives had hit the mark?

One of my preaching mentors – and he was definitely old school – advised me to target specific people in the congregation when I spoke.  He did it, and he felt he had success with it, but after a while, I could not bring myself to do it anymore.

I should have learned from the last pastor that I served under as a youth pastor.

The pastor was gone one Sunday.  At the end of the service, some kind of praise anthem was sung, and a few people raised their hands to the Lord.  As I recall, some of those people were in the choir.  Handraising was not done at our church.  It was a practice imported from those divisive charismatic churches, and we weren’t about to become charismatic!

So when the pastor returned home, he was informed – probably by those same people from my first church – that handraising occurred in our church last Sunday!  Oh my!

So what did the pastor do?  He prepared a sermon for the following Sunday about controversial issues in the church, ticking off some examples … and then mentioned handraising.

Uh oh.

That was strategic product placement, wasn’t it?

Suddenly, the congregation was divided.  You were either for handraising or against it.  No middle ground.

Those against it stayed at the church.  Those for it began making for the exits.

Years later, I had breakfast with the pastor.  We got to talking about his handraising sermon.  He told me candidly that he never should have highlighted that issue.  He said, “People just wanted to express their love for the Lord.”  And he was right.

As the years went on, whenever I prepared a message, the faces of certain people would naturally flit through my brain.  It happens to every speaker.  We don’t want to speak to a mass of people, but to individuals.  And it helps if we speak to certain individuals, not those we don’t like or those we think are stuck in sin, but those who are hurting.

As I worked on a message, sometimes I would write down the names of a few people in the church on my worksheet, not because I wanted to “nail them” with the message, but because I sincerely wanted to help them advance in their walk with Christ.  I would ask myself, “What kind of applications would free them to live for Jesus?”

As the congregations I spoke to increased in size, I no longer tried to aim a message at any one person.  Why aim at one when dozens more needed help?

But from time-to-time, I believed that God wanted me to say something that I knew might offend certain people in the church.  Although I’d ask the Lord what He wanted me to do, most of the time, I said it anyway.  I subscribed to the philosophy of teacher extraordinaire Stephen Brown:

When in doubt, say it.

Why?  Brown believed that would usually be the most interesting and memorable part of the message.  And while many pastors try not to offend anyone in their message, my top two spiritual gifts are teaching and prophecy.  The gift of prophecy leads me toward saying the hard thing rather than shying away from it.  But I always tried to do it with grace rather than with rancor.

In fact, my preaching philosophy comes from John 1:17: “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.”  I tried to preach the truth with grace.  Rather than bind people, I wanted to liberate them.

Our pastor speaks to several thousand people every Sunday.  His applications seem to be aimed at the congregation as a whole.  He has a big enough staff that they can handle the problem situations.  And if he’s having problems with a church leader, he’ll probably call them into his office during the week and deal with the situation in private.

That’s the way it should be done.

So do pastors sometimes aim part of a message at certain individuals in a church?

My guess is that the younger the pastor, and the smaller the church, the more it’s done.  But the older the pastor, and the larger the church, the less it’s done.

Let me conclude with this thought: while pastors can be controversial when they preach – just teaching what the Bible says provokes controversy in our culture – they should never deliver a message in anger or aim a message at a particular person.

When a pastor gets worked up, he raises the conflict level in his church.  When he remains calm, he brings the conflict level down.

This Sunday, listen carefully to your pastor’s message.  If part of his preaching seems like it was aimed at you, he didn’t do it on purpose.  He may not even know you.

That’s the Holy Spirit.

Read Full Post »

The following article is from Chapter 11 of the book I’m writing. The chapter parallels the way that Jesus’ enemies “terminated” Him with the way that pastors are often terminated today. Thanks for reading:

It is my contention that there are a host of similarities between the way that Jesus was cruelly terminated and the way that many pastors are unjustly treated in our day.  In fact, a case can be made that the steps leading to the crucifixion of Jesus are replicated on a regular basis in churches throughout the world.  While some parallels are inexact – for example, pastors lack Jesus’ perfect character and miracle-working power – the unoriginal devil uses the same template today to destroy spiritual leaders as He did in our Savior’s time.  Why change your methodology when it’s been working so well?

In re-reading The Gospels recently, I believe that the single verse that best describes Satan’s strategy in attacking a leader is Mark 14:27.  The night before His death, Jesus quoted from Zechariah 13:7 and told His disciples, “You will all fall away, for it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.’”  While the devil sometimes picks off a stray sheep or two – and even provokes some sheep to fight each other – he knows that the single best way to slaughter an entire flock is to eliminate their leader.  Without their shepherd, the sheep wander off toward cliffs, fail to find nourishing pastures, and become prey for wolves.

Let me share some parallels between the way that Jesus was mistreated twenty centuries ago and the way that many pastors are mistreated today.

First, the enemies of Jesus were threatened by Him.  Before Jesus came on the scene, the Pharisees and chief priests and elders were the unquestioned spiritual authorities in Israel as well as the undisputed arbiters of Jewish law.  But in one of the first of many clashes with Israel’s leaders, Jesus publicly challenged their authority inside a synagogue on the Sabbath in Capernaum.  Jesus met a man there with a shriveled hand.  Although healing on the Sabbath was considered to be work and a violation of the popular interpretation of the Law, Jesus turned His attention toward the Pharisees before addressing His patient.  Showing His awareness of their presence, Jesus asked them in Luke 6:9, “Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy it?”  The Pharisees chose to remain silent rather than engage Jesus in dialogue.  After looking them directly in the eyes, Jesus instantly restored the man’s hand to health.

Jesus committed a good deed that Sabbath day.  He cared much more for the spirit of the law than its letter.  While the Pharisees lived by their extra-biblical, legalistic codes, Jesus consistently behaved within the true meaning of God’s law.  In the Father’s eyes, Jesus only did good while in the Pharisees’ eyes, Jesus only did evil.  But who did Jesus work for: the Father or the Pharisees?  He served His Father alone.  Because He could have healed the man on any other day, Jesus’ attitude got Him into trouble with the religious authorities.  They began to worry that He might gradually come to displace them as leaders in Israel.

Jesus not only threatened the authority of the Jewish leaders by spurning their man-made laws, He also threatened their influence via a scathing public indictment (Matthew 23), castigating them for practices like hypocrisy, narcissism, vanity, majoring on minors, and being obsessed with their spiritual images.  And in Luke 13:17, after healing a woman with spinal issues on the Sabbath (once again in a synagogue), the synagogue ruler angrily told those in attendance, “There are six days for work.  So come and be healed on those days, not on the Sabbath.”  But Jesus did not back down, accusing His opponents of being “hypocrites” who lead their animals to water on the Sabbath while prohibiting supernatural deliverance for hurting people.  Luke concludes, “When he said this, all his opponents were humiliated, but the people were delighted with all the wonderful things he was doing” (Luke 13:17).

Most of all, according to John 11:48, Jesus threatened their very survival.  After Jesus raised Lazarus, the Sanhedrin concluded, “If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation,” referring either to Jerusalem itself or the temple.  In other words, if Jesus kept attracting a large following, He might put the Jewish leaders out of business altogether, rendering them irrelevant.  Due to their scarcity mentality, they couldn’t let that happen.  While John the Baptist nobly proclaimed, “He must become greater; I must become less” (John 3:30), their sentiment was, “We must become greater; He must become nonexistent.”

While Jesus and the Jewish leaders contended for the soul of their nation, many pastors and church leaders fight for control of a congregation.  There are people in every church who have been there for years – especially charter members – and who sense that their influence is being displaced as the pastor’s influence increases.  When that happens, it’s not uncommon for these people to band together and strike back.

Next, the enemies of Jesus plotted to destroy Him.  It is simply amazing to read how many times in the Gospels we are given insight into the real motives of the Jewish leaders toward Jesus.  While their decisions were made in the dark, they later fully came into the light.  For example, after Jesus healed the lame man at the Bethesda pool on the Sabbath, John tells us that “the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own father, making himself equal with God” (John 5:18).  John 7:1 tells us that Jesus purposely stayed away from Judea “because the Jews there were waiting to take his life.” The attitude of the leaders became so well known that some of the people in Jerusalem began to ask in John 7:25, “Isn’t this the man they are trying to kill?”  Jesus Himself told the Jewish leaders that He knew about their hostility toward Him in John 8:40 when He said, “As it is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God.”  After Jesus declared that “before Abraham was born, I am!” the Jewish leaders “picked up stones to stone him” but Jesus slipped away from the temple area (John 8:58-59).

Finally, after Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, we’re told about the Sanhedrin that “from that day on they plotted to take his life” (John 11:53). They were even so enraged at the miracle Jesus performed on Lazarus that “the chief priests made plans to kill Lazarus as well, for on account of him many of the Jews were going over to Jesus and putting their faith in him (John 12:10-11).”  During the last week of Jesus’ life, Luke tells us, “Every day he was teaching at the temple. But the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the leaders among the people were trying to kill him” (Luke 19:47).

The New Testament writers never tell us that anyone at this point was trying to kill Peter, or James, or Thomas – just Jesus.  In the same way, no one in a local church bands together to eliminate the small group director, or the children’s fourth grade teacher, or the office manager.  No, if they go after anyone, a group always goes after the pastor.

When I use the word “destroy,” I am not for a moment suggesting that the enemies of a pastor in church settings wish to kill him as they did Jesus.  While that sort of thing has happened – and I have some news stories in my files as evidence – it’s extremely rare.  It’s much more common for individuals and groups to try and harm a pastor’s reputation, remove him from office, or damage his career.  Rediger writes that “it is frightening, as well as embarrassing, to see how many religious leaders are willing to destroy careers, congregations, and missions in the name of theological cleansing, or whatever the source of their vexation.”  Greenfield ads, “In some cases, the commitment to do harm, to tear down, to destroy could be seen as just short of murder, because the evil actions are intended to kill the leader’s ministry, career, position in the church, and even his health.”

In my mind, it is often very simple to determine which side in a “religious war” represents the devil and which side represents the Lord. In a word, Satan majors in destruction (I Peter 5:8) while Jesus majors in redemption (Titus 2:13-14).

Read Full Post »

A gunslinger is someone in a church who wants to “gun down” the head pastor.  Using terminology from the Old West, he’s gunnin’ for the preacher.  The gunslinger can be someone from the congregation, or a staff member, but most often is a member of the governing board.

For at least a year before revealing his true motives, the gunslinger mounts a stealth campaign against the pastor.  He tells others in private: “The pastor isn’t a good leader.  His preaching isn’t connecting.  He’s losing the young people.”  This is just his opinion, of course, but he’ll share it whether the church is prospering or not.

What amazes me is that the gunslinger is able to convince at least two members of the governing board (the proverbial Gang of Three) that he’s right: the pastor does need to leave.  How is he able to pull this off?  How can a gunslinger turn normally rational people into unthinking bobbleheads?

Let me offer five possiblities:

First, the gunslinger “works on” these board members for at least twelve months.  He is relentless with his campaign because he can’t “fire” the pastor by himself.  During this time period, if the pastor slips up once or twice in his leadership or preaching – and he probably will – the gunslinger is there to fire a warning shot and say to the others, “What did I tell you?  He’s not the right man for the job.”  Pretty soon, the board members stop seeing the pastor through their own eyes but through the eyes of the gunslinger.

There are three primary ways to stop the gunslinger at this point: tell him “I disagree with your assessment and don’t want to hear from you anymore on this issue”; break off all contact with him; or expose him to others in the church.  But if you do break off all contact, you won’t know what he’s up to next and he’ll just find another set of ears.  (Of course, if you expose him, he will simply deny everything.)

Second, the gunslinger possesses a forceful personality.  He’s full of confidence.  He seems to know what he’s talking about.  He’ll talk about his experiences in other churches. (“We should have gotten rid of that pastor sooner.  He took the church down with him.”)  He’ll talk about what’s happening at other churches.  (“They got rid of their pastor and now they’re growing like crazy.”)  He sounds like a church growth consultant, right there on the church board!

The problem is that he really doesn’t know what he’s talking about.  Most likely, he hasn’t been to seminary.  He’s not a “church professional.”  He hasn’t read any church growth literature.  At best, he’s an opinionated amateur.  Hold a full-fledged verbal duel between him and the minister and the pastor would mop the floor with him – but the gunslinger never wants to have that debate.  It would jeopardize his power.

Third, the gunslinger makes his followers feel powerful.  In the great majority of cases, a gunslinger wants to destroy a pastor not because the pastor is doing anything wrong, but because the gunslinger wants the power to make decisions.  He will never admit it, claiming that he only wants to serve God and help the fellowship, but he really wants to run the church.  And there is only one person standing in his way: the pastor.  As the gunslinger’s minions gather around him, they too feel powerful.  When the pastor leaves, they will sit at his right and left hands.

But what the bobbleheads fail to realize is that the gunslinger has seduced them into putting their group’s needs ahead of their church’s needs.  When the gunslinger and two of his followers meet and plan and plot, they feel a sense of exhiliration!  They alone know what’s best for the church – but they haven’t consulted with the other 95%+ of the church that loves the pastor and does follow his leadership.  The gunslinger and his boys convince themselves that they are representing the entire church when they are really only representing themselves.

Fourth, the gunslinger befriends his followers.  They may never end up being good friends with the pastor but they can be close with this charming and intelligent person.  The opportunity to be granted power is intoxicating.  Even Christians have been known to sell their souls to acquire a promotion at work.  The gunslinger talks about the way that “we” will plan the future together when the pastor is gone and his followers eat it up.  Being friends with the gunslinger places his followers into his inner circle, a place they don’t ever want to leave.

If the gunslinger’s followers could discuss this situation with someone objective like a counselor or a spouse or even the pastor, they would discover that the gunslinger is trying to manipulate them for his ends.  But:

Finally, the gunslinger insists on strict confidentiality which adds to the allure.  In other words, The Plan is also The Secret.  No one else in the church is allowed to know what’s going on – not one’s spouse, or other leaders, or even anyone outside the church.  Why not?  For starters, the gunslinger and his followers don’t want anyone rebuking them or trying to talk them out of their nefarious scheme.  They also don’t want anyone to spill the beans to the pastor or his supporters.  For this reason, the gunslinger and his twosome agree that they will not tell a soul about The Plan.

Of course, in biblical terms, they are operating in the dark, not in the light.  There is a biblical process for dealing with a pastor who incessantly sins (found in 1 Timothy 5:19-21, an application of Matthew 18:15-20), but they don’t want to use that process.  Takes too long.  Too cumbersome to apply.  Requires a Bible.  And besides, the process is unpredictable.  What if the pastor actually changes?  What if he leaves but the gunslinger and his boys aren’t left in charge?  The gunslinger can’t take that chance, so all meetings and deliberations are strictly hush hush – until the gunslinger calls for the pastor to meet him and his boys for a private meeting at Dry Gulch.

Does the New Testament ever mention a gunslinger?  Glad you asked.  In 3 John 9-10, John, the apostle of love, writes:

“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.”

John doesn’t indicate that Diotrephes is attacking a pastor but an apostle!  Even though John had apostolic authority over the church in Ephesus, Diotrephes refused to submit to John’s authority and verbally criticized John to others in the church.  What makes Diotrephes a gunslinger?  John says that he “loves to be first.”

If the church’s official leaders all left, would they have appointed Diotrephes to be their leader?  Hardly.  Would the people of the church have chosen him?  Probably not.  According to John, Diotrephes lacked official authority inside the church but used his intimidating personality to get what he wanted – and no one seemed to be able to stop him.  It took John, an outside authority, to try and rein in Diotrephes.  A congregation should be able to handle these people.

There is now a growing body of literature on gunslingers (or “clergy killers”) and these people follow a pattern that’s been documented since Judas flipped on Jesus twenty centuries ago.  While some pastors know the template (it’s right there in the Gospels), most lay people do not.  My prayer is to empower thousands of lay believers all over this country to stop the gunslingers and the Gang of Three and prevent their pastor from being carried to Boot Hill in a pine box.

Will you be one of those people?

 

Read Full Post »

Back in the 1960s, a new kind of doll hit popular culture: the bobblehead.  The first such dolls produced were of baseball players Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, Roger Maris, and Roberto Clemente.  Later in the decade, dolls were produced of The Beatles.

As a kid, I distinctly remember bobblehead dolls of the Los Angeles Dodgers, who had the best promotions in all of sports. The head on the bobblehead is oversized and, connected to its small body by a spring, continually nods.  The doll never says “no” but always says “yes.”

The only bobblehead I own is of former Oakland A’s pitcher Vida Blue, and I’ve been looking to give it away for quite some time.  If you want it, you can come over to my house and claim it.  (I met Vida Blue in Anaheim in 1972, the year after he won the Cy Young Award as the best pitcher in baseball.  I asked him to pose for a photo.  He stuck his tongue out at me.  I still have the photo.  But you can’t have the photo.  It’s precious.)

Anyway, I digress.  The reason I bring up bobbleheads is because some Christian leaders resemble them.  Just as the bobblehead constantly nods its head in approval, so too these leaders always seem to agree with the other leaders around them.

Where can one find Christian bobbleheads in a church setting?

They can be found almost anywhere that decisions are made: on the programming team, among adult youth leaders, on any ministry team, and on the church board.  Especially on the church board.

Church boards – whether they’re called elders, deacons, servant-leaders, or the Board of Directors – usually have lots of decisions to make and not much time to make them.  I’ve attended several hundred board meetings in my time (violins, please) and one of the constant themes is that “we’ve got to hurry up and get out of here by 9:00 pm” or whatever time is set.  (11:00 is more like it.)  The chairman introduces an issue, board members ask questions and discuss it, and the board eventually comes to consensus.

When the issue is relatively insignificant, this approach works well.  But the more an issue impacts the entire church family, the more time the board needs to take in deliberation.  It’s irresponsible for a board to make a quick decision, for example, over changing the times of the services or borrowing money to construct a worship center.  The greater the impact on the entire church family, the longer the board needs to take in making a call.

This principle is especially relevant when it comes to two issues: hiring and terminating the head pastor.  Let’s talk about the latter decision.

Every month in our country, 1,300 pastors are involuntarily terminated from their positions.  Some deserve it, being guilty of incompetence, immorality, or stubbornly refusing to repent of wrongdoing.  But in the great majority of cases, the template goes like this:

One board member has it in for the pastor.  Let’s call him the gunslinger.  For a year, he tries to wear down the pastor through controlling tactics, insinuations, harassment, and a lack of support.  He privately makes his case with the other board members between meetings in the church parking lot, during private meals, and at “secret meetings” in a restaurant or someone’s  home.  The gunslinger can’t seem to find anything the pastor does right and concludes that the board must “shoot him” to save the church.  When questioned about the propriety of such an undertaking, the gunslinger produces a Wanted poster with a list of charges against the pastor (and often his family) that indicate the pastor has to go, the sooner the better.  It’s never the quality of the charges but the sheer quantity that ultimately persuades the other board members.

If you’re wondering about how in touch with reality I am, let me quote from Guy Greenfield’s book The Wounded Minister:

This person “will lead a campaign of attack on the minister.  This person is not trying to give constructive criticism.  Even if some valid points are offered, his goal is nothing short of control, no matter what it may cost the minister or the church.  The antagonist is so full of rage that he feels compelled to attack the ‘enemy’ (the minister) until he is destroyed (terminated and eliminated from the scene).

This person probably has a ‘God-problem.’  He feels some deep-seated anger toward God, for some reason out of his past experiences.  Because it is difficult to show anger directly toward God, the pathological antagonist chooses the minister, the ‘man of God’ as his target.  Sometimes this anger is guilt-driven (possibly due to some hidden sin, such as an extramarital affair, for example).  His antagonism is an attempt to move the spotlight off his own sins and onto another.  Therefore the attack is a smoke screen to cover his own moral indiscretions … His stated reasons for opposition are a ruse for his own hidden agenda.  What he really wants is power, control, status, and authority.”

How does the gunslinger get away with his diabolical plan?

A while back, I bought a DVD collection of the classic TV show Bonanza.  The collection contains more than 30 episodes of the show from the first several years, all of them very, very good (even though they’re not remastered.  But what do you expect for $6.99?)  In some of the stories, there’s a bad guy who wants to kill Pa or Hoss or Hop Sing, but he never tries to go gunnin’ for them by himself.  He’s always got some not-so-bright “boys” who are willing to do whatever he tells them to do.  No matter how bad his plan is for stealing Ben’s cattle or grabbing some Ponderosa land or stealing Little Joe’s girl, the boys are in the background nodding their heads.

In other words, they’re bobbleheads.

Church boards have bobbleheads, too, or else the gunslinger couldn’t get away with anything.  They fail to realize that just as the gunslinger has been working on the pastor for a long time, so too he’s been working on them.  Greenfield again:

This person “tends to attract certain followers.  Without them, the antagonist’s efforts would fizzle.  He usually does not have the courage to go it alone.  He needs followers to bolster his campaign against the minister.  My antagonist was calculating in his enlistment of a small band of followers.  Each had a personal ax to grind with regard to what was happening in the church.  Each had a reputation for being a severe critic of former ministers.  All but one was a natural follower in personality makeup.”

In other words, they were bobbleheads.

Greenfield goes on:

“Four others were enlisted to join in this effort.  They began to hold secret meetings at Jim’s home on Wednesday evenings (at the same time the congregation was scheduled to hold midweek prayer meetings at the church building).  So Jack won over five men and their wives to concur with his accusations, none of which was true.  All of these men were deacons [board members].  Then, one by one, a few of their longtime friends, nondeacons, were persuaded to see things at church their way.”

The bobbleheads on the board kept nodding their heads in time with each of the gunslinger’s accusations.  They nodded so much that it became trendy to do so around town … er, the church.  Soon others began to “do the bobblehead” as well.  Greenfield concludes:

“In a few months, they knew they could count on at least 30 church members to vote with them regarding the minister’s future.  In the final showdown business meeting, they were able to muster some 50 members to vote with them.  There were some 135 members who voted to sustain the minister.  These were not good odds for future unity and fellowship in the church.  Therefore, I chose to take early retirement.  My health was too fragile to continue living with this kind of stress.”

The gunslinger never has to actually fire a shot at the pastor.  Just the threat of a shot causes most pastors to head for the high grass.  “C’mon, pastor, draw!”  But most pastors aren’t trained to shoot, especially at church leaders.  The gunslinger knows this and figures that even if the pastor tries to shoot, he’ll fire blanks – or wing the associate pastor.

Greenfield then asks the question that I’ve often wondered about.  Maybe you have, too.  “Now why would a handful of malcontents, led by a pathological antagonist, be able to enlist followers in a crusade based on a combination of falsehoods and half-truths?”  In other words, how does the gunslinger enlist bobbleheads to his cause?

If you have some ideas, I’d love to hear them.  I will share my own ideas next time.

Read Full Post »

We were very good friends.

We met every Thursday for breakfast.  We’d tell each other about our weeks, especially about the challenges we faced in our jobs.  We shared our private pains and special joys with one another.

Nothing could harm our friendship.  After all, we were both pastors.

My friend was the associate pastor at his church, filling in while the senior pastor was in the hospital for months.  While he had ideas for his church, he didn’t feel right implementing them while his pastor – and supervisor – was incapacitated.  The months dragged on, but the senior pastor just wasn’t given the green light to return.  The church got into dire straits financially and began to spiral downward.  Some of the governing leaders in my friend’s church wanted him to ignore the pastor’s plight and lead the church ahead, but my friend felt that was a breach of ethics.

A tough, tough situation.

I was pastoring my first church a few miles away, and it was slow going.  I was under thirty, most of the people in the church were over sixty, and there were few people in-between.  I was reaching mostly people my age, and when my generation gained as many people as the over sixty group, power struggles began to emerge.  Since the church had booted their previous pastor, I thought I might be next.

Then one day, my friend called to tell me that a leader from his church proposed that our two churches merge.  There were about 80 people in my friend’s church and about 50 in ours.  Their building was paid for while we met in a school multi-purpose room that was scheduled to be bulldozed down by the school district.  We needed a building.  They needed more people and money.

Merger talks began.

Then the senior pastor from my friend’s church suddenly got well enough to attend a few merger meetings.  Somewhere along the line, he just disappeared.

While the boards from the two churches began merger negotiations, my friend and I continued to share how we felt about everything.  We both agreed that we would look for pastoral positions outside of the proposed merged church.  Neither one of us really wanted to pastor it.  I had read that in many cases, merger math is 1+1=1.  In other words, if you put a church of 80 and a church of 50 together, when the dust settles, you’ll have a church not of 130 but of 80.

So my friend began looking around, and a church in the Northwest expressed interest in having him as pastor.  I too began looking around, but the right situation didn’t open up for me.  I did not want to be the pastor of the new merged church.  I wanted to go elsewhere.

The board from our church gave the board from the other church one condition for merging: I had to become the new senior pastor.  The board from my friend’s church evidently wanted me to be the pastor as well – but I didn’t want the job.

My friend accepted the call to the Northwest church, and I was glad for him.  I still hoped I could find another ministry somewhere else.  But in the end, I didn’t.  On October 2 – the deadline set by the new board – I signed an agreement that made me the senior pastor of the new church.

My friend was convinced that “the fix was in.”  He believed that since he found another ministry, I should have done the same.  And I tried.  I really did.

He never spoke to me again.

I don’t think I’ve ever publicly told this story before even though it happened 28 years ago.  Why not?  Because I lost a friend – a good one – and for a long time, just thinking about it caused me great pain.

And I’m sure it caused my friend pain as well.  It’s hard to lose a close friend like that, no matter what you do for a living.

But how can two pastors – of all people – part ways like that?

There’s a story in Acts that many of us have read.  Paul took Barnabas on his first missionary journey, and they also took along Barnabas’ cousin John Mark (author of Mark’s Gospel).  During that initial adventure, John Mark left the two missionaries and returned to Jerusalem.  When the duo planned their second journey, Barnabas wanted to take along John Mark again, but Paul refused, believing that John Mark would probably desert them again.  Barnabas wanted to give his cousin a second chance and was willing to vouch for him.  Paul was the task-oriented leader, Barnabas the people-centered encourager.

Dr. Luke writes in Acts 15:39, “They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company.”

How could Paul – writer of half the New Testament, church planter deluxe, the chief proponent of divine reconciliation – sever a friendship with his mentor and colleague?  Shouldn’t they have hung around and tried to settle their differences before doing the Lord’s work?

When Paul returned to the churches he had planted on his first journey, some of the believers undoubtedly asked, “Hey, Paul, where’s your companion Barnabas?”  I doubt if Paul wanted to explain why his friend didn’t come on the trip.  Barnabas probably received similar queries anyplace they knew Paul.

Later in Paul’s ministry, he had positive words for both Barnabas and John Mark, although the latter doesn’t appear until 2 Timothy 4, the last chapter Paul ever wrote.  But thank God, everybody reconciled in the end.  Yet had Paul or Barnabas died first, they might have never have worked things out.

It’s ironic, but church ministry causes pastors to both make and lose friends.  Pastors make friends primarily with those with whom they serve: staff members, board members, key leaders, and ministry team leaders.  Friendships are forged as believers march together toward a common vision.  During such times, it’s natural to think, “We will always be friends.”

But sometimes disagreements surface between the pastor and a leader.  Sometimes the pastor feels he has to talk to a leader about their ministry and that leader becomes upset.  Sometimes the pastor believes he has to intervene in a leader’s life because he sees self-destructive tendencies.  There are even times when a pastor notices that a ministry is repelling people rather than attracting them and he feels the need to intervene.

When a pastor takes any of these actions, he risks his friendship with that leader.  Why?  Because he has to balance that friendship against Christ’s command to make disciples.

I’m writing about this because when a pastor is forcibly terminated, he isn’t sure he has any friends left in a church.  He knows the governing leaders will put their own spin on his departure and that he may end up being portrayed as someone who is incompetent or unspiritual or even evil.  He then has no idea who or how many people will end up believing what is said about him.  Should he try and approach friends in the church, he may be rebuffed or even ostracized.  The only way he really knows those friendships are intact is if his friends contact him and tell him that their friendship is still “on.”

I know about the loss of such friendships firsthand.  During my last church ministry, I lost some good friends, most of them male.  They chose to walk away for reasons of their own.  While I’ve come to accept what they did, the severance of our friendships hurt a lot.  On the whole, women were much more faithful and understanding.  This parallels the sufferings of Jesus when His male disciples fled but His female friends stayed by the cross and tomb.

Being the pastor of a church is a tough job – and it’s getting tougher.  People all come to church with their own expectations and impose them on the pastor, who can’t possibly meet each one.  For this reason, your pastor needs your prayers, encouragement, and support.

And he also needs friends who – come what may – will stand by him, and stand strong with him, and see him for who he really is: a deeply flawed person called to advance the kingdom of God.

I recently had lunch with a man who has remained loyal to his senior pastor for forty years.  Years ago, this man was the only staff member to stand up for his pastor when the rest of the staff banded together to get rid of him.  That pastor and his staff member have provided leadership to their church which now impacts more than 15,000 people every weekend.  Imagine what might have happened had that staff member not stood with his pastor.

Jesus told His disciples in the Upper Room, “You are those who have stood by me in my trials” (Luke 22:28).  It meant the world to Jesus that in His hour of need, eleven of His twelve disciples still considered Him their friend.

Romans 12:18 says, “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.”

Even your pastor.

Read Full Post »

I’m ten years old and playing baseball with friends at my school on a Saturday.  The field is muddy because of rain, better conditions for football than baseball.  There’s a collision at home plate involving a friend and me.  He comes up swinging.  So do I.  We each land a few blows on the other’s body.  We’re each covered in mud.  Game over.  Score tied 10-10.

My friends are all surprised that I got in a fight: the pastor’s kid.  As we both walk home, my slop-covered friend and I are yelling things at each other.  Crazy things, hurtful things, things we felt for a moment but later denied we really meant.

I valued my friends – all of them, even the guy I collided with.  Sometime later, we met and made up.  It’s funny – we weren’t related, but we both had the same last name.

I abhor conflict.  Most of us do.  As the above story indicates, too many times in our lives, conflict results in emotional damage, verbal volleys, physical pain, and relational distancing.

Why does conflict scare us so much – especially Christians?

For starters, conflict scares us because it’s unpredictable.  Let’s say I have two co-workers who constantly make cutting remarks to me.  I finally work up the courage to confront each person in private.  The first individual quickly admits his wrongdoing and apologizes.  The second person accuses me of “being soft” and “not being adult enough to take it.”  I’ve reconciled with the first co-worker – but now I’m even more distant from the second one.

While I feel I did the right things, I didn’t necessarily obtain the right results.  There is no one-size-fits-all way of handling conflict because it always involves more than one person.

After more than 35 years in church ministry, I don’t miss confrontations at all.  I’d talk to one staff member about an issue, and he’d rebel on me.  I’d talk to another, and she’d fully understand and cooperate.  Mark Twain said he could live a month on one good compliment.  One bad confrontation can ruin an entire month as well.

Conflict scares us because we don’t know how others will react to it.  But …

Second, conflict scares us because we’re afraid of ourselves.  Most of the time, I’m a pretty mild-mannered person.  I know myself well.  Give me nine scenarios involving conflict, and I can predict with accuracy how I’ll handle each one.

But put me behind the wheel of a car, and let another driver nearly run me off the road, and I can become a different person.  (When my kids were teenagers, they used to chide me for the way I reacted to stupid drivers.  When they began driving, they changed their tune.  There are a lot of dangerous drivers out there!  Of course, I’m not one of them.)

If a car approaches me from the rear and tries to run me off the road … if a driver cuts in front of me with no warning … if a vehicle plows through a stop sign without ever applying the brakes … I don’t know what to do with how I feel.  The other driver has initiated conflict with me (not that’s it’s personal) but then speeds away – and even if I tried to follow the car, how would I communicate with the perpetrator?  (I once knew a high school girl who made little signs and would show them to other drivers when the youth went on missions trips.  Is that the answer?)

My point?  When people threaten my life (and my car with 213K miles on it) I’m anything but a happy camper.  In fact, sometimes my reactions scare myself!  (Am I the only one who feels this way?)  While I’ve learned better how to handle these situations over the years (“Lord, send a CHP officer their way”), I’m still amazed at the depths of fear and rage that can reside even inside a present Christian and former pastor.

Many of us instinctively know that we do not handle conflict well.  Paul wrote about his own “conflict on the outside, fears within” (11 Corinthians 7:5).  Over time, we have to learn how to handle conflict better.

Third, conflict scares us because we avoid it so much.  If someone hurts me with words, I resolve not to say a thing.  If a co-worker ignores me, I decide not to do anything to reconcile.  If a pastor says something really stupid from the pulpit, I choose not to challenge him.

But when we go through life practicing conflict avoidance, we never get better at handling conflict.  Because even when we try and dodge it, it still has a way of finding us.  The way to take the fear out of conflict is to practice getting better at it.

On the Myers-Briggs test, my wife and I are exact opposites.  For example, I’m a thinker, she’s a feeler.  She’s intuitive, I need data.  For years in our marriage, when we fought (and I use that word deliberately), we both learned a little more about the other during our post-combat wrap-up.  Instead of assuming that my conflict style was correct, I’d ask my wife, “How could I have handled that situation better?  How would you like me to talk to you about that issue in the future?”  She would tell me how to approach her and I’d try and do that when we had our next conflict.  (Ten years later.)

You can read all the books you want on conflict (and I’ve read scores).  You can take all the seminars available.  You can even write out all the verses applying to conflict in the NT (as I’ve done).  But the best way to become fearless about conflict is to practice getting better at it rather than running away from it.  View every conflict situation as a learning experience.

Finally, conflict scares us because the stakes are high when it gets out of control.  When conflict goes south in the Middle East, innocent people die.  When conflict goes poorly at work, people lose their jobs.  When conflict goes badly at church, pastors quit, staff are fired, and people leave in droves.  A conflict badly handled can negatively impact our lives for a long, long time – and we instinctively know this.

This is why it’s helpful to know the level of a conflict when we’re going through one.  Speed Leas, my number one go-to conflict expert, believes that there are five levels of conflict.  The lower the level, the better chance we can resolve the issue ourselves.  The higher the level, the more essential it is that we obtain outside expertise.  Leas says that:

Level 1 involves predicaments.  Everyone wants to solve the problem and go for a win-win.

Level 2 involves disagreements.  We look for a tradeoff and want to come out looking good.

Level 3 involves a contest.  We want to win and get out our way.  We form coalitions and scapegoat people.

Level 4 involves fight/flight.  We either withdraw or want the other party to withdraw.  We’ve become enemies.

Level 5 involves punishing people.  We try and destroy people’s careers and reputations.

Most of us handle Level 1 conflicts nearly every day.  We’re not as proficient at Level 2, and it’s getting away from us at Level 3.  We’re so out of our league at Levels 4 and 5 that if a conflict gets to this point, we either fight and get bloodied or run far away.

When matters get to Levels 4 and 5, we need to call for outside professional help, like a consultant or a mediator, or we can destroy individuals, families, and organizations.

I’ll write more about Leas’ levels later, but for now, I encourage you to try and keep conflicts at the lowest level possible.  If we can become experts at handling matters at Levels 1 and 2, then hopefully we’ll rarely if ever have to deal with conflict at Levels 4 and 5.

My big concern is for the way Christians handle (or don’t handle) major conflicts, especially as they relate to the pastor.  While pastors can certainly learn better ways of dealing with conflict, when a conflict is about the pastor himself, he almost always has to step to the sidelines and let others manage things.  If those others are prepared, a church can survive and even thrive in such an environment.  If the leaders aren’t ready – and most aren’t – conflict can have disastrous results.

If a church had a major conflict every week, its people would eventually learn how to resolve issues from a biblical perspective or the church would collapse.  But when a major conflict only occurs once every five or ten years, then people either lack the skills to deal with the issues or forget whatever skills they may have learned.  (This is not a justification for creating more conflicts!)  I’d like to share some ideas with you in the future on how we might do a better job in this area.

One of my goals with Restoring Kingdom Builders is to “teach Christians ways to manage these conflicts biblically,” especially issues surrounding the involuntarily termination of pastors and staff members.  I receive statistics on a daily basis as to how many people are viewing the blog, as well as the terms that people are inserting into their search engines to find me.  One of the most common phrases is “how to terminate a pastor.”  I don’t know if pastors, board members, or lay people are ending up here (probably a combination of all three), but I’m gratified to know that God is using me in some way to help others.  There is a dearth of materials and teaching in this area in the Christian community.

Please join me in praying that God will use our new ministry to bring biblical and healing solutions to the hundreds of American churches every month that are considering forcibly removing their pastor.

May you become so proficient at conflict management that the Lord uses you to bring reconciliation to others!

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »