Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Conflict with Church Antagonists’ Category

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 »

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 »

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 »

Book Excerpt: What Happens to Clergy Killers? Part 1

Posted in Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories, tagged , , on July 30, 2012| 9 Comments »

It’s been a while since I’ve presented an excerpt to my upcoming book, which should be published in September or October.  The book is a real-life story about a group of people who joined forces to force a pastor to resign … using any and all means at their disposal.

The last chapter of the book presents FAQs on this kind of conflict.  In most churches, there are churchgoers who know which perpetrators have launched an attack on their pastor … but to keep their friendship, they usually remain silent.

I’ll divide this question into two parts.  Here’s the first part:

What usually happens to the perpetrators?

Realistically?  Nothing.  Biblically, however, perpetrators must be corrected before they strike again. This can be done by staff members, the governing board, or deputized members.  However, if a transitional/interim pastor is hired after the pastor’s departure, he may have to oversee this thankless task.  (Some transitional pastors are trained to deal with powerbrokers and request absolute authority before being hired.)  Unrepentant individuals who target their pastor sense they are immune from correction and feel free to use the same template with the next pastor.  However, in such situations:

Peace mongering is common. With tranquility and stability reigning as premium values, congregational leaders adapt to their most recalcitrant and immature people, allowing them to use threats and tantrums as levers of influence. Malcontents’ complaints never seem to cease. Unwilling to confront the constant critic, leaders set the table for the unhappy souls to have a movable feast of anxiety.  By appeasing rather than opposing, leaders give control to reactive forces.  Feed them once and leaders can be sure they will be back for more.[i]

As far as I know, no one took action against any non-board perpetrators in our situation.  My counsel to any successor is, “Watch your back.  They know the template.”  Trull and Carter note:

Generally speaking, an incoming minister does not need to fear those who speak well of the predecessor. Those who loved, appreciated, respected, and supported the former minister will likely do the same with the new minister.  The church member of whom the minister should be wary is the one who speaks ill of the previous minister. Those who criticize, find fault with, and express disappointment in the former minister will probably react to the new minister in the same way over time.[ii]

I have to confess, this really bothers me.  For decades, pastors have been told that whenever there’s a major conflict in a church they’re leading, they need to resign to keep the church intact. But why should the pastor leave while those who initiated the conflict are permitted to stay?  I suppose it’s easier to remove one person than many.  And spiritually-speaking, the shepherd lays down his life for the sheep, just as Jesus did (John 10:14-15).  But why don’t God’s people band together and ask the perpetrators to leave as well?  If the pastor can find another church, they can find another church – and it’s much easier for them than for him. I saw the highlights of a basketball game in which both players involved in a fight were instantly removed from the game.  Why doesn’t this happen in churches?  Aren’t we rewarding people for their divisiveness without expecting them to change?

If I was a layman and my pastor was pushed out by non-board antagonists, I’d approach a board member and say, “If you confront those who perpetrated this conflict, I will stay in this church.  But if you don’t deal with them, I will leave and find a church where they take Scripture seriously. And if anybody asks why I left, I will feel obligated to tell them.” While this may sound harsh, how can church leaders take no action against those who have driven out their minister?  Steinke writes:

In congregations, boundary violators too often are given a long rope because others refuse to confront the trespassers. When boundaries are inappropriately crossed and people are harmed, no one wants to name the violation.  It’s as if the disturbance of the group’s serenity is a greater offense than the viral-like behavior.  Boundary violators go unattended and suffer no consequences . . . . The lack of attention only enables the repetition of the invasive behavior.[iii]

Your thoughts?

        [i] Steinke, Congregational Leadership in Anxious Times, 102.

        [ii] Trull and Carter, Ministerial Ethics, 129.

        [iii] Steinke, Congregational Leadership in Anxious Times, 85.

Read Full Post »

Facing Down Church Bullies

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Jim's Ten Favorite Articles, Please Comment!, tagged , , , on June 22, 2012| 2 Comments »

Bullying has become a huge problem in our country.

Parents bully children.  Brothers bully sisters.  Bosses bully employees.  Teachers bully students … and students bully teachers.

Have you seen the video of the middle schoolers in New York state who bullied a 68-year-old bus monitor as she rode home on the school bus?  Disgraceful.

Churches have bullies, too.  And there’s a sense in which church bullies are the worst of all because we don’t expect that kind of behavior in church.

How can one detect a church bully?

A bully demeans others by picking on weaknesses and calling people names and making demands.  If you don’t do what a bully wants, he or she threatens to hurt you in some fashion.

I once knew a bully who tried to intimidate me in board meetings.  He went right after me every chance he could.  He wanted power and sensed that I was slowly taking it from him.  Fortunately, I didn’t have to take him on because others did that for me … but it could have gotten nasty.

Church bullies often get their way because they sense that no one has the guts to take them on.  They know that Christians value “being nice” and that if they aren’t nice, they can get their way more often.

Believe me, it works.

This is why Christians – especially leaders – have to learn to face down the bullies.

It’s biblical.

In 3 John 9-10, John the apostle 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 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.”

Diotrephes was a church bully.

He “loves to be first” … he wanted to control the decision making.

He “will have nothing to do with us” … he didn’t recognize John’s authority as an apostle.

He was guilty of “gossiping maliciously about us” … attacking John verbally, probably disparaging his apostolic credentials.

He “refuses to welcome the brothers” … visiting leaders and teachers sent by John.

He “stops those who want to do so” and “puts them out of the church” … excommunicating John’s representatives.

Wow!  This guy really had issues.

Diotrephes’ misbehavior was threatening the very existence of that church.  Can you imagine challenging the authority of John, the Apostle of Love?

How did this Apostle of Love propose to deal with this church bully?

“So if I come, I will call attention to what he is doing …”

John was going to face him down … maybe with the help of church leaders, or the congregation itself … but John was going to meet Diotrephes at high noon.

He was going to confront him … maybe publicly, maybe privately … but he was going to stop the bullying.

John may have been hoping that this warning would cause Diotrepehes to run for the hills.  If we had 4 John, maybe we’d find out what happened.  (We’ll have to wait for heaven for the thrilling conclusion.)

Sometimes a pastor has to face down a bully.

I once served in a church where an ex-policeman was griping about everything.  He griped about the music.  He griped about the youth.  He griped about the neighbors.

Part of me felt sorry for him because he was no longer a policeman … but he had morphed into the church police.

Because nobody dealt with him, he became bolder and bolder with his griping.  This went on for several years.

Finally, a new pastor came, and he tried to work with this man, but nothing worked … and he couldn’t tolerate the behavior any longer.

He finally ordered the man to leave the church … and he left.

He faced down the church bully … and the church was better off for it.

Last year, I had breakfast with an ex-pastor who told me what happened at his former church.

There were people in the church who were terrorizing the pastor, and the church board didn’t know what to do to stop things.

Wisely, the pastor hired a consultant, who met with the board and told them what to do:

You have to go and face down the bullies.

The board members just looked at each other.  The bullies were their friends.

The consultant barked, “Now!”

The board members got in their cars and did what they should have done months before.

Stephen Brown is one of my favorite Christian communicators.  He’s half-crazy, but that just adds to his appeal in my book.

Anyway, in his classic book No More Mr. Nice Guy!, he tells a story about a pastor who was being bullied by a parishoner … and the pastor couldn’t take it anymore.  The man gave a large amount of money to the church and had many relatives in positions of leadership.  Brown’s friend believed that he would divide the church if he confronted him.  Brown told his pastor friend:

“Invite this man to your study and say, ‘I have had it up to my ears with you.  Before this meeting is over, one of us is going to resign.’  Then tell him all the things he has been doing to hurt the church.  Tell him, ‘This is not your church or my church, this is God’s church, and He will not allow you to act in this manner anymore.’  Then tell him that you are God’s agent to make sure that he doesn’t.”

In some cases, this tactic might backfire.  In the case of Brown’s friend, it worked.  His pastor friend called two days later and said:

“Steve, you wouldn’t believe what happened.  The church member who has been giving the church all the trouble asked if I would forgive him.  He said that he knew he had a problem and asked for my help.  Not only that, he said that if I would give him another chance he would be different.  Not only that, his two brothers came in and thanked me for what I did, and said that I was the first pastor in twenty years who had had the courage to do what needed doing.”

I can’t guarantee this tactic will work in every case, but if you’ve tried everything else, it’s certainly worth a try.

Because of church bullies, I’ve endured sleepless nights … worried myself sick … threatened to quit church ministry … and turned myself into an emotional wreck, all because nobody – including me – would face down the bullies.

It’s time we started doing just that.

Go … now!

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 »

Blaming Others for My Mistakes

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Please Comment!, tagged , , on June 4, 2012| 4 Comments »

Most mornings, while working out on my treadmill, I run to classic rock while watching ESPN.

This morning, I saw highlights from last night’s Celtics-Heat playoff game.

Paul Pierce of the Celtics bulldozed over another player during overtime and was called for a foul … and fouled out of the game.

But did he do it?  According to Pierce’s body language, he did NOTHING wrong and shouldn’t have been called for any foul.

Then LeBron James backed into a defender on the other side of the court and both of them fell down.  When James was called for the foul – and he too fouled out – he couldn’t believe it.

It was the defender’s fault … or the ref’s fault … or the fault of Boston Garden (which seems to make “homers” out of refs) … or the fault of those little green leprechauns that inhabit the Garden.

But LeBron James’ fault?  No way.

There was a show on TV when I was a kid called Romper Room.  Believe it or not, I had the show’s theme song on record.  The chorus went like this:

I always do what’s right

I never do anything wrong

I’m a Romper Room do bee

A do bee all day long

Seems to me the first two lines of that song perfectly encapsulate the attitudes of millions of people in our country … especially the second line: “I never do anything wrong.”

A Christian counselor friend of mine once told me that we’re raising a generation of sociopaths.  The latest estimates are that 4% of the population has anti-social personality disorder (the new term for sociopathy), characterized by a complete lack of conscience.

As Dr. Archibald Hart told me after class one day, the sociopath feels no anxiety before doing wrong and feels no guilt afterward.  This person lacks a moral core.  While the sociopath can be outwardly charming, he or she is inwardly manipulative.

And what does this person want more than anything else in life?

To win.

The sociopath will do anything to win.

They choose targets … people who threaten them or who they think are weak … and then bully them or abuse them or lie to them just to watch them squirm.

You’ll find these people running countries … and supervising employees at work … and in families … and in politics … and even in your neighborhood.  (Dr. Martha Stout’s excellent book The Sociopath Next Door asks this question on its cover: Who is the devil you know?)

Although a layman cannot properly diagnose someone as a sociopath – it takes a well-trained psychologist to do so – we can at least suspect someone of having the condition if they demonstrate certain symptoms.

The reason I bring this up is that the last place we’d expect to find a sociopath is in a Christian church.  After all, isn’t the confession of sin a requirement for both conversion and spiritual growth?

As 1 John 1:8 puts it, “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”  Verse 10 goes on to say, “If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.”

And yet sociopaths slip into church leadership … and onto church staffs … and behind church pulpits … fooling EVERYBODY along the way.

I’ve worked with a handful of church leaders that I suspected fit this description.

They were charismatic individuals.

They ignored authority.

They made the same mistakes over and over again … and didn’t learn anything from them.  (One leader kept getting traffic tickets, and instead of changing his behavior, he’d fight the tickets in court … and win.)

They put on a facade of charm for their adoring public … while engaging in sabotage behind the scenes.  (Whenever I had to correct their behavior, they would tell their fans, who would become upset with me.)

But what I’m most concerned about isn’t the presence of sociopaths in churches.

I’m most concerned about the fact that we’re raising sociopaths in Christian homes.

Let me give you an example.

Imagine that you have a daughter named Jane, who is in the fourth grade.

One day, Jane’s teacher calls you at work and tells you that Jane’s grades are poor and that she’s been misbehaving in class.  The teacher wants to meet with you … right away.

So you meet with Jane’s teacher, who shows you copies of Jane’s incomplete and poorly done assignments … and shows you indisputable proof via surveillance that Jane’s behavior in class is out of control.

Once upon a time, you and Jane’s teacher would collaborate together and come up with a plan for dealing with Jane’s behavior.  Call it a PTA … a parent teacher alliance.  With a strong alliance between school and home, Jane would be forced to change her behavior.

But what happens in our day?  You become incensed because Jane’s teacher doesn’t view your daughter as being perfect … so you blame Jane’s teacher for Jane’s misbehavior … as well as the school … and the curriculum … and Jane’s classmates … as well as President Bush.  (Can you believe that some people are still blaming him for problems in our country, even though he hasn’t been president for almost four years?)

Instead of forming a PTA, you have just formed a PCA (parent-child alliance) with your daughter and against her teacher … and by extension, every other authority that will come into her life.

And what will happen to Jane?  She may grow intellectually … and vocationally … but she won’t be able to grow emotionally or spiritually.

Why not?

Because you, as her parent, will not let her learn from her mistakes.

Could this be a reason why so many college graduates are living at home with their parents?  Just asking.

I’ll have more to say on this matter next time …

I’d love to hear your thoughts on this matter.

Read Full Post »

The Folly of Being Too Nice

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Current Church Issues, Fighting Evil on May 11, 2012| Leave a Comment »

Have you ever known someone who was just too nice?

Many years ago, my wife and I went on a long road trip with another married couple.  (The husband and I had become good friends.)  When you’re living with someone 24/7 – as TV’s reality shows reveal – you begin to see who people really are.  While we can be on our best behavior during programmed encounters – like at work or in social situations – people tend to demonstrate their true character when they’re under stress.

And nothing unveils character like a road trip.

During the trip, my wife and I disagreed with the other couple over several things.  For example, I wanted to attend church on Sunday morning, while they wanted to plow on and make time toward our ultimate destination.  In addition, the other wife continually corrected things that my wife and I said, making us gradually withdraw from conversation.

But my friend, who drove during much of the trip, never displayed any negative emotions.  He didn’t show any anger, or irritation, or regret.  In fact, he was close to being perfect in the way he behaved on that trip.

While he wasn’t perfect, he had mastered the skill of being nice.

And sometimes, being too nice is foolish.

In Mark Galli’s recent book, Jesus: Mean and Wild, the author guides the reader on a journey of the Gospel of Mark and shows us the real Jesus.

In his chapter “It’s Not Nice to be Nice,” Galli illustrates incidents of non-niceness in Jesus’ life and then asks this question: “If Jesus was merely loving, compassionate, and kind – if Jesus was only nice – why did both Jews and Romans feel compelled to murder him?”

Good question.

Galli goes on to write, “Christians are often fascinated with the Religion of Niceness because it appears to champion biblical virtues such as humility, forgiveness, and mercy.  This religion so permeates our consciousness that when we hear someone quote the second Great Commandment, the epitome of Christian ethics, we tend to hear: ‘Be nice to your neighbor, as you would have your neighbor be nice to you.'”

In other words, we’ve substituted being nice for being loving … but the two are not the same.

Galli goes on to indict us for the way we use niceness to avoid conflict:

“Thus we learn not to make a fuss in school, at work, in life.  We quickly discover that people respond positively to us when we are nice to them and negatively when we aren’t.  Since it feels good to be liked, we get addicted to being nice.  And this addiction skews our reasoning.”

Galli then tells about an Episcopalian church that he once attended.  Even though the church at the national level was debating the issue of homosexuality, Galli’s church chose to avoid discussing the issue altogether.  He says that their unspoken motto was, “Let’s just agree to disagree and go about our life together.”

But the issue wouldn’t go away, as most controversial issues don’t.  When the denomination installed a noncelibate homosexual as a bishop in 2003, Galli’s church was forced to discuss the issue of homosexuality.  He writes:

“We were shocked to discover that we had two different congregations – with radically different assumptions about the most basic things.  Since we had no track record of speaking the truth in love to one another, we found ourselves shouting at each other.  It was, to say the least, extremely painful, and it wasn’t long before the church divided.”

And then his next paragraph underscores why Christian leaders need to be more open in discussing areas of conflict in churches rather than just “sweep them under the rug”:

“Better to have addressed these issues years earlier in a frank and charitable manner – even though raising such issues would have broken the code of Episcopal decorum.  An earlier conversation would have left some feeling alienated, and some would have left.  But that would have been preferable to the congregation literally splitting in two later on.”

In other words, our Christian niceness makes us avoid conflict … which leads to even greater conflict later on.

For those of us who have been taught that “being nice” is the same as “being loving,” let me quote Galli one more time:

“Jesus was a sharp judge of character, and he employed anger even when he was aware it wasn’t going to do any good.  Why?  Because sometimes the most honest and truthful response to foolishness or evil is anger.  Jesus couldn’t have integrity if he was indifferent.  The person who is always nice, always decorous, always even-keeled is likely a person who ultimately does not care about what God cares about.”

Wow.

God doesn’t call His people to be uncivil, or rude, or obnoxious.  We don’t emulate or honor Jesus that way.  But He does call us to address certain issues head-on, with strength and assertiveness.

When our son was small, our family lived on a semi-busy residential street.  My wife and I made it clear that he was not to go into the street for any reason.

One Saturday morning, he was playing with a ball, and it went out into the street, and he tried to chase it down … and almost got hit by a car.

My wife and I responded with anger and grounded our son for the day.  We made it clear to him that his disobedience could have cost him his life.  He had to stay in his room for hours and think about his folly.

We wanted our disciplinary measure to sting.

We let him out at dinner time and reiterated to him how much we loved him and why we confined him for the day.

We were’t very nice, but we were extremely loving.

And we were loving because we cared about him and his future enough to get upset and do something about it.

Where in your life are you avoiding conflict?

With whom are you dodging that tough conversation?

It’s all right to be nice in the way that you approach conflict.

Just make sure that being nice isn’t your goal in life.

And that being loving is.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »