Conflict with Church Antagonists | Restoring Kingdom Builders

Archive for the ‘Conflict with Church Antagonists’ Category

Stopping Slander in Our Churches

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged attacks on pastor, gossip against pastors, pastoral termination, slander against pastors on March 3, 2015| 4 Comments »

There is a megachurch in the United States that hires dozens of staff members all the time … and fires some as well.

According to one of the church’s former senior pastors, whenever a staff member is dismissed, the same reason is privately given as to why that person left:

“They had an affair.”

If a staff member leaves due to burnout … or ineffectiveness … or a poor relationship with his supervisor … the response is always the same.

Why would a church do this?

It’s simple: in evangelical circles, if a pastor/staff member has had an affair, there is a consensus that they did a bad thing … they need to leave the church … and people stop asking questions about why that individual left.

But it’s clearly wrong to do this … and sinful … and falls under the category of lying.

In addition, accusing someone of adultery could destroy their reputation … their career … and their marriage.

I suppose that those who quietly announce that the departing staffer had an affair figure that their concise explanation will never reach the ears of the departing staff member, and even if it does, nobody will be able to trace back the origin of the charge.

But that’s what is troubling me right now: that lying sometimes goes on in the upper echelons of Christian churches … especially when it comes to the departure of pastors and staff.

Back in 1995, Bill and Lynne Hybels wrote a book called Rediscovering Church. At the time, Pastor Bill was the senior pastor of the largest church in America, Willow Creek Community, in South Barrington, Illinois.

Lynne describes a tense time early in the church’s history. A key member of the church staff was involved in sinful misconduct. The elders confronted the staff member, hoping he would repent, but he resigned instead.

Lynne writes: “The following morning an elder announced the staff member’s resignation, citing ‘differing philosophies of ministry,’ and wished him well in his new endeavors. The elders assumed the congregation would accept the partial explanation given, but they clearly misjudged. By the end of the service, the core members of the church were in an uproar. ‘Give us the truth! Tell us what’s really going on!'”

Lynne continues: “The elders tried to explain in positive terms the philosophical and personality issues that necessitated a ‘a parting of the ways.’ But in order to protect the privacy of the resigned staff member, they hid the real issue behind an opaque screen of secrecy. When people questioned the former staff member, he too avoided a straight answer.”

Without being given enough information to process, many churchgoers speculated that Pastor Bill was seeking more power and decided to eliminate the competition … and that the elders were his “naïve accomplices.”

With some other issues that were going on at the time, the church experienced a major train wreck, and scores of people left the church … just when the church was getting to ready to start a building program.

I don’t think the elders needed to share all the bloody details of why that staff member resigned. After all, as 1 Peter 4:8 states, “… love covers a multitude of sins.”

But sometimes the reasons given as to why a pastor has left a church aren’t intended to “cover the sins” of the person departing.

They’re designed to cover the sins of the leaders who bullied that pastor and bungled his exodus.

This lying trend inside churches makes me ashamed … but I know why many leaders do it.

Several weeks ago, I heard a former presidential advisor in the United States say that lying in the interests of national security is justified.

In the same way, many pastors … staff members … and board members believe that lying inside a church is justified if it’s in the name of church security.

Their reasoning: if they tell the truth about why they fired a pastor or staff member, that could put the whole church in jeopardy.

So to protect the survival of the institution … to keep people attending and serving … and especially to keep people donating:

*They concoct a story that’s untrue.

*They use overly broad and deceptive terms like “philosophical differences” to explain the departure.

*They privately blame the pastor or staff member for everything … without the accused knowing anything about it.

*They conceal their role in the dismissal even if they’re guilty of betrayal … overreacting … creating pretexts … and ignoring Scripture and church bylaws.

*They continue to tell untruths until people stop protesting the departure of the pastor or staff member in question.

The lies are intended to work for a short time. As the truth eventually comes out … and it always does … people become less emotional about the pastor’s departure, they choose not to challenge anybody over the spin … and then they forget about it.

But slander … if it’s really slander … always results in the destruction of a person’s peace … family … reputation … or career.

And that’s not what the gospel or Christ’s church are all about.

Let me share with you five ways we can stop the slander that happens in Christian churches concerning terminated pastors:

First, remain skeptical about the public version of why the pastor left.

I once had a friend who was on the board of a prominent church. He was a huge supporter of the pastor. The church was growing like crazy.

One night, my friend couldn’t attend a board meeting, and because he was absent, the board took the opportunity to force the pastor to resign.

Although my friend wasn’t present, he obtained a copy of the board minutes from that night, and sent them to me for my counsel.

In the minutes, the board agreed together to announce the pastor’s resignation the following Sunday morning … and to lie about it to the congregation.

I was appalled … and so were others. In fact, one person ended up suing the church to find out the truth.

I refuse to follow leaders who lie in private or in public, and you shouldn’t either.

If someone lies to you once … and they get away with it … you can guarantee they will lie to you again and again.

This is especially true of politicians who lie with impunity in hopes that the public will forget their deceptions over time.

But lying happens at times inside Christian churches as well.

If you’re in a church, and a staff member or elder announces that your pastor has left, I wouldn’t automatically believe the public explanation. I’d proceed to the next step:

Second, contact the pastor directly and hear his side of the story.

Some pastors are prohibited from saying anything about their departure if they signed a severance agreement with the church board.

But that agreement almost never covers the pastor’s wife … the pastor’s family members and friends … and his supporters inside the congregation.

If you’re diligent, there are always ways to find out what really happened.

When I hear that a pastor or staff member is about to get the ax, I advise them to tell their side of the story to people they want to keep as friends before they sign a severance agreement.

Why?

Because after the pastor leaves, there may be a concerted effort to destroy his reputation, and in all too many cases, those friends who haven’t first heard the pastor’s side may abandon him if they pay attention to the whisperers.

Two family members told me what happened in their church. The board forced the pastor to resign, and then stood up in front of the church and warned people not to discuss his departure with the pastor … or else! (Those family members wisely left the church.)

While churchgoers don’t need to know all the gory details as to why a pastor left, they need to know enough so they can still trust the church’s leadership.

Third, correct any misinformation that you hear going around.

Those who believe the first thing they’re told about a pastor’s departure may unknowingly pass around slanderous information. Be very careful.

Yes, pastors are fallible beings, and they may be guilty of a disqualifying sin, like sexual immorality or criminal behavior. So if you hear that’s why they left the church, the information might be accurate.

But remember the story that begins this article … accusing a pastor of specific sins usually causes most people to back off from inquiries … even if the charges are false.

I believe that truth should trump unity inside a local church because unity is based on truth.

For example, let’s say that this Sunday, an announcement is made that your pastor has resigned, and you want to find out why.

So you speak to an elder … then to the pastor’s brother … and you’re convinced that church leaders pushed out the pastor in a power play.

Some people will tell you, “Let this go. Drop it! The pastor is gone. Now is the time for the church to come together and be united.”

But how can a church unite around a lie? The only way it can heal is for the people to be told the truth.

In Dennis Maynard’s book Healing for Pastors & People Following a Sheep Attack, the author writes:

“The wounded members of a congregation will share a common prescription with their wounded pastor or lay professional. They need to talk about what happened. If they remain silent their wounds will become gangrenous. Allowing the antagonists to continue to spin their story only increases their pain and anger. Their sense of justice demands that the antagonists be exposed for exactly what they did. Based on the experiences that form the foundation of these books [Maynard’s books on sheep attacks], it is highly unlikely they will be offered such an opportunity in the congregation. Yet these truth tellers need to speak. Your healing begins by doing that very thing. Follow the scriptural admonition to speak the truth in love. Hearing yourself do so will contribute to your healing.”

It may take weeks or months for the truth about the pastor’s departure to emerge, but if you’re patient, you will learn as much of the truth as you want to know.

The pastor’s severance agreement may expire when he receives his last payment from the church. Then he may be free to share his side without repercussions.

People can only cover up their sins for so long. It only takes one or two individuals to blow the lid off of a cover-up.

Fourth, pastors need to add one paragraph to their severance agreements.

In most written separation contracts, the departing individual agrees that they will not harm or sue the institution they are leaving.

But from my experience, and from the stories I hear from terminated pastors, this isn’t the problem.

The problem is that people inside the church … including church leaders at times … end up harming the departing pastor’s reputation.

Now if a pastor was truly a destructive individual, then just telling the truth about him could destroy him.

But much of the time, a pastor is innocent of wrongdoing but quietly charged with major sin anyway after he departs.

For this reason … however it’s worded … I believe that before a pastor signs a separation agreement, he should insist that a paragraph be added that says that (a) church leaders will not slander him after his departure, (b) church leaders will swiftly and forcefully correct any misstatements going around about him, and (c) church leaders will only speak of the departing pastor in a truthful manner.

I can understand why church leaders might balk at such language, but only if they plan to do the very things that paragraph prohibits.

Finally, pastors need an ethical and legal recourse if they’re slandered.

I know a pastor who was under fire but innocent of wrongdoing. He tried to stand strong against the opposition, but they began lying about him, and sadly, some people began to believe the lies.

Worn down, the pastor agreed to resign in exchange for a severance agreement, but when he left the church, there was still a cloud hanging over him.

Before he left, the pastor had commissioned a team of people to investigate the charges against him. The team ended up being composed of various church leaders. Several of them told the pastor before he left that the charges against him were baseless.

Two weeks after the pastor left, the board chairman stood in front of the church and publicly stated that an investigation had been conducted and that the pastor was innocent of any wrongdoing.

That should have put an end to the matter.

But there were still people inside the church … and on the outside … who didn’t want the pastor to be vindicated. They had invested a great deal in forcing him out of office, and if he was exonerated, they might appear guilty by default.

So after the pastor left, they engaged in a whispering campaign and accused him of all kinds of misdeeds … all of them untrue.

But their strategy paid off when many churchgoers believed their falsehoods, cut all ties to that pastor, and castigated his reputation inside the church.

That pastor would like to visit that church someday … maybe to attend a memorial service, or a worship service … but he doesn’t believe he can because of the lies told about him … lies that should have been corrected but were permitted to spread throughout the church.

That pastor has little recourse.

*He would never sue the church … or any of the individuals connected to the church … past or present.

*He would never make demands or threats of the current administration.

*He would never demand that the denomination or district that church belongs to take action.

*He would never manipulate people inside the church into refuting the charges made against him.

But the church of Jesus Christ provides no forum he can use to clear his name.

So he did the only thing he could: he told his story in the pages of a book.

And it took me three years to write it.

Read Full Post »

Slander in the Church

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged lying among Christian leaders, lying in the church, slander in the church, stopping slander in the church, tolerating lying in the church on February 27, 2015| Leave a Comment »

Many years ago, I was preparing a sermon and decided to use a story I had read to illustrate a point.

There was just one problem: the book that told the story was buried in a box inside my garage. Should I fish out the box and find the book?

I decided to tell the story from memory … and did just that the following Sunday.

Several days later, the pastor who wrote the book that was buried in my garage sent me an email. He gently chided me for getting the story partly wrong.

Evidently he had been searching for his name online, found the manuscript of my message which was posted every week on the church’s website, read what I wrote, and decided to correct me directly.

I apologized to him for not getting the story completely accurate and learned a valuable lesson: when you refer to people by name – especially Christian leaders – you better tell the truth.

Since God “does not lie” (Titus 1:2), Jesus is “the truth” (John 14:6), and Jesus told the Father “your word is truth” (John 17:17), we can conclude that truth is extremely important to the Holy Trinity … and must characterize the lives of Jesus’ followers as well.

But during times of stress in churches, truth often becomes a major casualty … and even Christian leaders have been known to lie at times.

Let me share two fictional scenarios to illustrate my thesis:

The first scenario involves Pastor Bob who is struggling to manage the behavior of his youth pastor, Larry.

Larry has started avoiding worship services, causing most young people to follow his example and not attend, either.

In addition, Larry has been skipping staff meetings, which are mandatory.

And the pastor has received reports that Larry swears on youth outings … bashes Pastor Bob verbally whenever he can … and doesn’t agree with Pastor Bob’s vision.

Pastor Bob finally confronts Larry, who promises to change but quickly reverts to his old ways.

Pastor Bob doesn’t want to fire Larry because he is adored by both the parents and the youth … but Bob also knows that Larry deserves it.

So Bob goes to the church board … describes the situation … gains board approval … calls Larry into a meeting with the board chairman present … and fires Larry on the spot.

However, Bob is petrified by the potential fallout. He’s worked hard to build the congregation and is concerned that if he tells the truth about Larry’s departure, people will blame Bob and leave the church in protest.

So Bob persuades the board to give a generous severance package to Larry as long as he keeps his mouth shut … the old “cash for silence” routine.

The following Sunday, Bob tells the congregation that Larry “is no longer our youth pastor” … but Bob avoids saying why.

However, six perceptive individuals corner Bob after the service and say, “Bob, tell us the truth … why is Larry no longer here?”

Knowing that Larry has been paid to stay quiet, Bob replies, “Well, Larry wasn’t really happy here, and some parents were upset with his performance, so Larry and I mutually agreed that he would leave. That’s really the size of it.”

Those six individuals will now get on the phone … start sending emails … and repeat Pastor Bob’s untruths all over the church.

Some of those lies will make their way back to Larry … who will become livid that Pastor Bob didn’t tell the truth that Larry was unilaterally fired.

But Larry has been squashed like a bug and has no forum to rebut Pastor Bob’s inaccuracies.

The second scenario involves Pastor Bob and the church board two years later.

Two members of the eight-person board – Marshall and Stu – have become upset with Pastor Bob. His crime?

He refused to marry each of their daughters because they weren’t marrying Christians.

Feeding off each other, and with their wives and daughters threatening not to attend church anymore, Marshall and Stu decide together that Pastor Bob has to go. But they know that the other board members don’t care about their issue.

So they spend several lunch hours trying to create charges against Pastor Bob that will sound plausible and stick.

After several weeks of comparing notes, they decide on the following charges:

*Pastor Bob is not the right man to reach a changing community.

*Pastor Bob has been in the church too long and is past the point of effectiveness.

*Pastor Bob can’t manage his family well because his youngest son was suspended for skipping school.

And just in case those allegations don’t work, they add one more they can pull out of their back pocket without needing corroboration:

*Pastor Bob has been mismanaging church funds.

Over the next few months, Marshall lobbies three board members to see things his way. Stu does the same with the other three members.

Eventually, two board members agree with Marshall, and one agrees with Stu, so the board has five votes to terminate Pastor Bob … and in the end, they vote 6-2 to fire him.

The church board is gravely concerned about the fallout after they announce Bob’s departure, so they decide to fortify their charges against him, adding several more.

They then meet with Bob … ask him to sign a separation agreement in exchange for a six-month severance package … but won’t answer one question that Bob asks:

“Why specifically am I being dismissed?”

Marshall mutters something about “it’s time for a change” and Bob walks into the night … stunned and abruptly unemployed.

After the board makes their announcement to the church, the spin begins: Bob could no longer manage his family … he mismanaged church funds … some people suspected him of having an affair … the staff no longer respected him … and on and on.

In fact, sometimes the board members change their story depending upon who they’re talking with at the time.

But the truth was that all of their “charges” were really pretexts because Marshall and Stu were angry that Pastor Bob hadn’t married their daughters.

Marshall and Stu knew the truth, but they didn’t dare tell the other board members or Pastor Bob. That wouldn’t have sounded “Christian.”

Wounded and depressed, Pastor Bob withdrew from public life until two months before his separation agreement was set to expire.

He started applying for open pastoral positions inside his denomination, but four months and thirty-two applications later, he had not received one positive response from any church.

Then one day, out of the blue, a friend from his former church called Bob. He told Bob that his reputation inside the church was in tatters … that it was going around that Bob’s son was on drugs, that Bob had stolen church funds, and that Bob had had an affair … none of it true.

No wonder Bob couldn’t generate any interest within his denomination!

The lies had done their work.

Believe me, what I have just written happens far more than it should inside of God-loving, Bible-believing Christian churches.

It evens happens in theological seminaries.

In the late Frank Pastore’s book Shattered, the former major league baseball pitcher for the Cincinnati Reds relates a story that still bothers me.

Frank (I spent an evening with him once) taught at my college and seminary. A group of leaders wanted to “overthrow” the school’s president.

Frank was invited to participate, but he refused, making him a “loose end” that knew too much. The result?

Frank writes, “So they put a kinder, gentler hit on me – character assassination by slander and gossip. To my face they acted as though nothing had changed. But all the while, they were destroying my reputation.”

Frank’s ministries suddenly evaporated. And then he was dismissed from the school in the middle of a semester … and his son’s scholarship was pulled.

Understandably, Frank didn’t want anything more to do with ministry or the church again for a while … although he eventually became the host of a Christian radio program that perfectly suited his talents.

But here’s what I want to know:

Why do Christian leaders who claim to know and believe the truth sometimes resort to lying?

Why do some Christians tolerate the lies without calling out the leaders?

I’ll write more about slander in the church … including ways to stop it cold … next time.

Read Full Post »

When Churchgoers Threaten to Leave

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Forgiveness and Reconciliation among Christians, Personal Stories, Please Comment!, tagged church antagonists, church members who threaten to leave, criticizing pastors, leaving a church, threatening pastors on February 25, 2015| 2 Comments »

While going through some old church files recently, I stumbled upon a folder I forgot I had.

The folder contained documentation related to a couple who had once left a church I pastored. I’ll call them Harry and Mary.

Harry came to Christ under my ministry. A while later, I married him to Mary, a long-time Christian. They attended several small groups that I led.

I even invited Harry over to watch the Super Bowl with me one year.

During premarital counseling, I discovered that Mary struggled with a particular issue. While I made suggestions on how to manage things, there didn’t appear to be a long-term solution at hand.

Then one Sunday morning, I made a strong statement from the pulpit that reflected a value I held dear. I could have said it better, but I explained it and moved on.

But I had hit a nerve with Harry and Mary. They were incensed at what I had said.

Harry and Mary were part of a group that met after the first service. When they entered the room, they immediately began criticizing me to a new couple.

That new couple never returned.

I don’t remember receiving flak from anyone else after making my statement, but Harry would not let me forget it.

He made an appointment with me in my office and wanted me to apologize for the statement that I made while preaching.

If he had said, “Jim, I appreciate your ministry. I enjoy your preaching and have learned a lot about the Bible from you. But that statement you made really stung, and here’s why,” I probably would have said, “Harry, I still believe in what I said, but I admit to you I could have said it better.”

But that’s not what Harry did. He demanded an immediate apology.

Some pastors would have apologized on the spot. Others would have stood their ground.

I tend to come from the “stand your ground” group.

And all I could think of was, “If I apologize this time for something I said while preaching, is he going to demand more apologies in the future?”

If I apologized, I was extremely concerned about the precedent I would be sending.

So I tried to explain rather than apologize … but that wasn’t enough for Harry.

He and his wife wrote a letter to the church board. The chairman listened to the recording of my message.

The board’s conclusion: I hadn’t said anything wrong.

The board unanimously stood behind me, and Harry and Mary fired off another letter to the board, letting them know in detail why they were leaving the church.

Pastors would rather gather sheep than drive sheep away, but when sheep begin to threaten the shepherd, the shepherd must enforce boundaries.

Let me make four statements about people who threaten to leave a church:

First, making threats is a power move, not a love move.

Several years ago, I traced the English words “threat,” “threats,” and “threatening” throughout both Testaments and could not find a single instance in which those terms were used in a positive manner in Scripture.

When someone threatens us, they promise, “If you do A, I will do B” or “If you don’t do A, I will do B.”

Using a threat implies that the person making it (a) is superior to the person being threatened, and (b) views himself or herself as being indispensable.

While our world often operates by threats, that’s not the picture we receive in Scripture of how relationships operate in the body of Christ.

If I could do it all over again, I would have told Harry, “When you threaten me, I feel defensive and resistant. If you’ll calm down and rephrase how you feel, I can hear you better.”

Second, making threats damages innocent people.

I once served on a church staff and was approached by someone who told me, “If the pastor doesn’t start doing Such-and-Such, ten percent of the people in this church are going to leave.”

That wasn’t a warning … that was a threat.

Based upon our attendance at the time, ten percent equaled 25 or 30 people.

That’s a lot of attendees … a lot of volunteers … and a lot of givers. If they all left, it might take several years to replace them, and that can cause a pastor … or staffer … to panic.

My experience tells me that only a handful of those 25-30 people really felt strongly about the issue. In fact, the likelihood is that most people agreed to join the cause simply to support their friends.

Knowing what I know now, I would have told the person making the threat, “This isn’t the best way to handle this situation. Can you identify for me the two or three people who are most upset by this issue?”

If given their names, I would have said, “Chances are this is just their concern. If this is a personal matter, I encourage someone to go and speak with the pastor directly. If this is a policy matter, I encourage someone to go and speak with a board member directly. But I encourage you to stop speaking for anyone who is unwilling to go directly to the pastor or the board.”

Suggesting a wiser course of action may not always work, but it’s worth a try.

Third, making threats works all too often.

This is why people do it … at least, at church.

People would never make similar threats at work, or at a government office, but they’ll do it with God’s people. Why?

Peter Steinke writes in his book Congregational Leadership in Anxious Times that when some people use aggression and anger at church:

“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.”

Of course, that’s the problem when threats work: it’s guaranteed those same threats will be used again.

Finally, making threats should never be rewarded.

Once Harry went to power … and refused to shift into love mode … I knew what the outcome was going to be: he and his wife were going to end up leaving the church.

For a few weeks, they sapped the energy out of the congregation, the church board, and their pastor.

More than 95 percent of our congregation liked the church the way it was. People were growing spiritually and excited about our future.

But the more the board and I engaged with Harry and Mary behind closed doors, the less effective we were in ministering to the rest of the church.

Because of the energy sap, and because most people who make threats are never satisfied, I believe that most pastors and boards should handle similar situations swiftly but firmly by saying:

“We have listened to your complaints. We have made a decision, and we cannot support the way you have handled things. You have a choice: either stay at the church and support the ministry, or feel free to leave. The choice is up to you.”

Pastors should never make threats, either, and those that do should be given the opportunity to rephrase their threat. But if a pastor consistently says, “If you don’t do this my way, I will resign,” then a church board may reluctantly have to say, “Pastor, we don’t reward threats, so if that’s your final decision, we’ll accept your resignation.”

As a pastor, I hated it when people left the church, and tended to take it personally.

But sometimes, the best possible outcome is for unhappy people to walk out the door and never return … especially if they unwisely use threats.

And when people who use such tactics leave, throw a party!

I always did.

Read Full Post »

Identifying Church Powerbrokers

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged attacks on pastors, church antagonists, church bullies, defending your pastor, pastoral termination on February 18, 2015| 2 Comments »

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 »

Seven Principles for Resolving Pastor-Church Conflict

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged pastoral termination; 1 Timothy 5:19-21; correcting a pastor; conflict and the pastor on February 13, 2015| 5 Comments »

Imagine that you’re a governing board member of a medium-sized congregation.

One of your fellow board members comes to you and says, “There is a movement inside our church to get rid of our pastor. I’m on board … and I’d like you to join, too.”

This isn’t a rare occurrence inside churches. This scenario happens all the time!

The material below is applicable whenever someone in your church … a faction, a staff member, a board member, or an alliance of critics … wants to force out your pastor.

Let me suggest seven principles that every board member needs to know when some churchgoers want their pastor to leave:

Principle 1: Expect that your pastor will be attacked.

Jesus was attacked by the religious leaders of His day. Paul was attacked by heretics and church leaders alike.

So don’t be surprised when professing believers raise a clamor against your pastor. Expect it!

Pastors are often attacked when:

*They institute major change.

*They ask people to increase their giving.

*They take a stand on a controversial cultural issue.

*They try to discipline a staff member.

*They make attempts to reach the surrounding community.

*They initiate a building program.

*They preside over declining attendance.

If your pastor wasn’t attacked last year, he might be attacked this year. If he was attacked this year, he might still be attacked next year.

When your pastor is attacked, that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s done something wrong. It might well be an indication that he’s doing things exactly right!

Principle 2: Devise a biblical and just process for handling complaints against your pastor.

That process starts by reading, studying, and implementing Paul’s instructions to Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:19-21:

Do not entertain an accusation against an elder [includes “those whose work is preaching and teaching” in verse 17] unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning. I charge you, in the sight of God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, to keep these instructions without partiality, and to do nothing out of favoritism.

Before you say, “I am for or against the pastor,” it’s crucial that you take a step back and ask the other board members, “Which process will we use to evaluate these charges?”

The process must come before the product.

Paul felt so strongly about using a fair process whenever a Christian leader was attacked that he told Timothy “to keep these instructions without partiality” and “to do nothing out of favoritism.” In fact, he strengthened his caution by stating that three witnesses would be watching how the pastor would be treated: the Father, the Son, and angelic beings.

Besides studying 1 Timothy 5:19-21 and other relevant New Testament passages, I encourage you to:

*Examine your church’s constitution and bylaws and see if there’s already a process in place for removing a pastor in those documents.

*Locate and consult with a labor attorney about the right and wrong ways to dismiss an employee in your state.

*Speak to a church consultant, a Christian conflict manager, or a Christian mediator about the issue.

If you’d like some specific guidelines for handling these situations, you might check out my book Church Coup on Amazon which can be downloaded as an e-book:

Principle 3: Discover who is unhappy with the pastor and the nature of their charges.

You want to know (a) all the names of those who are upset with the pastor, and (b) exactly why they’re upset.

This is thoroughly biblical.

In Deuteronomy 19:15-21, Moses states that for someone to be convicted of a crime in ancient Israel:

*The accusers need to go on record: “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.” This idea of multiple witnesses is repeated in Matthew 18:15-17 and 1 Timothy 5:19-21.

What usually happens is that the pastor’s accusers don’t want to go on the record. They prefer to hide in the dark and support one of the pastor’s more vocal critics.

But you can’t let this happen. You want the names of all the pastor’s critics. Romans 16:17 says to “watch out for those who cause divisions.” How can you watch out for them if you don’t know who they are?

Once you ask for the names, watch some people head for the hills. But that’s good: you’ll have fewer people to deal with.

Once you have their names, you want to know precisely why they’re at odds with your pastor.

If it’s a matter of church policy, the pastor’s critics should be able to speak openly with any board member since the board usually makes policy.

If it’s a matter of the pastor’s personal behavior, encourage the critic to speak with the pastor directly … and leave the board out of it, at least initially. Many of these situations involve petty complaints that nobody needs to hear about except the pastor’s accuser and the pastor.

However, if someone believes that the pastor is guilty of a major sin … like heresy, sexual immorality, or criminal behavior … then the board will need to do an investigation.

In Deuteronomy 19:18, Moses says that when a man is accused of a crime, “The judges must make a thorough investigation …”

Principle 4: Tell the pastor who is upset with him and why.

After your investigation is complete, the pastor needs to know the names of his accusers, and what their specific charges are.

It is unfair to say to the pastor, “Some people are upset with you.” His first question will be, “Who is upset with me?”

It is unfair to say to the pastor, “Joe is upset with you” or “Mary is so hurt that she’s stopped coming to church” unless you also tell the pastor why they’re upset.

This is where church boards often blow it.

Too often, they don’t want the pastor to know who is upset with him because (a) the pastor’s accusers are their friends, (b) his accusers are influential/wealthy, (c) his accusers have threatened to leave the church en masse unless the pastor is removed, or (d) some board members agree with the pastor’s accusers.

And, of course, all this is done in the name of confidentiality.

But I believe strongly that the pastor has the right to know the names of those who are upset with him.

In fact, let me take this further: he has the right to face those same accusers … even if they’re on the church staff or the governing board.

In Acts 25:16, Porcius Festus spoke with King Agrippa about Paul: “I told them [the Jewish leaders] that it is not the Roman custom to hand over any man before he has faced his accusers and has had an opportunity to defend himself against their charges.”

But knowing the identity of your accusers and defending yourself against their charges is more than a Jewish practice (Deuteronomy 19:15-21) or a Roman practice.

According to 1 Timothy 5:19-21, it’s a Christian practice as well.

It’s easy at this point for a church board to say, “Well, Bill has threatened to leave the church if we don’t fire the pastor. Bill has been here a long time … he has lots of family members in the church … he employs many people here … and if he leaves, there goes his money. And if Bill goes, others will leave as well.”

But you can’t let a bully dictate how you’re going to treat your pastor. Give in to Bill here, and he’ll run the church by default for years.

Instead, call a special board meeting … invite the pastor and Bill … let Bill make his charges … and let the pastor respond after each charge has been made.

If Bill has a real case, he’ll come to the meeting. If he’s on a power trip, and knows his case is flimsy, he’ll leave the church in a huff.

Let him go.

Believe me, it’s easier to find another Bill than another pastor. (And Bill can only return if he comes to a board meeting and repents for his foolish behavior.)

If Bill does come, let him make his charges. If anyone else is willing to go on record, let them come as well.

When the charges have been made, and the pastor has had his say, then the board needs to go to the next step:

Principle 5: Deliberate together – prayerfully and carefully – about the pastor’s future in your church.

If it’s been demonstrated that the pastor has committed a major sin that disqualifies him from ministry, then the board needs to remove him from office … and as 1 Timothy 5:19-21 mentions, the board needs to tell the church something (after first consulting with an attorney). The board should prepare a severance package and discuss the pastor’s exit from the church.

However, most of the time, the board will discover that the pastor’s critics strongly overreacted and turned a minor offense into a major sin. If this is the case, then you need to exonerate your pastor as soon as possible … and if much of the church knows about your deliberations, you need to do this publicly.

If you believe the pastor needs to work on some issues to be more effective, then tell him specifically what your concerns are. You don’t want to go through this experience very often!

If the pastor feels that the board has been unfair in the way the board handled matters, he may quietly begin to look around for a new ministry.

But if he believes the board has been fair and followed Scripture, he may become even more effective because he knows that if there’s another flare up, the board will use a biblical and deliberate process to address his critics.

I’ve told this story several times over the years, but I know a pastor who was severely criticized by four staff members. They banded together, attacked him, and wanted him to leave.

The pastor was devastated. The only way for him to survive the staff coup was to call a public meeting of the congregation, which he did. When he did that, three of the staff members quit.

At the meeting, the pastor sat in a chair and fielded questions from the congregation for several hours. His credibility intact, the pastor emerged from that meeting stronger than ever.

That pastor went on to become the leader of one of America’s largest churches which has impacted a major metropolitan city for Jesus Christ. I know … I used to attend there.

So the whole idea that, “Well, since the pastor has been attacked, he’s damaged goods” is unbiblical thinking. Jesus was attacked on many occasions, wasn’t He? Did the attacks themselves discredit him? If not, then why do attacks automatically mean that a pastor has to leave his church?

Principle 6: Aim for restoration, not for winning.

Too often, those who oppose the pastor want to win … and that means the pastor must lose.

Winning means that the pastor has to leave … and that me and my group now have more power than ever.

But when Christians seek to win at all costs, the chances are good that everybody will end up losing.

In my book Church Coup, I describe in detail a conflict that I experienced in my last church ministry. Some people in the church were so determined to win that when the dust settled, the church lost its top ten leaders.

There was no attempt to restore anyone. It was all about winning and losing. That may be how the political and business worlds operate, but the church of Jesus Christ has a different set of values.

Jesus says in Matthew 18:15-17 that when a brother sins … and your pastor is your brother … you should aim to win your brother over … not defeat him soundly … and this often takes time.

Paul makes the same case in Galatians 6:1 where he says that “you who are spiritual should restore him gently.” Again, winning is not envisioned.

The more a board tries to win a conflict with their pastor, the more damage they will cause their church family … and the damage can last for years, if not decades. The more a board tries to restore their pastor, the less damage they will cause their church family.

Principle 7: Tell the truth about your pastor … and insist that others do as well.

The news has been filled recently with the story of Brian Williams, NBC anchor for their nightly news broadcasts.

Mr. Williams has been caught exaggerating about events where he was present, and lying about events where he wasn’t present.

It’s hard to watch someone destroy their own credibility in public.

But if you want to destroy your own credibility as a church board … and that of your entire church as well … then simply lie about your pastor.

When some people want to get rid of their pastor, they lie about him. They accuse him of unbiblical beliefs … question his financial ethics … run down his family life … and accuse him of doing things he never did.

And believe me, the lies hurt.

I know this all too well. I can fill several pages with the lies that have been said about me over the years … but so can every pastor.

But if there’s one person in the world you want to speak accurately about, it’s a man or woman of God.

The ninth commandment warns us, “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor” (Exodus 20:16).

Paul writes in Ephesians 4:25, “Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body.”

Jesus said that Satan “is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:44). When Christians lie about a pastor, they are doing the devil’s work for him.

And the lying is almost always an attempt to destroy the reputation of a man of God.

I beg you: no matter how you feel about your pastor … even if he has caused you and your church some grief … speak about him with the utmost accuracy … and insist that others do as well.

If you permit others to destroy the pastor’s reputation, it’s the same as if you were doing it yourself.

I know all too many pastors who are no longer in Christian ministry because people lied about them.

But isn’t the church of Jesus Christ to be known for proclaiming the truth rather than falsehoods?

If you want God to bless your church, then follow these seven principles when people are complaining about your pastor.

If you want to destroy your church, then just let your emotions run haywire and make it up as you go along.

I’m praying that you’ll follow these principles!

_______________

Today marks a milestone for this blog. This morning, I recorded view number 100,000.

This is a niche blog. I don’t write about current political issues, or doctrinal questions, or sports teams … although I’ve touched on just about everything over the past four+ years.

No, I try and write about pastors and church conflict. That’s my field of interest and expertise. In fact, it’s just about all I care about these days.

Most of my best-read articles have to do with pastors and conflict. I want to bring to light issues that are usually shrouded in darkness.

Blog titles and articles whiz through my brain every day. Sometimes if I nail down a good title, an article writes itself.

Today’s article flowed from my brain through my arms and fingers so quickly that I couldn’t write fast enough. Other days, it’s a bit more of a struggle.

But I want to thank every one of you who reads this blog, whether this is your first time or you’ve been here many times.

I want to thank my son Ryan for setting up the basic format when we started in December 2010. It’s been my baby ever since.

If you have any suggestions to make the blog better … or you want to suggest a topic … just use the comments sections and I’ll respond as soon as I can.

Thank you, Father, for using this blog to make a difference in the lives of many pastors, church leaders, and churchgoers.

Read Full Post »

Why Pastors Under Attack Hibernate

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged criticizing pastors, pastoral termination, pastors under attack on February 9, 2015| 4 Comments »

How do you handle harsh criticism that is directed at you personally?

Most people don’t handle criticism very well.

Some people lash out at their critics. Others engage in swift retribution. Many turn to drink or drugs. Some rush into counseling.

But when pastors are personally attacked, they tend to go into hibernation … especially if those attacks result in a forced exit.

By hibernation, I mean that the pastor holes up somewhere: in his house, a hotel, his car, or even at a friend’s house.

When a pastor hibernates, these phrases go running through his mind:

“I can’t believe what they are saying about me.”

By the time most Christians start attacking their pastor, they have been upset with him for some time. They’ve probably shared their feelings with family members, good friends, or co-workers.

But the pastor remains unaware of those latent feelings until they surface … and when the pastor hears what is being said about him … or to him … he goes into a state of shock.

Many years ago, someone at my church accused me of a serious charge to my face. I had received zero training on how to handle such an accusation.

I quickly brought over a staff member … called an attorney … then called the leader of the church board. I repeated the charge to them and assured them of my innocence … and I was innocent.

My instincts led me to go home for the rest of the day. I could not believe … and still cannot believe … that someone would make such a charge against me.

Jesus was accused of being a drunkard and in league with the devil, even though neither charge was true. He often withdrew to desolate places to think and to pray … but I wonder if there were times when His spirit was so wounded by the charges some people were making against Him that He chose to hibernate.

“I can’t believe my friend has turned against me.”

It is difficult for most pastors to form close friendships inside their church family.

The larger a church grows, the more likely it is that the pastor spends most of his time with key members of the ministry staff or governing board. So by default, most pastors select their friendships from the staff or the board.

After the pastor has carefully selected someone to be a friend, he still remains wary of them. He wonders, “Can I trust them with information about my background? About my home life? About my feelings? About my future plans?”

Some leaders fail the test right away, and while they remain a co-worker, the pastor doesn’t choose to pursue friendship with them.

But a few leaders seem to pass every test, and after a while, the pastor gradually learns to trust them with an increasing amount of personal information … and this process can take years.

So when one of the pastor’s few friends attacks him … or doesn’t support him when he’s under attack by someone else … the pastor is devastated … and all he wants to do is hide.

Judas’s betrayal wounded Jesus, but at least Jesus knew what Judas was going to do ahead of time. Most pastors have no idea that a friend has become a traitor until it’s too late.

“I no longer know who to trust.”

I’ve been in hibernation mode before, and it’s downright scary. You feel like the disciples right after Jesus was crucified … hiding out, afraid for your own life.

During my last church ministry, my wife and I were both attacked by people we thought were our friends. During that time, I was advised to go into hibernation mode by someone who had been through what I was going through.

People from the church wrote me emails, wanting to know what was going on.

Some people called. Some came to the door. A few sent flowers.

But I couldn’t be transparent because when you’re in the middle of an attack, you have no idea who is for you or against you.

Put a little too much information into an email, and it could be circulated all over the church.

Reveal too much on the phone or at the door, and it will be repeated to others … often inaccurately.

I even went through my Facebook friends and “unfriended” anyone I suspected might be against me … or was good friends with those who were.

You choose to stay away from others … for a while … until it’s safe to go outside again.

So you hibernate.

“I have to stay safe until I can think straight.”

Imagine that you have a dream job. You love the work and the people you work with.

Then one day, your boss calls you into her office, and without any warning, she fires you … ordering you to clear out your desk immediately.

How would you feel?

Confused … hurting … fearful … frightened.

You don’t know who to see … where to go … or what to do.

So you do the one thing guaranteed to keep you safe: hibernate.

That’s how pastors feel when they’re under attack.

In my case, I spent much of my time on the telephone speaking to people outside the church: Christian leaders, fellow pastors, ex-board members, close friends, and family members.

Just the interaction on the phone helped keep me sane.

I also spent time writing out what was happening to me and how I felt about it … which became the genesis of my book Church Coup.

I had many theories as to what was happening, and I was able to test those theories with people outside the church … who often gave me critical insights into what they thought was occurring.

When I was under attack, I discovered that the safety of hibernation helped me make better decisions … put things into perspective … and make wiser future decisions.

If you’re a pastor who is presently under attack, that instinct to hide out may very well be from God.

Let others investigate the charges against you and who is opposing you. Learn all you can but stay out of sight.

And view that time of hibernation as a gift from a God who will eventually right all wrongs.

Read Full Post »

The Access-Influence Theory and Pastoral Termination

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged antagonism toward pastors, pastoral termination, why pastors are attacked on February 6, 2015| Leave a Comment »

Pastor Tim sighed.

He was not looking forward to his lunch meeting with Harold the next day.

Harold had been a member of the church board at Joy Fellowship for two years. Although Tim liked Harold personally … and had approved his selection to the board … Tim wished someone else had come onto the board instead.

Tim had mistakenly assumed that Harold supported his ministry philosophy until after Harold’s first year on the board. Then Harold starting sharing some bizarre ideas in meetings on how to move the church forward.

Now Harold had invited Tim to lunch … and Tim was uncertain of Harold’s agenda.

After exchanging pleasantries and talking about the Super Bowl, Harold produced a two-page list of “improvements” that he felt would make the church better. Tim just listened as Harold excitedly discussed his suggestions.

Tim didn’t like any of Harold’s suggestions … and thought that several would drive people out of the church … so he just listened, thanked Harold for his ideas, and left the restaurant after an hour.

Over the next few months, Pastor Tim became immersed in hiring a new staff member, planning for a mission trip, and handling several unexpected deaths. And in the process, he completely forgot about Harold’s ideas.

But Harold hadn’t forgotten about his suggestions. He hadn’t forgotten that Pastor Tim wasn’t very enthusiastic about them, either. And he hadn’t forgotten that Tim had never brought up any of his ideas in a board meeting.

Harold led a small men’s group that met on Saturday mornings. The group decided to ask the entire church to support a missionary financially, so Harold went to the leader of the missions team and asked if they could make an announcement the following Sunday asking the congregation for monthly support.

The missions leader told Harold, “I’ll get back to you.” Two days later, he called and said “No.”

Harold suspected that Pastor Tim was the one who vetoed the announcement … and Harold had guaranteed his cousin that the church would support him financially.

Harold was not a happy camper.

The pastor didn’t take his ideas seriously. The pastor hadn’t implemented even a single one. And now that Harold wanted to do something good … support a missionary … the pastor wouldn’t even support that.

Harold had had enough.

In his mind, there were only two options:

*Leave the church immediately.

*Get rid of Pastor Tim.

Harold and his family didn’t want to leave Joy Fellowship. They had too many friends at the church to go somewhere else.

So Harold made a unilateral decision: Pastor Tim had to go.

_______________

Nearly a decade ago, I researched and wrote a doctoral project at Fuller Seminary on antagonism in churches … based on Scripture … and using family systems theory.

I studied five conflicts that had occurred at the church I pastored over the previous ten years.

In each case, a church leader assumed they had a special relationship with the pastor.

In each case, a dispute arose over a specific issue championed by the leader.

In each case, the pastor made a decision that went against the wishes of the leader.

In each case, the leader turned against the pastor and became an antagonist.

_______________

People become antagonistic toward pastors for a variety of reasons:

*They lack spiritual depth.

*They become emotionally reactive when they’re hurt.

*They believe the pastor has singled them out for embarrassment.

*They tend toward paranoia … thinking the pastor is out to get them … and decide to “get him” before he “gets me.”

*They aren’t comfortable with his preaching style … or content.

*They view the pastor as a father figure … or a brother figure … or a son figure … who has rejected them.

*They think the pastor is taking the church in the wrong direction.

But I believe that in many cases … and this is just a theory on my part … someone in a church … especially a leader … becomes antagonistic toward the pastor because:

*The pastor doesn’t seem to be listening to or championing any of their ideas.

*The pastor doesn’t seem to recognize that person as being “special.”

*The pastor hasn’t included this individual in his social circle.

*The pastor has resolved a dispute against the wishes of the other person.

And this is the killer:

*The pastor has limited this person’s access and influence in his ministry.

I was once the pastor of a church where a prominent leader angrily left the church.

A friend of his came to see me in my office. The friend wanted the leader to come back to the church.

The leader said he would return if I granted him one request:

He wanted complete access to me as pastor.

I said, “No.” The leader never returned.

What did the leader want?

He wanted to run the church through me.

He had some success doing that with the previous pastor. It made him feel valuable and validated.

But what happened if I crossed him … or he didn’t like a decision I made … or a sermon I preached … or the schedule I kept?

I knew what would happen: he would come after me with full force … because that’s what he did to the pastors in his previous two churches.

_______________

For those of you who have been through pastoral termination … or know someone who has … see if you can answer the following question:

To what degree was the pastor’s exit determined by people who wanted complete access to him and total influence with him yet didn’t get it?

Read Full Post »

When a Pastor Suspects Conflict

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged pastoral feelings about conflict, pastoral instincts, pastoral intution on February 3, 2015| Leave a Comment »

No pastor is infallible.

Sometimes I hear about pastors who act like they are faultless. No matter what they say or do … no matter how many people they offend or wound … these pastors believe, “I am always right.”

Conversely, pastors are usually right far more than they know. Due to an attempt to act humbly, many pastors don’t listen to what their instincts are telling them about certain people … especially potential troublemakers.

I once served in a church where a certain individual … let’s call him Bob … was teaching an adult Bible class. Well and good.

But Bob’s goal didn’t seem to be to enhance the spiritual growth of class members. Instead, he seemed to have something else in mind.

One Sunday, after Bob’s class was done, we met in the men’s room at church. I asked Bob how his class went.

Bob proceeded to tell me how many people were attending his class, but his attitude aroused my suspicions. I asked myself, “I wonder if Bob is using his class as a power base?”

So one Sunday, I visited the class … and my instincts were going haywire.

I decided to do something I had never done before. I discovered the previous two churches Bob had attended and invited those pastors out to eat.

I told each pastor that my instincts about Bob had kicked into overdrive and that I wanted to know how Bob had behaved in their church.

The first pastor told me how destructive Bob had been. He said, “Whatever you have to do, get him out of your church.”

The second pastor told me that Bob had indeed used his class as a power base … that Bob had challenged the pastor’s leadership in a public meeting … and that Bob and his class left the church en masse, resulting in the church going into a spiral from which it never recovered.

You can call my instincts pastoral intuition … spiritual discernment … the voice of God’s Spirit … or something else. Those instincts were the result of years of biblical learning, ecclesiastical experience, and yes, strong feelings.

Pastors often fail to listen to their inner alarm systems when it comes to certain churchgoers. They tell themselves:

“Maybe they’re just going through a hard time.”

“Maybe that’s just their personality.”

“Maybe they’ll like me the more they get to know me.”

“Maybe they’re having problems at home … at work … or with their health.”

“Maybe my suspicions aren’t justified.”

But pastors need to learn to trust their pastoral intuition … or they may find themselves out of ministry for good.

A little more than five years ago, I was the pastor of a generous, gracious, and growing church. I’ve recounted what happened in my book Church Coup, but due to space limitations, a lot occurred that I didn’t put in the book.

I started wearing down … and my pastoral intuition went to sleep.

And while it was asleep, conflict surfaced … and because I wasn’t at the top of my game, I didn’t handle things proactively.

Here is what’s interesting: when the conflict finally surfaced, my instincts reawoke.

I trusted them again … and they were incredibly accurate.

I told my friends in the church what the purpose of the coup was … who was behind it … how things would play out … and that I would eventually have to leave.

In other words, I knew what was going to happen before it happened.

My friends would say, “No, Jim, you’re not seeing things accurately. I don’t think he would ever do that to you … she would never say that about you … they would never plot against you.”

I don’t like saying this, but in the end … I was right … on almost everything.

To my fellow pastors, I say this: if you’re walking with the Lord … and if you’re suspicious of certain people in your church … trust your instincts.

To members of the governing board: if your pastor is walking with the Lord … and he’s suspicious of certain people in your church … trust his instincts.

No professor ever gave me such counsel in seminary. I don’t recall anything about “instinct trusting” in my doctoral program.

But I learned the hard way that feelings … even negative ones … can be a sign from God.

Yes, you should test those feelings as much as possible.

A pastor might consult with his wife … with good friends … with pastoral colleagues … with a Christian counselor … and with wise mentors.

But never ignore your intuition about an individual or group.

It just may be God’s way of prompting you to prepare for what’s about to come.

Read Full Post »

Dismissing the Coach, Dismissing the Pastor

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged church board and pastoral termination, pastoral termination, the aftermath of pastoral termination on January 30, 2015| 6 Comments »

Jim Harbaugh is a great football coach.

He’s won everywhere he’s gone as a head coach: the University of San Diego, Stanford University, and the San Francisco 49ers.

And he’s not only won, but quickly turned failing programs around, which is why his alma mater, the University of Michigan, hired him immediately after Harbaugh and the 49ers parted ways.

The 49ers have been my favorite National Football League team since 1981 when quarterback Joe Montana connected with Dwight Clark in the end zone for “The Catch” in the last minute of the NFC title game against the favored Dallas Cowboys.

So I’ve followed Jim Harbaugh’s four years in San Francisco pretty closely.

To put it mildly, Harbaugh is a very intense individual … but he’s also a winner. He took the 49ers to three straight NFC Championship Games and one Super Bowl after the team experienced years in the football wilderness.

But the team’s owner and key front office personnel decided they wanted to get rid of Harbaugh months before the 2014 season ended, even though he had an additional year left on his contract. (The 49ers finished 8-8.)

The 49ers just hired a new coach: Jim Tomsula, their defensive line coach. The columnists in the Bay Area are not happy about the hire. In their view, Tomsula is NOT Harbaugh … or even close.

In fact, Tim Kawakami, columnist for the Mercury News in San Jose, recently wrote a column in which he makes the following statement:

“What was the 49ers’ plan here? Now it’s clear: Letting go of Harbaugh was the plan. That’s it: Get rid of the guy who gave them all palpitations. Nothing more. There was no other thought put to this beyond dumping their nemesis and for that they planned and plotted and leaked for months and months.”

Kawakami goes on:

“They knew they wanted Harbaugh out. They knew he was popular. They had to go backwards to figure out WHY they would publicly announce he was out.

Their solution:

-Talk about ‘winning with class’;

-Declare that any season ending without a Lombardi Trophy is a failure and a potential fire-able offense;

-Pretend it was a ‘mutual separation’;

-Let it be known that you’re talking to a lot of great candidates;

-Hire Tomsula, the comfortable in-house candidate who basically is the opposite of Harbaugh in all personal ways, especially in dealing with ownership;

-And, most fatefully of all, communicate to all that you don’t think the coach is that important, anyway.”

Does all of this sound familiar?

When a church’s governing leaders or a powerful faction decide they want to push out a pastor, they usually focus all their energies on getting rid of him.

And in turn, they don’t have much of a plan … if any … as to how the church will fare without him.

Getting rid of him is their goal.

What’s their plan beyond that?

Zilch.

I once attended a spring training baseball game with a friend who served with me on a church board for many years. While talking about church leaders that plot to get rid of their pastor, I asked my friend, “Don’t church boards know how much they will destroy their church when they run off their pastor?”

My friend stated matter-of-factly, “They don’t care.”

In these situations, board members give their best energies to making sure the pastor leaves. But when the dust settles, now they have to:

*Hire an interim pastor.

*Form a search team to find a new senior pastor.

*Placate the departing pastor’s supporters.

*Assign other staff/lay leaders to handle the departing pastor’s work load.

*Address the multitude of complaints that will come their way.

In addition, they’ll have to deal with:

*Reduced attendance as the pastor’s supporters leave.

*Cutting back the number of worship services to hide all the empty chairs.

*Decreased giving as donors walk out the door.

*Keeping the staff intact with that decreased giving.

*Preventing the staff that supported the pastor from leaving.

*Plunging morale as the church gradually enters an entropy phase.

*Answering questions from churchgoers such as, “Why did the departing pastor leave?” and “What’s going to happen to our church?” and “When are we going to get a new pastor?”

The temptation is for the board to blame everything on the departing pastor. After all, he’s not around to defend himself.

But when church boards do this … and all too many do … they can ruin a pastor’s reputation and choke his ability to find a new church ministry … forever.

I’m not arguing that every pastor should stay in a church regardless of his behavior. As I’ve said many times, heresy, sexual immorality, and criminal behavior disqualify a pastor from leadership, and it’s a thankless task to sit on a church board that has to clean up such a theological or moral mess.

But much of the time in churches, the pastor is forced out because he’s earned too much authority for the board and/or staff to control.

Tim Kawakami makes this observation in his article on Harbaugh and the 49ers:

“My point is that [the 49ers’ brain trust] set themselves up for this by treating Jim Harbaugh—and his achievements—as cavalierly as they did all last year and for convincing themselves that there would be no ill effects from it. Wrong.”

A far better solution … one that all too few churches try … is to hire a consultant … or a conflict manager … or a mediator … anyone both the pastor and board can trust … who will help them learn how to work together more favorably.

Rather than forcing out the pastor and sending the church into a descending spiral, wouldn’t it be better for everyone concerned if the board at least tried to bridge their differences with their pastor first?

The future of many pastors and churches is at stake.

Read Full Post »

Damaged Pastor Syndrome

Posted in Burnout and Depression in Ministry, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged attacking a pastor, pastors under attack, surviving a sheep attack; pastoral abuse; abusing a pastor, wounded pastors on January 28, 2015| 5 Comments »

When a pastor is under attack inside his church, he begins to suffer from a condition I’d like to call Damaged Pastor Syndrome.

DPS strikes a pastor when he picks up signals that an individual or a group are laying the groundwork to force him from office.

These signals include church members:

*Making inquiries about church attendance and giving patterns.

*Requesting copies of the church constitution and bylaws.

*Calling district or denominational headquarters.

*Visibly gathering before and after church … even if they don’t travel in the same social circles.

*Increasingly making negative comments on social media about the church and/or pastor.

In addition:

*The governing board may call itself into executive session without the pastor’s foreknowledge.

*Staff members may begin to resist the pastor’s directives.

*Staffers may become secretive while talking on the phone.

*Some church leaders may limit or avoid social time with the pastor altogether.

*Certain board and staff members may stop coming to worship … especially when the pastor is preaching.

Most pastors – nearly 80% – are very sensitive individuals, and when they sense an attack is coming, they quickly acquire DPS.

Let me share a story from my own ministry to illustrate this more concretely.

During my second pastorate, the seniors’ Bible class rebelled against me.

They didn’t like the new music the board had approved for worship. They didn’t feel I was paying them enough attention. And the class’s teacher – a former pastor who couldn’t find a job anywhere in Christendom – began to feel powerful as his class focused on the source of their discontent: their pastor.

Before long, rumors of discontent became reality.

A board member found out that a group of seniors were going to hold a secret meeting at a specific time and place. He told me about the meeting.

I was afraid and anxious. I couldn’t think. And I wondered, “Why doesn’t this group like me? What have I done to offend them?”

My wife and I went to a movie – a Disney cartoon, as I recall – just so I could focus on something other than that meeting.

In the end, it didn’t come off because the supportive board member showed up at the meeting unannounced and took away all their fun.

But that didn’t stop them. They rescheduled and reloaded.

Because I didn’t know what was happening … and could only imagine the worst … I shifted into survival mode.

In the end, they created a two-page list of complaints against me, my wife, our son (who was 9), and our daughter (who was 6).

When I found out about this, I called a special board meeting and informed the entire group about the plot.

To a man, they stood with me … even though my district minister recommended that I resign.

But for weeks, I was a wreck. I couldn’t sleep … couldn’t carry on a decent conversation … couldn’t trust people … and couldn’t think about anything other than the attack.

Because I had shifted into fight or flight mode, I was pumping adrenaline at a furious rate to handle the emergency.

The conflict went on for months … until the seniors and their buddies all left the church en masse … forming a new church one mile away.

Now here’s how DPS becomes relevant: when a pastor is under attack, he will be further attacked for responding to the attack like a human being.

For example, when a pastor is under attack:

*If he becomes depressed, he will be attacked for looking gloomy.

*If he becomes fearful, he will be attacked for not appearing strong.

*If he becomes anxious, he will be attacked for not trusting God.

*If he becomes isolated, he will be attacked for being aloof.

*If he becomes ill, he will be attacked for appearing unhealthy.

In other words, the very people who abuse, betray, and criticize the pastor will kick him around even more for not handling himself the way they think he should.

They will ask people in the church: “How can he be our pastor if he isn’t going to set a better example for the rest of us?”

DPS may be the primary reason why pastors end up resigning after enduring a sheep attack.

It took me six months to recover my energy after that group left the church. The pastor of one of America’s largest churches told me that after he survived a similar attack, it also took him six months to recover, so this may be a pattern.

The group attacking the pastor is correct: the pastor may not be very effective for a while due to anxiety, depression, and fear.

But the group is wrong about why the pastor quickly wilts. It’s not because he’s a poor example … it’s because shepherds are never prepared for sheep to turn on them and stomp them into the ground.

Since pastors are attacked while on the job, it only seems fair for the congregation and/or church board to assume responsibility for the pastor’s care while he recovers. This includes a reduced workload … extended time off … funds for counseling … a visit to a retreat center … and creating safeguards to resist another attack.

Because most of the time, it’s not a weakness in the pastor that causes him to collapse under pressure … it’s a weakness in the church system that allows the attack in the first place.

Think about it.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Restoring Kingdom Builders

Archive for the ‘Conflict with Church Antagonists’ Category

Stopping Slander in Our Churches

Slander in the Church

When Churchgoers Threaten to Leave

Identifying Church Powerbrokers

Seven Principles for Resolving Pastor-Church Conflict

Why Pastors Under Attack Hibernate

The Access-Influence Theory and Pastoral Termination

When a Pastor Suspects Conflict

Dismissing the Coach, Dismissing the Pastor

Damaged Pastor Syndrome

“Church Coup”

Click here to purchase!

Categories

Archives

Follow Blog via Email

Church Conflict

Conflict Resolution Groups I Recommend

Pastor Abusers

Pastors and Burnout

Pastors and Forced Termination

Archive for the ‘Conflict with Church Antagonists’ Category

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

“Church Coup”

Categories

Archives

Follow Blog via Email

Church Conflict

Conflict Resolution Groups I Recommend

Pastor Abusers

Pastors and Burnout

Pastors and Forced Termination