Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Conflict with Church Board’ Category

Why Wounded Pastors Struggle with Forgiveness

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Forgiveness and Reconciliation among Christians, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , on July 24, 2013| 8 Comments »

A pastor friend who lives in Japan – and was once a Jr. Higher in one of the youth groups I led – read my last blog post and asked, “Can you address the issue of pastors who were pushed out needing to deal with the roots of bitterness?  I find some say they forgive them [those who pushed them out].  But you see their face wince and eye twitch at the mention of these people.  They prayed the prayer to forgive them in obedience but the emotional wounds are very deep.”

I find this struggle for wounded pastors to forgive their assailants encapsulated in two New Testament passages:

Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice.  Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.  Ephesians 4:31-32

“If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him.  If he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you and says, ‘I repent,’ forgive him.”  Luke 17:3-4

Let me summarize the way we usually view these verses:

“A fellow believer has hurt you.  The hurt was unjustified and makes you angry.  You’re tempted to harm that person in return, but resist that temptation.  Follow the example of Jesus instead.  Just let it go and act like it never happened.”

Those five statements all appear to be true – but they don’t go far enough.

I believe there are two kinds of forgiveness: unilateral forgiveness and bilateral forgiveness.

When you forgive someone unilaterally, you choose to release the wrong they committed against you in private.  You say, “Father, I ask that You forgive Joe for insulting me in front of my friends.”  You never talk to Joe about his offense – you just tell God.  When you do this, you may choose to renew your relationship with Joe, or you may feel that your relationship with Joe has been temporarily or permanently harmed.  Joe may not know or care that he hurt you.

I believe that as a believer, I am compelled by God to forgive every person who wrongs me unilaterally.  It’s not an option – I must forgive.

But when you forgive someone bilaterally, you are aiming to restore your relationship with the person who hurt you.  While you can forgive them unilaterally, there are times when the relationship cannot be repaired unless you tell that person how much their actions wounded you.  If you don’t have that conversation, the relationship remains in a perpetual state of disrepair.

For example, sometimes a husband keeps hurting his wife, and she tries to tell him how much he’s hurt her, but the husband doesn’t acknowledge his error or change, so she just stops sharing her feelings, and they drift apart.  The same thing happens in friendships.

Now what about Ephesians 4:31-32 and Luke 17:3-4?  Are they dealing with unilateral or bilateral forgiveness?

Stay with me.  I will deal with wounded pastors and forgiveness!

At first glance, Ephesians 4:31-32 seems to be dealing with unilateral forgiveness except that the context is dealing with relationships inside the body of Christ.  You forgive your spiritual brother or sister for their offense and prove it by demonstrating kindness, compassion, and a lack of anger toward them.  The passage implies that you’ve sat down with the person who hurt you and worked things out with them.

But Jesus’ words in Luke 17:3-4 clinch this.  Jesus does not say, “If your brother sins, forgive him.”  That’s unilateral forgiveness, right?

Instead, Jesus says, “If your brother sins, rebuke him.”   Why rebuke him?  Because when your brother hurt you, he may be unaware of that fact unless you tell him.

During my freshman year in college, I attended a social event for freshmen at a park.  I joined a co-ed tackle football game, intercepted a pass, and ran it back for a touchdown.  I expected applause from my team as I returned to the field, but was met with anger instead.  Why?  Because when a girl on the other team tried to tackle me, I knocked her silly but was totally unaware I had hurt her.

Sometimes a fellow believer will hurt us by their actions, but they honestly aren’t aware of it, so Jesus encourages us to say to our friend, “You hurt me by what you did.”

Jesus isn’t concerned about who’s right and who’s wrong.  He’s concerned about right relationships among His followers.

And then He says, “If they repent, you are obligated to forgive them.  That’s how My followers act.”  And Jesus takes it even further, stating that if they repent seven times in one day, I’m obligated to forgive all seven times.

Now the confession must be authentic.  When we were kids, I sometimes hit my brother John and then immediately asked him to forgive me.  Due to my obvious insincerity, he had every right not to forgive me until I was truly contrite.  He could forgive me unilaterally, but our relationship wasn’t going to be repaired until I could admit that I had wronged him.

There’s another name for bilateral forgiveness: reconciliation.  In fact, professor and author David Augsburger believes that when the New Testament speaks of forgiveness among believers, it’s talking about reconciliation, or bilateral forgiveness, not unilateral forgiveness.

And Augsburger believes that, according to Jesus’ words in Luke 17:3-4, if you rebuke your brother, but he doesn’t repent, there’s a sense in which you can’t fully forgive/reconcile with him.

Okay, let’s apply all of this to a fictional 57-year-old wounded pastor named Al.

Al has been the pastor of Trinity Church for 13 years.  The church has tripled its attendance and giving during that time.  Al and most of the people in the church are pleased with the way things are going.

One day, Al is called into an unplanned meeting of the church board, where he is told, “Either sign this resignation letter and receive two months of severance pay or you’re fired without pay.”  Brokenhearted, Al signs the letter.

In the months to come, Al struggles to forgive members of the church board.  Why?

First, the board did not follow any kind of biblical process to dismiss Al.  Al was ambushed, blindsided, bushwhacked, and sideswiped.  He was never confronted or rebuked, so he could never make things right with the board.

While the vilest criminal in the United States is entitled to a public trial, a godly pastor can be kicked to the curb without the board using any kind of process, biblical or otherwise.

This lack of a biblical process makes a pastor feel violated.  The pastor cannot get his head around why the Bible was ignored.  He thinks to himself, “Isn’t this a church?  Don’t we take Scripture seriously here?  What is going on?”

Second, the board never tells Al why he’s being dismissed.  This tortures Al’s soul because he has to resort to guessing to find the real reason why he’s being relieved of his duties.

Al wonders if his dismissal has to do with his competency: “Was it my preaching?  My leadership?  My pastoring?  My counseling?”

He wonders if it has to do with chemistry: “Do I no longer fit in this community?  In this church?  Have I hurt someone interpersonally that I don’t know about?”

He reviews incidents from the past and wonders, “What have I done or said that should result in my termination?”

Because the board never tells Al the truth about his dismissal, Al doesn’t know how to make things right with them.  Their actions have not only destroyed their working relationship, but their personal relationships as well … and this wounds Al to the core.

After Al’s departure, some accuse him of sexual immorality … embezzling funds … slothfulness … not preaching the Word of God … and on and on.  While Al knows these charges aren’t true, he wonders, “Why isn’t anybody calling me to find out if these charges are true?  Or are people believing the first thing that they hear?”

So Al tries to defend himself against some of the charges … and every time he does, he’s charged with three more offenses.  Al asks himself, “Why are they destroying me?”

Third, the board treats Al far worse than he deserves.  Al asks himself, “Is this the thanks I get for tripling the attendance and giving?  And after being here 13 years, why am I only receiving 2 months severance?  Shouldn’t I receive 6-12 months instead?”

Al doesn’t feel he’s been granted justice, mercy, or grace.  In fact, he can’t find anything redemptive or Christian about the way he’s been treated.  Instead, he believes that someone on the board is being vindictive.

But because Al has left the area, and church leaders are now in control of the congregation, Al comes to realize that almost nobody is interested in his side of the story.

Fourth, Al will lose his life as he knows it.  Al knows that he will now lose 7 things that are precious to him:

*He will lose his church family from the past 13 years.

*He will lose 90% of his church friends.

*He will lose his reputation as a man of honor and integrity.

*He will lose his pastoral career because of his age.  (When you’re over 55, it’s nearly impossible to find a pastorate or staff position.  There are hundreds of applicants for every available position.)

*He will lose his income and his lifestyle.

*He will lose his house because he can’t possibly keep up payments without an income … which will decimate his credit.

*He will lose his faith in the Church and Christian leaders … and for a while, maybe even in God Himself.

If you work for a high-tech company, and you’re fired, you still have your church family, and your church friends, and your reputation, and your career, and your faith.  You may lose some income, and even your house, but your losses are minimal compared to what a pastor loses when he’s forced to leave a church.

Finally, Al comes to realize that he can never reconcile with his previous church.  Why not?  Because nobody there shows any interest in any kind of reconciliation.

The church will put their energies into looking for an interim pastor.  Then the church will appoint a search team for a new pastor.  During this time, board members will do their best to obliterate Al’s memory from the church.  The interim pastor may help with this exercise.

Friends from Al’s old church will stop emailing him … unfriend him on Facebook … cease sending him Christmas cards … and avoid him when he’s back in town.  Al can sense their rejection … and it stings.

And all the while he wonders, “What did I do to be treated this way by the church I faithfully served for 13 years?”

In the end, wounded pastors struggle with forgiveness because they sense that professing Christians have chosen to treat them with anger, contempt, and injustice.  The pastor instinctively knows that he doesn’t deserve this kind of treatment but knows that he will never be offered any kind of forum for biblical reconciliation.

The pastor has been branded … slandered … and banished from the church that he once loved and served with his entire being.

And every time the pastor goes to church and hears a praise song they sang at his former church … every time he hears a pastor preaching he laments, “That’s what I used to do” … every time he hears about friends taking a vacation he can’t afford … every time he hears the name of someone from his former church who cut him off … every time he engages in self-torture by asking, “Why was I dismissed?” … the pastor is wounded all over again.

And after a while, the pastor grows weary of forgiving people – who have never repented – so many times.

So all wounded pastors can do is forgive their opponents unilaterally from afar … and wait until everyone arrives in heaven before he experiences authentic and lasting reconciliation.

In the meantime, pastors continue to suffer spiritually and emotionally because they know that heaven is a long way off.

____________________________________

Check out our website at www.restoringkingdombuilders.org  You’ll find Jim’s story, recommended resources on conflict, and information about upcoming seminars.

Read Full Post »

Who Does the Pastor Work For?

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , on July 17, 2013| Leave a Comment »

Pastor Phil couldn’t believe what he was hearing at the monthly meeting of the church board.  He had only been pastor for six months.

Out of nowhere, Don the chairman viciously slammed Pastor Phil.  Don claimed that Phil was preaching against sin too often … that several experiments in the worship service were colossal failures … and that Phil needed to spend less time in sermon preparation and more time in home visitation.

It wasn’t Don’s criticisms that bothered Phil as much as Don’s tone.  Don was implying that Pastor Phil worked for Don!

But that’s not how Phil saw it.  As he planned his time, he didn’t contact Don on a daily basis and ask, “What should I do this Thursday?  Study for my sermon or visit shut-ins?”

It’s safe to say that as many as one thousand pastors are terminated monthly.  My guess is that this question is at the heart of the problem:

Who does the pastor work for? 

As I see it, there are four possible answers:

First, the pastor works for the congregation.

In churches with congregational government, church members vote to call a pastor, usually on the recommendation of a search team and/or the church board.  But while the congregation may have the final say as to who their pastor will be, no pastor can truly work for the entire church body because everyone has differing expectations for their pastor.

Mary wants the pastor to preach through Bible books.  Joe wants the pastor to preach on contemporary social issues.  Linda wants him to speak on family/emotional problems.  Bob wants the pastor to preach on theological truths.

Mary wants her pastor to focus on home visitation/counseling … Joe on administration/organization … Linda on leadership/teacher training … Bob on vision casting/big-picture items.

Mary wants to become the pastor’s personal friend … Joe aims to become his advisor … Linda hopes the pastor will be her advocate for women’s ministry … and Bob wants the pastor to become his golf buddy.

I’ve only shared with you the personal viewpoints of four people!  Can you imagine what it’s like to pastor a church of 75 … or 150 … or 300?  The expectations keep escalating.  The larger the church, the less likely the pastor can ever meet everyone’s expectations.  If he tries, he will fail miserably.

Unless the church is composed of a handful of people, no pastor can ever truly work for the congregation.

Second, the pastor works for the governing board.

Whether they’re called elders, deacons, the church council, the board of directors, or something else, many churches expect that the pastor will work for the governing board.

When I first entered church ministry, this was my assumption.  I’d meet with the deacons once a month and we’d make decisions together.  In fact, I made few decisions without consulting the deacons.

But this arrangement just slowed the ministry to a crawl.  If I made a proposal, but only one deacon hesitated, we didn’t do it.  In fact, the more items I brought to the board, the longer the meetings lasted, and the less we accomplished.

The better way was for the board and I to agree on a job description and for me to report to the board in writing on a monthly basis.  But although I wanted to be accountable, I could never tell them everything I did … and I didn’t want to feed anyone’s micromanaging tendencies.

I believe a pastor should work with the board … not for the board … and that the board’s primary mission should be to encourage and protect their pastor.

When I worked with a board that said, “Jim, you’re the professional.  We’re going to follow your lead and promote your ideas and protect you from attacks” … the church prospered.

But when I worked with a board that said, “Jim, we’re the professionals.  You’re going to follow our lead and expect you to promote our ideas and protect us from attacks” … the church tanked.

Every church I know that is doing something significant for Christ’s kingdom is led by a strong pastor … and I don’t know a single board-led church that is growing to any degree.

Third, the pastor works for a powerbroker in the church.

This person may be a charter member … a wealthy businessperson … the church patriarch/matriarch … a large donor … a church staff member … someone who employs many churchgoers … an adult Sunday School teacher … or a former pastor … but this person holds the real power in the church.  Whenever the pastor wants to make a major change … and sometimes even minor ones … the powerbroker is consulted … even if they hold no official leadership role in the church.

It’s good to have friends.  It’s wise to listen to advice.  But I will never understand why professing Christians ever pledge allegiance to any unofficial/official church leader and let that person do their thinking for them.  It’s not only unwise … it’s just plain dumb.  No powerbroker can ever do for a church what a pastor can do!

Should a pastor listen to board members and powerbrokers?  Yes, he should try and understand their concerns, but that doesn’t mean he should automatically do whatever they want.

Once a pastor has identified a powerbroker, he needs to ask God to remove that person … the sooner the better.  (In case you think this sounds harsh, this is a step that all intentional interim pastors take.  No church can survive if it’s being taken hostage/blackmailed by a powerbroker.)  Whatever the powerbroker thinks, the pastor does not work for him/her … because:

Finally, the pastor works for Jesus Christ.

Jesus is the Head of the church … not the church board … and not a church powerbroker.

Every Christian church is ultimately owned and run by Jesus … and not anybody else.

*Jesus directly calls pastors into ministry.

*The risen Christ gives pastors unique combinations of spiritual gifts including leadership, teaching, shepherding, prophecy, discernment, administration, and showing mercy.

*Jesus leads pastors to engage in formal training in Bible schools and seminaries.

*He gives them ministry mentors.

*He allows them to suffer so they can identify better with parishioners.

*He certifies pastors through the ordination process.

From a pastor’s viewpoint, he works directly for Jesus … with the governing board … over the church staff … and never for any church powerbroker.

But in all too many cases, the board thinks the pastor works directly for them … some powerbrokers think the same thing … and conflict is crouching at the door.

Think about this:

If a church board/powerbroker wants to run off their pastor … and he is not guilty of any biblical offense … then:

*Which board member/powerbroker has God directly called to ministry?

*Which board member/powerbroker has God specially gifted for ministry?

*Which board member/powerbroker has completed formal biblical/theological training?

*Which board member/powerbroker can preach like the pastor … pray like the pastor … counsel like the pastor … and pastor like the pastor?

If the pastor ever capitulates and starts working for the board or for a powerbroker … he’s finished in that church … because a pastor must work directly for Jesus Christ.

What is the church about?

It’s about fulfilling Christ’s Great Commission to make disciples … baptize them … and teach them.

If a structure advances the Commission and expands the Kingdom, we should applaud it.

If a structure hinders the Commission and stalls the Kingdom, we should oppose it.

It seems to me that churches that have a strong leader and a strong preacher do a far better job of advancing the Commission and expanding the Kingdom.

After 36 years in church ministry, I look back and realize that when I was working for the board, the church stalled … and when I worked for the Lord, the church prospered.

As Pastor Chuck Smith from Calvary Chapel has often asked pastors, “Who do you work for: the board or the Lord?”

As for me and my house … we work for the Lord.

Who do you work for?

Read Full Post »

Interview with a Church Bully

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , on July 15, 2013| 8 Comments »

Let me introduce you to Zane.  He’s been a member of the governing board at the 225-member First Baptist Church in a medium-sized Midwestern city for 42 years.

During that time, Zane has watched 10 pastors come and go … and most of the time, Zane has led the charge for the pastor’s removal.

I recently asked Zane if I could interview him about the way he wields power in his church.  I had just one stipulation: he had to tell the unvarnished truth.  Zane agreed.

Zane, the average tenure of a pastor in your church is less than 5 years.  Why is this?

For the first year or two that a pastor is with us, he is still feeling his way around.  He’s trying to get settled, matching names with faces, and learning about our culture.  During this time, I still wield the power in the church.  But if new people start visiting, and the church starts to grow, then I gather my board buddies together and we start sabotaging the pastor’s ministry.

Why would you do that?  Don’t you want your church to grow?

Not really.  If the church grows too much, then the balance of power will tilt toward the pastor, and we will have to work even harder to dislodge him in the future.  While it would be nice to have more people and funds, we can never let the church get larger than our ability to control things.

But don’t you want to fulfill Christ’s Great Commission and make disciples?

I almost never think about people outside this church.  My goal is to satisfy the desires of the people I know inside this church.

How does that work out in practice?

For example, I meet with my buddies at a restaurant before every board meeting.  We review the agenda and make decisions among ourselves.  Then when we attend the meeting, we control everything, and the pastor ends up having little influence.  On those rare occasions when the pastor persuades the board to do something his way, I contact the board members afterward and bring them back into line.

So you don’t want your pastor to be a leader?

That’s right.  The pastor doesn’t know the community or the church’s history or its people like I do.  We hire him primarily to preach, counsel, do visitation, and conduct weddings and funerals.  We don’t need or want a leader.

When you finally decide that a pastor needs to go, how do you accomplish that?

The best way to get rid of a pastor is to wear him down so he’s no longer effective.  There are several ways we do this.

First, we oppose his plans for outreach.  We can’t afford to have people join the church that we can’t control.  Newcomers are almost always loyal to the pastor, so we have to limit their number.  We usually do this by controlling the money.

Second, we always make sure to attack the pastor’s wife.  We’ll criticize her for working outside the home (meaning she’s not very involved at church).  Or we’ll criticize her for not working outside the home (indicating that she’s lazy).  If she’s not outgoing, we’ll say she’s unfriendly.  If she’s too outgoing, we’ll claim she wants the spotlight.  It doesn’t take long for the pastor’s wife to sense that we don’t like her – and she’ll pass on her feelings to her husband.  When she starts missing meetings, or stays home from church completely, then we’ll claim the pastor doesn’t manage his family well.

If attacking the pastor’s wife isn’t successful, we start in on their kids, and we always find something to nail them on.  As we start spreading our opinions about the pastor’s family around the church, they practically have their bags packed.

When we attack his family, the pastor begins to wear down physically.  He becomes discouraged and depressed.  He starts isolating himself from others.  Then we claim that he isn’t fit to lead us.  This usually works.

And if that doesn’t work?

Then we start spreading half-truths.  We’ll claim that the pastor has been padding his expense account.  We’ll claim that his wife is seeing someone else.  We’ll say that one of their kids is getting poor grades.

If we’re consistent and adamant about our claims, most people in the church will believe us.  Very few people ever ask the pastor if the claims are true.  You wouldn’t believe how naïve most Christians are.  They believe the first thing anybody tells them especially if it comes from an official church leader.  My wife and the wives of my board buddies have become experts at calling churchgoers to run down the pastor.

But that’s lying!  How can you justify what you’re doing?

I’m not really lying … just stretching the truth a little bit.  In all honesty, I don’t care about the pastor – I care about the church.  And I really don’t care about the congregation as a whole – only about my friends and family.  As long as I’m in charge, they’ll keep coming because they know I represent their interests.

But isn’t what you’re doing in direct contradiction to Scripture?

Well, I asked Jesus into my life when I was 9 years old, so I know I’m going to heaven.  But I’ve learned more about subverting a leader from following politics than from the Bible.

What about church bylaws?

We either ignore them or rationalize that they don’t apply in our situation, and nobody has ever called us on it.

If a pastor became wise to your tactics, is there a way for him to stop the attacks?

I suppose there is theoretically, although no pastor has ever tried.  To stop us, the pastor would have to expose our behind-the-scenes machinations to those outside our network.  Since I’m in control of my network, almost nothing the pastor could say would sway them, but if he could document our tricks, he might convince some people to stand against us.  However, in that case, we’d just claim that the pastor was being divisive.

Just in case, we make sure to build strong alliances before we launch our attacks.  I contact the district minister of our denomination and detail the pastor’s deficiencies, so if the pastor ever contacts him, the district minister recommends that the pastor leave the church to keep the peace.  I also contact the associate pastor and office manager and coax them into spying on the pastor.  One is always a willing accomplice.

If by some strange occurrence the pastor survives my campaign against him, I have one more ace to play: my buddies and I threaten to leave the church.  We’ve only had to do this twice, and it worked both times.  If you just say, “It’s either us or the pastor,” it’s amazing how quickly people turn against the pastor because people assume that we know things they don’t know.

If the pastor resigns, what happens to his supporters?

Most of them eventually leave the church, so it affects our attendance and giving temporarily.  But we usually hire a new pastor within a few months.  When we advertise the position, we’ll get 200-300 resumes – and I always make sure to stack the search team with my people so I have the final say.

What happens to the pastors that you force out?

I don’t really care.  I’d say less than half go back into church ministry.  Right after the pastor leaves, I make sure to spread a few additional rumors about him to discourage people from contacting him in the future.  When a pastor is at our church, I try and discredit him.  After he leaves, I try to destroy him.  That way, if he tries to tell anyone from the church why he really left, he’ll be shunned rather than taken seriously.

What’s your worst nightmare?

A pastor with experience who is a strong leader.  If the church starts growing rapidly, and donations pour in, I might have to sell my soul to the devil to stop him.

I’m also afraid of a pastor who is adamant that he gets to face his accusers.  My whole strategy is based on secrecy and back-hallway maneuvering.

I’m also afraid of a pastor who comes to this church and teaches the congregation how to prevent and resolve conflicts biblically.  My success at chasing out pastors is based on my ability to manipulate a faction to carry out my wishes.  If a pastor taught the church how to handle disagreements in a biblical way, my time as a leader might be nearing an end.  Fortunately, most pastors avoid preaching on conflict, so right now, I’m safe.

One more thing: I’m fearful of a principled board member that I can’t manipulate, as well as a strong lay person who insists that we follow the Bible in our dealings with the pastor.

The latest statistics indicate that 23 million Christians in America no longer attend church.  What kind of role does bullying a pastor play in those numbers?

How would anyone know that their pastor was being bullied?  I do my work in secret, and few pastors or Christian leaders are willing to discuss the issue.

Any final words for our readers?

You’re not actually going to publish this interview, are you?  You never told me that!

____________________

I hope by now you’ve figured out that this is a purely fictional interview.  It’s a composite made up of church bullies that I’ve known, read about, or heard about from other pastors.

A friend of mine is writing a book about church bullies, so if you have any stories you’d like to share that he can use, please send them to me and I’ll pass them along.  Thanks!

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

Read Full Post »

Discerning Your Church’s Spiritual Health

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Please Comment!, tagged , , on June 17, 2013| 1 Comment »

Sometimes when I’m reading, I run across a comment that makes me stop and think long and hard.

That’s how I felt when I ran across this statement from Neil Anderson and Charles Mylander in their book Extreme Church Makeover:

“If I had to determine the spiritual health of a church on only one issue, I would find out if the governing board of the church consisted of people coming together to persuade each other of their own independent will or spiritually mature children of God coming together to collectively discern the will of God.”

In a nutshell, the authors are asking:

Are the members of the governing board first asking God about church direction, or are they first asking each other?

I’ve worked with boards that run the gamut on this question.  Here’s what I’ve noticed:

First, a spiritually mature board takes time to listen to God’s Word.

The church I pastored in the 90s did this at every meeting.  The chairman would choose a passage … some of them a bit on the long side … and he’d read it to us.  We’d discuss it afterward.

This simple act was a way of saying: “This board … and this church … are under the authority of the Word of God.  Before we do anything else … and before we talk among ourselves … we want to hear what God is saying to us.”

But I’ve also sat on boards where the Bible wasn’t read, or if it was, it was done hurriedly.  It’s like saying, “Let’s give God a nod but get right to the good stuff … our ideas.”

It seems to me that if a board is serious about Scripture, it will gravitate in the direction of fulfilling Christ’s Great Commission.

And its members will listen to what the Spirit is saying to their church.

Second, a spiritually mature board takes time to pray unhurriedly.

This may seem like a given, but I’ve sat in board meetings where we barely prayed at all.  I distinctly remember one meeting where neither the chairman nor anybody else prayed to open the meeting.

That meeting didn’t go well … and no wonder.  We didn’t invite God’s presence or direction into our time.

But I’ve been in many meetings where all the board members prayed before starting the meeting … everybody prayed at the conclusion of the meeting … and we’d stop and pray anytime we got stuck on an issue.

I’ve heard excuses for not doing this like “we can pray as individuals at home” or “we have such a packed agenda that we need to start immediately.”

But if the board is truly composed of a church’s most spiritual people, wouldn’t they want to ask God for His intervention in church life?

Didn’t Jesus tell His disciples, “Apart from me, you can do nothing?”

And that’s what happens when a board doesn’t take time to pray: nothing.

Third, a spiritually mature board values transparency concerning each person’s spiritual progress.

This can be done in conjunction with Scripture reading and prayer, but it’s essential … because only a board that’s growing spiritually can lead a church that’s growing spiritually and numerically.

As the Book of Malachi clearly specifies, as the leaders go, so go God’s people.

It seems to me there are three levels of sharing that go on between spiritual leaders:

Level One: how I’m doing at work

Level Two: how I’m doing with my family

Level Three: how I’m doing emotionally, morally, and spiritually

Most boards feel free to discuss Level One, especially if board members attend their meeting right after work.

Some board members will discuss certain family issues … especially the need for healing if a family member is physically ill.

But few if any board members will discuss their spiritual, moral, or emotional lives with each other … and yet Level Three represents the greatest opportunity for spiritual growth.

I once worked with a board where we had monthly meetings to discuss church issues … and weekly meetings to discuss our own spiritual growth.  The longer we met together, the more transparent we became with each other … and the more bonded we ended up becoming.

So when we came to do “board business,” decisions came quickly because we knew each other so well.

Finally, a spiritually mature board sets aside personal agendas and seeks God’s agenda for their church.

I once worked with a board member who had a dream: he wanted to see a worship center on the front lawn of our church’s property.

Our church at the time didn’t have a proper worship center, having met in a fellowship hall and a small gymnasium in the past.

This man was so influential that several of the buildings were named after members of his family!

But as God got ahold of his heart, he gave up his dream and chose to follow the Lord’s dream for that church instead.

And to do that, he pledged to follow the leadership of his pastor.

A prominent pastor once told me that several members of his governing board would meet in a restaurant before the official board meeting … and that was the real meeting.

Then they came to the official meeting and imposed their wills on everybody else.

That’s the exact opposite of what Anderson and Mylander are saying.

They believe that if board members say, “Our will be done,” that church is headed for disaster.

But if board members say, “Your will be done, Lord,” that church has a far greater chance to succeed.

In your church, do you think your board members are saying:

“Our will be done?”

or

“Lord, your will be done?”

Why don’t you take the time to find out?

Because the answer to those questions may well determine your church’s future … as well as your own spiritual growth.

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

Read Full Post »

Christian Leaders and Institutional Truth

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Fighting Evil, Forgiveness and Reconciliation among Christians, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , , on May 15, 2013| 2 Comments »

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about a term … but I don’t know how it made its way into my head.

The term is “institutional truth.”  (If you can find a clear definition of the term, please send it to me.)

This term provides a partial explanation as to why some churches end up treating their pastors – and sometimes other employees – so poorly.

To illustrate this idea properly, let me share with you a story that happened more than two decades ago to a pastor I once knew.  (I will use aliases throughout this story.)

Pastor John and his wife were called to Trinity Church, a church that had been declining for some time.  Through John’s preaching and personal charisma, Trinity began to grow at a rapid rate.  In fact, news of Trinity’s growth spread to the church where I was serving, which was several hours away.

One summer, I was attending a Christian conference back east, and when I picked up my rental car, I saw Pastor John and his wife at another rental counter … but all the cars had been rented.  I immediately introduced myself to them and offered to drive them to the conference.

During the two-hour drive to conference headquarters, we became fast friends.

While driving, I casually mentioned my interest in pastoral termination and church conflict.  John and his wife seemed intrigued by some of the ideas that I shared with them.

We saw each other several other times during the conference, and I sensed I had developed an ongoing friendship with this couple.

Not long afterwards, I heard rumblings that all was not well at John’s church.  Some of the pioneers were beginning to complain loudly that they didn’t like John or the way he did things, even though both attendance and giving had significantly improved.  These complaints begin making their way to other churches … including the one that I served as pastor.

One day, I visited our district office, and a secretary told me all about the conflict from her perspective.  Her view was that Pastor John was causing trouble in that church … which she used to attend.  The evidence?

Her friends were upset.

Back at my church, a board member named Harry had a different take on the conflict.  He was good friends with Don – a board member from the “troubled” church – and Don fully supported his pastor.

One night, at a board meeting at Trinity, Pastor John arrived to find the district minister sitting across the table from him.  The district minister had been meeting with Trinity’s board members who all wanted their pastor removed from office.

Someone pushed a letter of termination in front of the pastor’s face.  The letter demanded that Pastor John resign immediately, turn in his keys, clear out his office, and never set foot on the property again.

Pastor John told me later that he stared at the letter for 45 minutes before reluctantly signing it.

However, there is more to the story … because the board waited until Don was away and absent before they staged their coup.

When Don found out what happened – and that the district minister was involved in pushing out his pastor – Don and many of his church friends were extremely upset.  They thought the church was going well!

Over the next several months, I was visited by Pastor John, Don, and Stan, a Trinity member who had moved into our neighborhood.  Stan wanted to find out if there was a connection between the district office and the church office, so he filed a lawsuit to find out the truth.

Oh, my.

I spoke with all the parties involved, trying to understand the conflict better.  (I had no official role except as a pastor interested in resolving the conflict.)

I knew and liked the district minister … and the district’s attorney … and Pastor John … and Don, the board member who didn’t attend that infamous meeting.

I also knew a lot about what happened at that meeting because Don began sending me and his friend Harry official board documents … including the minutes of the meeting where the pastor was terminated.  (And I still have them.)

Both sides had made mistakes, but neither side would admit them … and some information going out about the conflict publicly consisted of outright falsehoods.

I witnessed institutional truth up close and personal, and I did not like what I saw.  Here is what I learned:

First, institutional leaders almost never admit they’ve made any mistakes.  The board at Trinity did wait until Don was absent before removing their pastor … and they did involve the district minister … and they did concoct some deceptive explanations when they made their announcement about the pastor’s departure the following Sunday.

I am not in a position to say that they purposely lied about anything … but I never heard anyone from the district’s side acknowledge that they had committed any errors.

In Scott Peck’s book People of the Lie – a book I’ve read several times – his closing chapter states that government institutions (and he uses the military as an example) never admit that they’ve done anything wrong, even when they’re caught red-handed.  In fact, we’re seeing this principle at work right now in our own government with several scandals that have just been revealed.

Why is this?  Because it is the job of institutional leaders to advance the mission of their organization and defend it at all costs … and if they publicly admit they’ve done something wrong, they’re afraid they’ll lose people’s confidence and (a) donations will take a hit, and (b) they’ll be reprimanded, disciplined, or even removed from office.

But if God is a forgiving God … and His grace covers all our sins … then why can’t Christian leaders admit that they make mistakes?   Doesn’t the gospel apply to leaders as well as non-leaders?

Second, institutional leaders prefer to blame problems on convenient scapegoats.  When Don revealed that the church board had aligned themselves with the district office to push out his pastor, Don became the scapegoat instead.

He was blamed for all kinds of things, and because he held a national office with the denomination, attempts were made to remove him from office.

Most pastors and church leaders lined up behind the district office, which resulted in attempts to discredit Don.

And I got caught in the crossfire, too.

Harry, the board member from my church who was friends with Don, went to the district minister and told him to his face that he never should have been involved in removing his successor.  I told my district minister the same thing, only in a much kinder way.

I wasn’t trying to remove him from office … after all, every leader makes mistakes … but I couldn’t play political games and act like it was all Pastor John’s fault, either.

Pastor John undoubtedly made some errors in judgment as well, especially when he sent a letter to every church in the district insinuating that the district minister was corrupt.  But the district minister was a good man not normally given to playing politics, and I felt that John’s letter went too far.

Third, institutional leaders who do not support their institution 100% are considered subversive.  I could not support the district minister’s actions completely.  Know why?  Because Trinity was the church he had pastored for several decades!

And I believe that it is unethical for a pastor to become involved in removing his successor.

Because I questioned the actions of the district minister, I was branded by some as being disloyal to the district … and some people wrote me off from that moment on.

It’s not that I was disloyal to the district office – it’s that I was more loyal to the truth.

Some top-level leaders felt that since I wasn’t vocally supportive of the district minister, that meant I was standing behind Pastor John instead.

And they especially felt that way when Pastor John quoted from a study I had done about pastors leaving our district.

Since I was becoming persona non grata inside our district, I called the President of our denomination and told him what happened from my perspective.

He told me that I hadn’t done anything wrong … and that he was good friends with Pastor John and felt he was being unfairly blamed for things he didn’t do!

This was the point at which I asked myself:

Must I look the other way and remain silent when I see wrongdoing?

Must I tow the party line and cast blame on people that I think have legitimate complaints?

Must I support an institution completely even when I believe its leaders have done something wrong?

Must I view every conflict through institutional eyes …  or am I allowed to view conflicts through biblical eyes?

In my opinion, I was asked – along with many other pastors and church leaders – to believe in institutional truth … which states:

*Those who lead the institution are always right.

*Those who criticize the institution in any way are always wrong.

*Those who fail to protect and advance the institution will be ignored, slandered, or intimidated.

*While it is never permissible for an individual to criticize the institution, it is permissible for the institution to criticize and even destroy its critics.

What do you think of this idea of “institutional truth?”

How have you seen it play out in your church, denomination, or even your company?

Read Full Post »

A Real-Life Quiz on Church Conflict

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , , on May 6, 2013| Leave a Comment »

Out of the 269 articles I’ve posted on this blog, a few stand out in my mind because they challenge conventional wisdom.  That’s certainly true of this article from nearly two years ago:

(The following post is meant to be interactive.  Along the way, I have included some questions that I’d like you to answer for your own benefit.  Compare your responses to what actually happened in the story.  Thanks!)

Yesterday I read a true story about a church that faced a terrible situation.  The story comes from congregational consultant Peter Steinke’s book Congregational Leadership in Anxious Times.  I do not wish for anyone to be upset by this story, so please know ahead of time that the story turns out favorably for all.

Here’s what happened:

A young girl in a church accused her pastor of molestation.  Two leaders, Tom and Diane, met privately with the pastor to notify him of the charge.  By state law, they had to report the charge to a governmental agency.

The pastor shook his head and quietly responded, “I have never touched her.  Never.”

1.  Which option would you recommend for the pastor if you were Tom or Diane?

  • Stay and fight the charge.
  • Take a leave of absence.
  • Resign immediately.
  • Hire an attorney.

Which option did you select?

Tom and Diane recommended that the pastor take a leave of absence.

However, the pastor eventually decided against that option because he felt it indicated guilt.  He told the leaders, “I need to clear my name, but I don’t want to drag the church through this for months.”

Tom and Diane knew they had to inform the congregation of the charge, and when they did, a group of members thought the pastor should resign.  The leaders of the church were warned that most cases like this one are based in fact.

2.  What should the leaders do now?

  • Insist that the pastor stay and fight.
  • Encourage him to take a leave of absence.
  • Recommend that the pastor resign.
  • Let the process play itself out.

Which option did you select?

The leaders decided to let the process of justice go forward and stand behind their pastor until the legal system made the next move.

The leaders also decided that they would meet every week for prayer followed by a sharing time where they would openly discuss what they were thinking.

Tom shared that he believed the pastor was innocent.

Diane wondered how stable the girl was based upon the fact that her parents had gone through a terrible divorce two years earlier but had now jointly hired a lawyer.

Another admitted that she was being pressured by other members to withdraw her support for the pastor.

The pastor told the leaders that he would hold no resentment if anyone felt compelled to withdraw their support from him.

One leader chose to resign.

Marie, another leader, stood solidly behind the pastor because she had been falsely accused of something at her own workplace.

A few anxious leaders turned against the pastor and condemned him.

3.  If you attended those weekly meetings, what would you as a leader do now?

  • Insist the pastor stay and fight.
  • Encourage him to take a leave of absence.
  • Recommend that he resign.
  • Let the justice process run its course.

Which option would you select at this point?

The leaders chose the last option once again.

Fourteen weeks later, the charges against the pastor were suddenly dropped.

4.  What should Tom and Diane do now?

  • Verbally berate every person who doubted the pastor’s innocence.
  • Encourage all the doubters to return to the church.
  • Shame those who didn’t stand with the pastor.
  • Just turn the page and move on.

Which option did the leaders select?

They decided to personally contact anyone who doubted the pastor (or the leaders) and welcome them to return to the church – no questions asked.

5.  What did the leaders of this church do that was so unique?

  • They stood behind their pastor whether he was innocent or guilty.
  • They ignored almost everything the congregation told them.
  • They waited for the truth to come out before making a judgment.
  • They took the easy way out.

Which option did you go with?

The third statement best reflects the mindset of this church’s leaders: they chose to let the justice system take its course before deciding the pastor’s future.

According to Steinke, many people facing these conditions become what psychologists call “cognitive misers.”  They instinctively draw either/or conclusions: either the pastor is innocent or he’s guilty.  Either the pastor is good or he is bad.

But the leaders of this church are to be commended for not letting anxiety make decisions for them.  When certain people were calling for the pastor’s resignation – and even staying home from services until he left – the leaders stuck to their original decision and let the legal system do its work.

The pastor’s job, career, and reputation were all saved.

The church’s reputation and future were preserved.

The decision of the leaders was vindicated.

Why?  Because the leaders chose to make their decision based on truth rather than (a) unity, (b) politics, (c) groupthink, or (d) anxiety.

Let me quote Steinke on this issue fully:

“Nowhere in the Bible is tranquillity preferred to truth or harmony to justice.  Certainly reconciliation is the goal of the gospel, yet seldom is reconciliation an immediate result.  If people believe the Holy Spirit is directing the congregation into the truth, wouldn’t this alone encourage Christians who have differing notions to grapple with issues respectfully, lovingly, and responsively?  If potent issues are avoided because they might divide the community, what type of witness is the congregation to the pursuit of truth?”

In other words, the church of Jesus Christ does not crucify its leaders just because someone makes an accusation against them.

Think with me: if unity is more important than truth, then Jesus deserved to be crucified, didn’t He?

The accusations against Jesus caused great distress for Pilate, resulting in turmoil for his wife and animosity between Pilate and the Passover mob.

The Jewish authorities had to resort to loud and vociferous accusations against Jesus to force Pilate to act.

The women around the cross wept uncontrollably.

The disciples of Jesus all ran off and deserted Him in His hour of need (except John).

Jesus’ countrymen engaged in mocking and taunting while witnessing His execution.

Who caused Pilate, the Jewish authorities, the women, the disciples, and the Jewish people to become angry and upset and depressed?

It was JESUS!  And since He disrupted the unity of His nation, He needed to go, right?

This is the prevailing view among many denominational leaders today.  If a pastor is accused of wrongdoing, and some people in the church become upset, then the pastor is usually advised to resign to preserve church unity, even before people fully know the truth – and even if the pastor is totally innocent.

In fact, there are forces at work in such situations that don’t want the truth to come out.

That is … if unity is more important than truth.

But if the charges against Jesus – blasphemy against the Jewish law and sedition against the Roman law – were false and trumped up, then Jesus should have gone free even if His release caused disunity in Jerusalem.

The point of Steinke’s story is that leaders – including pastors – need to remain calm during turbulent times in a church.  There are always anxious people who push the leaders to overreact to relieve them of their own anxiety.

If Pilate hadn’t overreacted … if the mob hadn’t … if Jesus’ disciples hadn’t … would Jesus still have been crucified?

Divinely speaking: yes.  It was the only way He could pay for our sins.

Humanly speaking: no.  What a travesty of justice!

20 centuries later, Jesus’ followers can do a better job of handling difficult accusations against Christian leaders – especially pastors.

Instead of becoming anxious, they can pray for a calm and peaceful spirit.

Instead of making quick decisions, they can make deliberate ones.

Instead of aiming for destruction, they can aim for redemption.

Instead of holding up unity as the church’s primary value, truth should be viewed that way.

If the pastor in this story had been guilty of a crime, then the leaders needed to choose a different course of action.  Sadly, these things do happen in our day, even in churches.

But in this case, the leaders stood strong and did not let the anxiety of others – or their own – determine the destiny of their pastor and church.

They opted for truth instead.

And the truth will set you – and everyone else – free.

Read Full Post »

Introduction to the Book Church Coup, Finale

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories, tagged , , , on May 1, 2013| Leave a Comment »

Here is the second half of the introduction to my recently-published book Church Coup: A Cautionary Tale of Congregational Conflict.  I sign all the books that are ordered from my website at www.restoringkingdombuilders.org   You can also purchase the book from Amazon and other retailers.

__________

While there are fascinating studies on the forced termination of pastors, Christians need to hear more stories about this tragedy that happens behind closed doors.  Yet pastors are afraid that if they tell their stories publicly, they will look foolish, rehearse their pain, sully their reputations, and damage their chances for future employment. So except for rare forays into the light, the involuntary dismissal of hundreds of pastors every month has escaped the notice of most Christians.  Because most books on conflict are aimed at pastors and church leaders, my hope is to enlighten and empower lay people as well to ensure that conflicts involving pastors or staffers are handled in a just, deliberate, and biblical manner.

I may be violating some unwritten rule that says, “What happens in church stays in church.”  Wouldn’t it be better for our careers and mental health if my wife and I refused to look back, learned from our mistakes, kept our mouths shut, and advanced full-speed ahead?  But I believe it’s a greater evil to remain silent.  What kind of a New Testament would we have if Paul had been mute about the problems in Rome, Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, Philippi, Thessalonica, Ephesus, and Crete?  We have learned so much from those churches and their blunders.

Part of me wants to travel back in time and prevent my father’s forced exit.  If I could help him with that situation, would he still be alive today?  Although that notion may be unrealistic, I have sensed God calling me for years to do something to limit (and even eliminate) the unchristian practices that are inherent in forcing an innocent pastor to leave a church.  Wouldn’t it advance the kingdom to prevent this tragedy from happening to other pastors and churches?

Let’s acknowledge that troubled pastors do exist. Some have character disorders or a narcissistic bent.  Others are control freaks.  A few are lazy.  Some can even be tyrants.  There are pastors who should be terminated – and even leave pastoral ministry altogether.  But Alan Klaas, who investigated the causes of pastoral ousters in different Christian denominations, concluded that in 45 percent of the cases, a minority faction caused the pastor to leave, while “only seven percent of the time was the cause the personal misconduct of the minister.”[iii]

I have written this book with three purposes in mind.  First, I want to share my side of a conflict as forthrightly as I can.  Several weeks after the conflict surfaced, I sat in two public meetings and did not respond to any of the charges leveled against me.  Three years later, I am able to articulate my responses with greater perspective.  Others have differing views as to what happened, and that’s fine.  This is not the final version of what happened in 2009, but my version as I experienced it.  While the conflict occurred, I took careful notes, generated and received scores of emails, interacted with key players, and interviewed congregational experts.

Next, I want to seek redemption for what we’ve experienced.  Rick Warren says that our greatest ministries emerge from our greatest sufferings:

“God intentionally allows you to go through painful experiences to equip you for ministry to others . . . . The very experiences that you have resented or regretted most in life – the ones you’ve wanted to hide and forget – are the experiences God wants to use to help others.  They are your ministry!  For God to use your painful experiences, you must be willing to share them.  You have to stop covering them up, and you must honestly admit your faults, failures, and fears.  Doing this will probably be your most effective ministry.”[iv]

While my wife and I are unimportant in the larger Christian community, maybe our willingness to share honestly about a painful experience will turn out to be our “most effective ministry.”

Finally, I want to prevent these kinds of conflicts from happening altogether.  My prayer is that by reducing the fifty-day conflict to slow motion, God’s people will be able to identify key junctures and learn from both the wise – and foolish – decisions that were made.  I also pray that believers will institute safeguards so that a similar conflict won’t invade their churches.

It is not my intent to seek revenge on those who hurt us.  Although it took time, my wife and I have forgiven them and wish them God’s best in the days ahead.  But for this story to help others, it must be reported with authenticity and emotion.  My goal is to let believers know how quickly a conflict can spiral out of control and to recommend ways to handle matters that go against our feelings but are consistent with Scripture.

Because I come from a tradition where mostly men are considered for ordination, I will use terms that reflect that reality, although I greatly value the contributions women make in ministry.

Except for members of my immediate family, I have used aliases throughout this book to protect the identity of the individuals involved. I have also avoided naming my former community or church – but all the events related in this story are real to my knowledge.

May God use this book to help his people treat pastors and staff members with greater dignity and respect so they can serve him passionately and productively until Christ returns.

Read Full Post »

Introduction to the Book Church Coup

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories, tagged , , , on April 29, 2013| Leave a Comment »

Over the course of many months, I’ve posted a few excerpts on the blog from my new book Church Coup: A Cautionary Tale of Congregational Conflict.

Since the book has now been published, I thought I’d post a few more excerpts.  The following is from the book’s introduction (with the formatting altered).

____________________

Did you know that hundreds of pastors are forced to leave their churches every month?

Christians rightly lament the persecution of believers worldwide, but they are being terrorized by secular authorities or religious extremists.  But in far too many cases, pastors and their families are being mistreated in local assemblies by their spiritual brothers and sisters – and the toll keeps escalating.

If a group in a church attacks their pastor and he is forced to resign, the consequences are tragic for everyone involved. The pastor may leave church ministry for good. That church’s reputation will be sullied.  Some believers will flee their church.  Friendships will end.  Outreach will stop cold.  And the evil one will dance.  I’ve seen it all my life.

When I was a boy, my father felt pressured to resign as pastor from a church he founded, even though he was innocent of any major offense.  He died twenty months later at age thirty-eight, leaving behind a homemaker wife who didn’t drive, two sons (ages thirteen and ten), and a five-year-old daughter who has only vague recollections of the father she lost.

During the ensuing years, the pastors of the churches I attended were subjected to similar pressures.  In my early teens, one pastor abruptly resigned in the middle of a church meeting.  My next pastor was forced to resign after five years of ministry.  In my second staff position, the pastor was voted out of office in another contentious public meeting.  And in my next staff position, the pastor was verbally threatened until he lost the will to serve.

When I became a rookie pastor, I learned that my predecessor had been forced from office after just one year of ministry.  When our church merged with a sister church two years later, the other church’s pastor was forced to leave.  Five years after the merger, a disgruntled churchgoer formed an alliance with a faction inside that church and pressured me to resign – but the board stood by me and that group left to form their own church nearby.

The next decade went so well that I hoped that I’d finally outlasted any ecclesiastical opponents. And after becoming the pastor of an impactful church entering the millennium, I entered the Doctor of Ministry program at Fuller Seminary and wrote my dissertation on dealing with church antagonists using a biblical model informed by family systems theory. After studying how powerbrokers operate in a church, I thought I had finally come to a place where peace and understanding reigned.  But sadly, I was mistaken.

In the autumn of 2009, after my wife and I returned from a mission trip to Eastern Europe, our church’s governing leaders stunned us by making drastic decisions.  Seven weeks later, I resigned as pastor because too many people believed a litany of false allegations.  We were not guilty of heresies, immoralities, illegalities, or any major offenses.  While we both had made minor mistakes in our ministries, we were treated like we had committed ecclesiastical felonies.

As I have related our story to family, friends, and colleagues, I have learned how frequently this kind of situation is replicated in local churches.  While there are unique features to our story, the template for forcing pastors from their positions has remained the same for decades, if not centuries.  Forced exits have become so common in American churches that Rediger writes:

“Abuse of pastors by congregations and the breakdown of pastors due to inadequate support are now tragic realities. This worst-case scenario for the church, one that is increasing in epidemic proportions, is not a misinterpretation by a few discontented clergy.  Rather, it is a phenomenon that is verified by both research and experience.”[i]

Guy Greenfield, who was forced out of his position as pastor in his early sixties, comments:

“This problem is a growing phenomenon. Numerous publications of observations and research indicate that it is in fact a major problem approaching crisis proportions.  Talk to any group of ministers, and you will hear stories of tragedy and heartache. In recent years I have interviewed a considerable number of former ministers, now in secular work, and nearly everyone I talked with told me a similar story that resulted in forced termination. Many of them are now cynical, bitter, angry, and discouraged. Most tell me they will never return to a full-time paid church position.  Their wounds continue to be painful.”[ii]

While pastors have always faced the possibility of forced termination, the problem has been growing steadily worse, which is why wounded pastors are flocking to specialized ministries that offer professional assessments, intensive counseling, and peaceful retreats.

For the past three years, my wife and I have been living hundreds of miles from the church we once joyfully served.  We’ve asked ourselves, “How did we get here?  Why did we lose so many friends so quickly?  What did we do to contribute to our exile?”  What’s ironic is that I possess a good-sized library on managing and resolving church conflict, and I think I understand the field fairly well.  Yet part of me continues to engage in self-reproach because I didn’t see the conflict coming – and neither did our church family.  The whole experience still seems surreal.

___________________

I’ll share the other half of the introduction next time.  If you’d like to purchase the book, you can obtain a signed copy from my website at www.restoringkingdombuilders.org or you can spend a little less and secure the paperback or e-book at Amazon’s website at http://www.amazon.com/Church-Coup-Jim-Meyer/dp/1624199321/ref=dp_wl_cart1?ie=UTF8&colid=EWNKS64TGXCT&coliid=IN8XJYN9467QW

Thank you!

[i] G. Lloyd Rediger, Clergy Killers: Guidance for Pastors and Congregations under Attack (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997), 1.

[ii] Guy Greenfield, The Wounded Minister: Healing from and Preventing Personal Attacks (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2001), 15.

Read Full Post »

Why I Wrote a Book

Posted in About Restoring Kingdom Builders, Church Conflict, Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories, tagged , , , , on April 25, 2013| 5 Comments »

Over the past 3 years, I’ve been writing a book on a devastating 50-day conflict that my wife and I experienced in our last church ministry.

The book has now been published by Xulon Press and is titled Church Coup: A Cautionary Tale of Congregational Conflict.

The book is 291 pages long, contains 14 chapters, and has more than 150 endnotes.

Why did it take 3 years?

*Because I wrote 450 pages and had to pare it down.  (You can’t share everything that happened or the book would become unreadable.)

*Because I chose to edit the book myself … and that took twice as long as writing it.

*Because this may be my only shot at writing a book … and I wanted to get it right.

*Because I hoped that the longer I waited, the less painful the recounting of the story would be for everyone involved.

While the first nine chapters are a narrative describing the conflict, the last five chapters analyze what happened and place it in its larger context in the Christian community.

There are models for books like this, such as The Wounded Minister by Guy Greenfield, Too Great a Temptation by Joel Gregory, Why I Stayed by Gayle Haggard, Crying on Sunday by Elaine Onley, as well as the classic Clergy Killers by the late G. Lloyd Rediger.

When I wrote my doctoral dissertation on church antagonism informed by family systems theory, my professional editor could not believe that these kinds of conflicts happen in churches.  Pastors know they occur, as do denominational executives and parachurch leaders, but the average Christian remains unaware of how conflicts begin and are perpetuated.

While pastors and governing boards will profit from the book, I wrote it primarily for lay people, which is why I chose to tell a story.  In fact, I believe that lay people hold the key to preventing and resolving these kinds of conflicts, even when they occur behind closed doors.

Let me make four observations about the book:

It’s personal.  The book is my attempt to share what a pastor goes through when a small minority targets him for removal.  I’m in a unique position to do this because I’ve seen pastors treated this way all my life, starting with my father, who died less than two years after he was forced to resign due to a major conflict in a church he planted.

It’s not possible to lead a large volunteer organization without making occasional missteps, which is why I wrote a chapter called, “Mistakes I Made.”  But I contend that any errors I made were minor and resolvable.  I was not guilty of any major offense and should have been protected against the accusations made against me.

However, some people collected several minor offenses, embellished them, exaggerated their importance, and then accused me of all kinds of wrongdoing.  They chose to elevate their personal agenda over the desires of 95% of the congregation . . . the epitome of selfishness.

While I answer some charges in the book, most could easily have been cleared up if people had simply spoken with me in person.

It’s emotional.  From the beginning, I intended to write a raw book, but after letting some professionals review it, I made modifications.

Because the book rehearses how the conflict affected my wife and me emotionally, there’s a lot of pain involved, which several endorsers noted.  Maybe someday the pain will subside, but from what I understand, it probably never will . . . and not just for us.

That’s why I’ve subtitled the book A Cautionary Tale.  There are lessons we can learn from pain that can’t be learned any other way.

At the eleventh hour, I felt like scrubbing the whole project, but my family cheered me forward.  Why put all that effort into a book and then discard it?  Because I truly don’t wish to hurt anyone or reopen any old wounds.

But if you write about the crucifixion, you have to talk about Pilate, and Caiaphas, and the Sanhedrin, and Peter’s denials, and Judas’ betrayal.  There’s no way around it.

So I tried to put as much distance between me and those who attacked me as possible.  I don’t name the church or its community, and I give aliases to those who were integrally involved in the conflict.  Whenever I could advance the narrative without mentioning people by name, I did, and as often as possible, I attribute actions and decisions to groups rather than individuals.

In addition, I purposely tried not to attack anyone either personally or professionally.  While I vehemently disagreed with many decisions that were made, I try to express myself with grace.

A major conflict surfaces a range of feelings that you can’t conceal.  Before and during Jesus’ crucifixion, He experienced sorrow, depression, agony, abandonment, betrayal, and shock.

In the same way – but to a far lesser degree – there is no way to tell this story without relating strong emotions, especially outrage.  Since I’m a thinker more than a feeler, my account is usually restrained – but not always.

It’s prescriptive.  At the end of each of the first 11 chapters, I offer suggestions as to how to prevent these kinds of conflicts from happening in churches.  I offer counsel to pastors, governing leaders, and lay people alike.  The book is not so much a “look how much I suffered” lament as it is an attempt to point out mistakes that were made to help Christian leaders and churches handle these situations better in the future.

Paul wrote letters to 7 churches and 2 ministry leaders in the New Testament.  His letters to Timothy and Titus were for their eyes only.  But books like Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians and Ephesians and Colossians were written to congregations and intended to be read aloud to affect the behavior of entire assemblies . . . and Paul often instructs them concerning how to handle the conflicts in their midst.

There’s so little in print on dealing with these challenges.  So the book’s last chapter deals with the problem of pastoral termination.  I offer prescriptions for eradicating this plague that causes at least 1,500 pastors per month to leave church ministry . . . often for good.

It’s redemptive.  While God did not cause this conflict, He did permit it.  After Joseph encountered his brothers in Egypt, he told them, “You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good.”

Much of my ministry in the days to come will be focused on helping congregations prevent these kinds of conflicts.  They are inherently destructive to churches, pastors, boards, and churchgoers alike.  (In fact, there isn’t one instance in the New Testament where churchgoers try to destroy one of their leaders.)

In my introduction, I quote Rick Warren – who is going through his own period of suffering right now – from his bestseller The Purpose Driven Life:

“God intentionally allows you to go through painful experiences to equip you for ministry to others . . . . The very experiences that you have resented or regretted most in life – the ones you’ve wanted to hide and forget – are the experiences God wants to use to help others. They are your ministry! For God to use your painful experiences, you must be willing to share them. You have to stop covering them up, and you must honestly admit your faults, failures, and fears. Doing this will probably be your most effective ministry.”

This book is my attempt to carry out Rick’s words.  In fact, I felt that God was compelling me to write it.

If you’d like to buy Church Coup, you can order it at our website at www.restoringkingdombuilders.org

And if you find the book helpful, I’d appreciate it if you would tell others about it.

May God richly bless you, and remember the wisdom of Romans 12:18:

“If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.”

Read Full Post »

When Spiritual Leaders Fight Back

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , , , on April 24, 2013| 1 Comment »

There’s an unbiblical notion about pastors that has been circulating for years.  It goes like this:

Churchgoers can publicly attack their pastor … accuse him of anything they want … without any corroboration … and the pastor is expected to absorb the hits without fighting back.

We’re told that Jesus refused to defend Himself against false accusations and that His leaders need to do the same.

There’s just one thing wrong with this idea.

It wasn’t true of Moses, or Joshua, or David … or even Jesus Himself, who defended Himself and His message at every turn (read John 5-9, for example) until His God-appointed execution.

Here’s a specific example: how Moses behaved in Numbers 16.

While Israel wandered in the wilderness, 4 men arose to challenge Moses’ leadership: Korah, Dathan, Abiram, and On.

And just in case Moses didn’t get the message, the foursome formed an additional alliance with 250 community leaders against Moses’ leadership.

This group thought that Moses shouldn’t be their leader … that they should be priests … and implied that Israel should return to Egypt.

In other words, they didn’t like their leader nor the direction he was taking them, so they tried to help God out by staging a coup.

In my last post, I mentioned two lessons about spiritual leadership that emerge from this passage:

First, God chooses who He wants to lead His people.

Second, God’s leaders can expect to be challenged periodically.

Here’s a third lesson:

Next, God’s leaders are permitted to defend themselves against public accusations.

I know pastors who have been trashed in public by a single individual or a small group in their congregation.

The majority of those pastors made a beeline for the exit and immediately resigned.

In one case, a woman sent a letter to every home in the congregation claiming that her pastor did not believe several essential Christian doctrines.  Her claims were completely false, but rather than defending himself, the pastor quickly split.

Although Moses wasn’t a pastor, he was a spiritual leader, and when his leadership was challenged publicly, he fell on his face in prayer (Numbers 16:4) … and then stood strong against his accusers.

Why did the humblest man on the face of the earth (12:3) resist rather than wilt?

*Because God had called him to lead His people.

*Because Moses was God’s spokesman to Israel.

*Because God had never commanded Moses to quit.

*Because Moses knew he hadn’t done anything wrong (16:15).

I wish more pastors would stand strong against false accusations.

I once met with a prominent pastor who told me a similar story.  During a pivotal time in his church’s history, four staff members began making accusations against their boss.

The pastor was devastated by their charges, even though they weren’t true.

The pastor knew that if he resigned because of their claims, they would end up in charge of the church by default … and that would be disastrous for everyone involved.

So the pastor called a public meeting of the congregation … and when he did, 3 of the 4 staff members instantly resigned, fearing that their mutiny would be exposed.

At the meeting, the pastor calmly but passionately answered the charges the staff had made against him.

The pastor stayed … the rebellious staff members all left … and that church became a congregation of great impact.

That’s how Moses handled this situation as well.

Finally, God aligns Himself with the leader He called.

Was Moses imperfect?  Yes.

Had he made mistakes as a leader?  Undoubtedly.

Did Korah and his 3 buddies and the 250 community leaders make any valid points about Moses?  Possibly.

But in spite of all this, the Lord sided with Moses 100%.

Moses indicted the rebels “because of all their sins” (16:26) while the Lord mentioned “the men who sinned at the cost of their lives” (16:38).

The Lord never said, “Moses, they’re right … you can be overbearing at times … and a bit too sensitive … and you lose your temper too often.  I’m replacing you with Joshua.”

No, the Lord backed Moses to the hilt.  In fact, He told Moses to get out of the way so He could “put an end to them [the rebels] at once”  (16:20-21).

God couldn’t have made His feelings any clearer when He opened up the earth and sent all the rebels to Sheol … and then sent fire that consumed the 250 community leaders.

True to form, the following day, the whole community in Israel blamed Moses and Aaron for killing the 254+ rebels when God was responsible … even though Moses interceded for their salvation (16:22).

And when Israel “gathered in opposition” to the two leaders, the Lord threatened to wipe them out a second time … only to have Moses plead for their salvation again … even though a plague took out 14,700 people “in addition to those who had died because of Korah” (16:42-49).

In my last article, I mentioned that I recently had a conversation with a man who had been a pastor for 50 years.  In his first church, there was a woman who had run out the previous 3 pastors.

When she tried the same approach with the new pastor, he ran her out instead.

When he told me that, I shook his hand and commended him for his courage.

That pastor knew that God had called him to that church, and that nobody was going to run him out prematurely.

That pastor stayed 23 years and enjoyed a glorious ministry … all because he had the guts to fight back against unreasonable opposition.

Last weekend, I led a seminar at a Christian leadership convention titled, “Dealing with Church Antagonists.”

When I was done, one veteran pastor told me, “I wish I’d heard that 30 years ago.”  Others echoed similar thoughts.

But I’ll never forget one tiny, quiet woman who wouldn’t let go of my hand and repeatedly told me, “Thank you.  Thank you.”

My basic message?  Spiritual leaders – especially pastors – have a biblical right to fight back against congregational antagonists.

Yes, I know such battles can be bloody.  I have the wounds to prove it.

Moses said to his opponents in Numbers 16:7: “No, I’m not the one who has gone too far … you’re the ones who have gone too far!”

Do you have the courage to say that?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »