Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Conflict with the Pastor’ Category

Beware of Bobbleheads

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination on April 11, 2011| 2 Comments »

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

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

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

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

Where can one find Christian bobbleheads in a church setting?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How does the gunslinger get away with his diabolical plan?

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

In other words, they’re bobbleheads.

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

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

In other words, they were bobbleheads.

Greenfield goes on:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read Full Post »

Pulling Our Punches

Posted in About Restoring Kingdom Builders, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Fighting Evil, Pastoral Termination on March 30, 2011| 1 Comment »

I went to a great seminary.  I loved everything about it: the professors, the books, interacting with fellow students, writing a thesis – just the general environment.  Sometimes the reading got to be a bit much, and at times the incessant papers nearly drove me mad, but I knew what the goal was: a solid Bible education.

We were in seminary to learn the Bible: to preach it, explain it, defend it, apply it.  Our professors knew, loved, and practiced the Word of God.  Being in seminary was a foretaste of heaven.

We didn’t learn much about business in seminary.  After all, we weren’t trying to get our MBAs, but our M.Divs (Master of Divinity degrees).  In fact, when I graduated from seminary after five years, the business world had little if any influence on the local church.

My how times have changed!

If you’re going to pastor an impactful church these days, a seminary education doesn’t seem necessary.  Some people say that what you really need is to take successful business principles and apply them to the church.  Develop your mission.  Cast a vision.  Find your niche.  Market your product.  And evaluate, evaluate, evaluate.

I am not saying that any of the above ideas are wrong.  Pastors can learn from any and all fields.  But in our culture, churches are getting more and more away from what the Bible says and are becoming increasingly enamored with what business says.

I could cite many examples, but one of the most prominent ones concerns the way churches view pastors.

The old paradigm said that a pastor was called by God to love the people and teach the Word.  Loving the people involved practices like counseling, hospital visitation, and praying with people.  Teaching the Word involved disciplines like studying, writing, and delivering biblically-based messages.

The new paradigm says that a pastor is the CEO of a small business, the local church.  You’re not called; you’re hired.  You don’t love the people as much as you lead the church.  You don’t teach the Word as much as communicate a message – one that should continually advance the church’s mission.

It’s all so different.

The reason I bring this up is that many pastors – including myself – were trained at a time when we believed God was calling us to be a pastor, not a CEO.  As some churches grew in size, their pastors became cultural superstars, and a lot of smaller church pastors suddenly felt inadequate.  Most of these large church pastors were using business principles in their churches, so the business way of doing things gradually spread to other churches.

But somewhere along the line, we lost the whole plot.

We now expect pastors to be CEOs, elders to be the board of directors, and money to be the bottom line.

Where’s the Bible in all this?

I bring this up because of my passion for pastors who have been involuntarily forced out of their churches.  How often is the Bible used in such situations?  How often are business practices used instead?

What does that say about our confidence in the relevance of Scripture?

Please don’t misunderstand me.  Pastors and churches can profit from some of the insights and practices of the business community.  But as followers of Jesus Christ, we should go to Scripture first and business second, not business first and Scripture second.

If God’s Word is primary, that changes everything in a local church.

What’s the bottom line in business?  Money.  How about in a church?  Devoted disciples.  The problem is that it’s easier to measure donations than changed lives.

What does a business do when it has hard times?  It cuts expenses.  It lays off employees.  It gets rid of product lines.

What does a church do?  It digs into Scripture.  It gathers together for prayer.  It believes God for great things.

It’s ironic: many Christian leaders believe what Scripture teaches for salvation and spiritual growth but ignore Scripture when business practices dictate otherwise.

Let me give you two examples among many I could cite.

Example one: I had a conversation yesterday with a Christian man.  We were discussing what should be done (if anything) about the people in a church who are wrongfully involved in forcing out a pastor.

My friend’s view is that a church doesn’t need to do anything to these people because God will punish them in His time and way.  He told me the story of an associate pastor who engineered the ouster of the senior pastor.  The associate got cancer and his wife died a horrible death.  His conclusion?  Christians don’t need to address the perpetrators in any way because eventually “God’ll get ’em.”

Where do we find that in the New Testament?

Yes, God will repay all of us according to our deeds in the next life (2 Corinthians 5:10), and the law of sowing and reaping still applies in this life as well (Galatians 6:7).  But would you rather receive correction from God directly or mediated through the leaders of a local church?

As Hebrews 10:29 reminds us, “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”

Instead, the New Testament tells us exactly what to do when those inside a church sin and cause division.  We are to gently and lovingly confront them until they repent.  We are to show them the error of their ways and bring them back to the Lord.  For example, look up Romans 16:17-18; Titus 3:10-11; 3 John 9-10.

Jesus said in Luke 17:3-4, “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.”

There are four action verbs mentioned here: sin, rebuke, repent, forgive.  Jesus lays out the sequence for us.  When someone sins, we rebuke them.  When they repent, we forgive them.  But how often do we follow His way?  Instead, when people sin, we quickly forgive them and dispense with our rebuking and their repenting.

In other words, if I’m the ringleader against my pastor, and I mount a campaign to force him to resign, and he eventually leaves, most people will quickly forgive me even though I’ve sinned.  No one will rebuke me.  No one will insist I repent.  No one will follow Jesus’ instructions.  And, of course, that leaves me wide open to do the same thing again.

Where’s the Bible in all this?

Example two: The church’s governing board is upset with the pastor for something he said.  One of the board members has had it.  He wants to fire the pastor outright.  During the meeting, another board member comes to agree with him.  Several aren’t yet sure, but nobody feels confident enough to defend the pastor.  After talking into the night, the remaining holdouts come around and agree that the board will fire the pastor.  They then agree to meet again to discuss how and when they’ll talk to the pastor and what (if anything) they’ll say to the congregation.

During this whole episode, they never crack open their Bibles.  They never discuss gently rebuking the pastor so he can repent and be restored.  They never ask for his intepretation of the event or let him present any defense.  They never even ask God for His guidance, asking Him to bless their decision instead.

In other words, they handle matters like they were in a seventh floor office at work.

Once again, where’s the Bible in all this?

The mission statement of Restoring Kingdom Builders is 25 words long:

“To begin the healing process for pastors and their families who have experienced forced termination and to teach Christians ways to manage these conflicts biblically.”

Please notice that last phrase: “to teach Christians ways to manage these conflicts biblically.”

Which conflicts?  The ones that involve the forced termination of pastors.

Most clergy-centered ministries in America are focused on the “healing process” for those who have gone through the pain of a forced exit, and my wife and I want to do that as well.  But isn’t it also wise to try and prevent these situations from happening in the first place?

That’s what I want to do.  Will you pray for my wife and me as we begin this ministry?  And when you hear about pastors who have undergone the pain of termination, will you let them know about our ministry?

And while you’re at it, may I suggest a project?  As you re-read the New Testament again, notice how many times the human authors – inspired by the Holy Spirit – make concrete suggestions as to how divisive people in a church are to be treated.  These instructions are always to the leaders or the people of a local church.

While reading Jeremiah 1 in The Message several days ago, I came across a fascinating phrase, especially as Opening Day in baseball approaches this Thursday.  God told Jeremiah (the prophet with whom I have the most affinity), “Don’t pull your punches or I’ll pull you out of the lineup.”

I believe He’s saying the same thing to me.

Read Full Post »

Who Will Stop Me?

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Fighting Evil, Pastoral Termination on March 21, 2011| 8 Comments »

Hi.  I attend your church.  You don’t know who I am, but I show up nearly every Sunday and sit in the next-to-the-last row on the left side.

And it’s ironic that I attend your church at all, because I don’t like the pastor.  I don’t like his sermons.  I don’t like his kids.  I don’t like the schools he attended and the hobbies he jabbers about from the pulpit.  I just don’t like him – and for that reason, I’d like him to leave.

The right thing to do would be for me to leave the church and attend somewhere else.  After all, at this point I’m not aware of anyone else who feels the way I do.  But I don’t want to leave.  I want to stay.  I want him to leave.

There’s a quick way for me to pull this off: start making accusations against the pastor.  It almost doesn’t matter what I accuse him of doing: sleeping around, embezzling funds, fuzzy beliefs, power plays – you get the picture.

Still with me?

I can accuse the pastor of various misdeeds through (a) a whispering campaign (“Did you hear that the pastor was recently seen …”); (b) a letter sent to select church homes (“The pastor doesn’t believe in the virgin birth!”); (c) a few strategic emails (“The pastor has been seriously overspending funds recently”); or (d) conversations with my friends (“Why does he continually refer to that TV show all the time?”).

Having done this sort of thing before, I know that one or two of my accusations will eventually reach the pastor, and he’ll be very upset.  But I also know my accusations will reach the ears of the governing leaders as well.

And if my charges are taken seriously, no one will come and talk with me.  No one will ask me for the evidence that my charges are true.

The pastor’s supporters will disbelieve the charges immediately.  His enemies (among which I count myself a proud member) will believe all the charges and more.  (We’ve just been waiting for someone to articulate them.)  It’s the group in the middle that I’m aiming for.  I just need to pick off a few to accomplish my goal.

By this time, a few people will add charges to the ones I’ve already made.  It almost doesn’t matter what they are or if they’re true or not.  The board may choose to investigate the charges, but if they do, they will almost certainly not be traced back to me.  And if anyone tries to confront me, I will just do what they do in politics: deny, deny, deny.

My first attempt may not be successful.  The pastor may survive my little campaign.  But if I keep making little charges here and there, the wind will pick them up, and when they get to the pastor, they’ll start to wear him down.

And then one of these days, the pastor will resign due to burnout or stress, or a small group in the church will add to my accusations and formally drive the pastor out.

The pastor will be told by the leaders of both the church and the demonination that he needs to leave the church to preserve its unity, that the church needs to start with a clean slate.

But no one will do anything to me.  I have ecclesiastical immunity.

Nobody will sue me.  Christians aren’t to sue other Christians according to 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, right?

Nobody will confront me.  After the board deals with the pastor, they’ll be too tired.

Nobody will finger me.  In the unlikely event that the leaders launch an investigation to find out who started the rumors, they would probably speak with others long before they got to me.  If I caught wind of their efforts, I’d quietly slip out the back door of the church, wait a couple months, and then return.  Nothing would happen to me.

Nobody will ask me to leave.  After all, I’m allowed to attend services at my own church, right?

And when the church calls the next pastor, if I don’t like him, I already know what to do.

Who will stop me?

Nobody.

Read Full Post »

Petty Christians

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues on March 18, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Nearly ten years ago, a famous rock star became incensed as to what was happening to music in America.  He remembered when he was a kid and would listen to the radio, enthralled at the personalities of the disc jockeys who spun records and tall tales.  Back then, you had to have a lot of talent to break through the pack and have your record make it to radio.  You had to write a great song, play and sing it well, and keep it up to have a successful music career.

Somewhere along the line, all of that changed.

So in 2002, this rock star put out a CD lamenting what has happened to the music industry.  He sang about “The Last DJ” who “plays what he wants to play”; about “Joe,” the CEO of a large record company who wants a kid “with a good-looking face” who “gets to be famous” while Joe gets “to be rich”; and in “Money Becomes King,” he decries the time when “everything got bigger and the rules began to bend, and the TV taught the people how to get their hair to shine.”

I’m with this rock star 100% on this stuff.  Throughout his career, he has taken on the big boys in the music industry on various issues, even going bankrupt because he refused to budge on principle.

His name?  Tom Petty.

While Tom has chosen to take on some large issues in the culture at times, there are still too many Christians who choose to focus on tiny stuff.  They make a big deal about nothing.

We should stick them with the last name “petty,” too.  Patrick Petty.  Margaret Petty.  Richard Petty.  (Oh, wait,  I hear he’s actually a good guy!)

Why do I mention this?  Because in a world where we’re dealing with earthquake fallout, radiation levels, no-fly zones, and bankrupt states, some Christians choose to focus on some little thing their pastor did or didn’t do.

Look, we all notice things about public people.  We notice their hair, their clothing, and their weight.  We quickly detect the depth of their voice, the accent they use, and the magnetism of their smile.  While we all have our own personal opinions about these matters, it’s almost always beneath us to talk about them with other people.

But that’s exactly what some Christians do.  Let me give you several examples.

*When my dad was a pastor, he received a lot of criticism toward the end of his tenure.  One of the complaints about him was that some people thought he parted his hair on the wrong side.

*A friend once told me that a woman in the church was angry with me.  When I asked him why, he said it was because I didn’t say hi to her one Sunday.  When I asked how many people she had told, he used both fingers to count and said, “Ten.”

*An older believer once became upset with me because I didn’t visit him in the hospital when he had a procedure done.  I told him that I didn’t know he was in the hospital.  He told me that I should have known anyway.

*While studying the resurrection of Christ for a midweek study, I made the statement that Christians could not scientifically prove that Christ rose from the dead.  One of the board members got up from his chair, walked to the door, said, “Then we’re all wasting our time here,” and slammed the door.

*That same board member became incensed with me after a worship service when I mentioned Christ’s death and resurrection in a statement of faith but didn’t mention his burial.

*In a message on Moses, I briefly referred to Moses as a “fogey” when God called him to lead Israel out of Egypt.  A man wrote an angry note on his response card about the use of that word and took offense for every senior person in the church.  I wanted to tell him that I got the idea for the word from a book on Moses … by Chuck Swindoll.

I could go on and on and on, but then I’d be the one who was being petty!

I believe that this “drip, drip, drip” effect of pettiness in our churches is driving pastors out of the ministry.  I recently read a statistic that said that 80% of new pastors are quitting the ministry within five years!  Why?

Undoubtedly some of it has to do with Karen, Daniel, and Mary Petty.

The Pharisees were petty.  They donated a tenth of their spices to the Lord but, Jesus said, “neglected the more important matters of the law – justice, mercy, and faithfulness.”  Jesus went on to say, “You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.  You blind guides!  You strain out a gant but swallow a camel” (Matthew 23:23-24).

Sometimes when our pastor is preaching, I will catch something that he says that isn’t accurate.  (For example, he claimed on several occasions that Nehemiah was the cupbearer to the king of Babylon, when he was actually cupbearer to the king of Persia.)  I might quickly mention it to my wife or discuss it with her after the service, but that’s as far as it goes.  I don’t send out a mass email detailing his mistakes.  I don’t hop on the phone and mention it to friends.  I don’t criticize him within a small group context.

But some “petty” people inside a church will criticize the pastor for every little thing he does wrong.  It’s almost like they exist to ferret out the pastor’s flubs.  When I was a pastor, there were times when I imagined certain individuals in our chuch singing these words to me (with apologies to Sting): “Every breath you take and every move you make, every bond you break, every step you take, I’ll be watching you.”

What can we do about this pettiness, especially when it comes to our pastors?

First, pray for your pastor more often.  Pray about the big things: his walk with God, his marriage, his fatherhood, his vision for your church, his teaching opportunities.  When you pray about the big stuff, you’ll be calling down the power of God upon him, and you’ll begin diverting your attention away from the small stuff.

Next, if you detect a small flaw in his life, keep it to yourself.  Look hard enough at anybody’s life and you will notice their little quirks and idiosyncrasies.  So what?  We all have them, so we all need to be gracious toward others.  If we start making a big deal about our pastor’s little foibles, others will start doing the same to us (Matthew 7:1-2).

There were times when I was tempted to write out a one-page list of all my tiny flaws (okay, two pages!) and hand it out to certain people in the church so they would know that I knew I had these little issues.  Would that have taken away their fun?  Or would they have started in on page three?

Third, discourage others from focusing on his flaws.  Most people that know me don’t know that (a) I practically get claustrophobic in heavy highway traffic and (b) cannot stand to wait in any line that goes for more than five minutes.  (Just today, I stopped by Target, and when I went to the checkstands, there were three long lines – and I only had two small items.  When they finally opened a fourth line, I should have been asked to be the first person in line, but the guy behind me was asked to go over instead.  I wasn’t happy.  Was I being petty?)

Okay, so let’s say that a friend of yours learns about my weaknesses in these areas, and this person comes and tells you about them.  How would you respond?  Would you say, like in Grease, “Tell me more, tell me more,” or would you shrug your shoulders and say, “Who cares?  I already knew he wasn’t an angel.”  If the latter, chances are good that you won’t be brought too much more gossip.

Finally, start encouraging him in his strengths.  Instead of noticing and publicizing a pastor’s flaws, it’s better to praise him for what he does well.  Reinforcement is a great teacher.  If you like your pastor’s humor, tell him so.  If you like his stories, tell him so.  If you like his applications, tell him so.  If you like his sincerity, tell him so.

Now if you start doing that every week, he’ll become suspicious that you’re no longer being objective, but if you do it every month or so, he may very well keep doing what you like.  While I liked it when someone complimented me verbally about a message after I gave it, I much preferred to receive a note or an email later on because I could keep that written record.  (And verbal comments tended to go in one ear and sail right out the other.)

So don’t be a petty Christian.  Be a pretty Christian instead.  One thing about pretty Christians: they’re never petty.

Read Full Post »

Saying Goodbye After a Pastoral Termination

Posted in Conflict with the Pastor, Healing After Leaving a Church, Pastoral Termination, tagged , on March 16, 2011| Leave a Comment »

As a child (and a young man, and an adult), I was an avid reader of the Peanuts cartoon strip.  There was often more wisdom and true-to-life observations in those little panels than you’ll get in most places.  One time, Linus and Lucy were going to be moving away because their father had taken a job in another city.  Charlie Brown hung his head in sorrow and said, “I need fewer goodbyes.  I need more hellos.”

Exactly.

But there comes a time when all of us must say goodbye – to a departing friend, to a graduating class, to a treasured house, to a dying loved one – and even to a church family.  During my ministerial career, I’ve said goodbye to six church families.  In some cases, it was a wonderful experience.  As people said kind things about you, it was almost like listening in at your own memorial service.  In others … well, let’s just say that people aren’t always thoughtful.

Let me discuss five ways that a terminated pastor might say goodbye to his church family:

First, he needs to tell his side of the story.  When I first became a pastor, I was shocked at how many of my colleagues were forced out of their churches by either a small minority or the governing board.  In each case, I contacted these men and heard their side of the story, and in each case, they were grateful that they could tell their story to somebody.  Know why?

Because they had been told that if they told their side of the story to anybody, that would be divisive.

Unbelievable.

For years, conventional wisdom held that when a pastor was forced to leave his church, he should fall on his sword, refuse to say anything to anybody, and walk away.  But the pastors that I spoke with regretted that they had followed that counsel.  After they left their church, these pastors (a) allowed their enemies to define their legacy, (b) saw friends flip on them (because they only heard one side), (c) watched their reputations be destroyed, and (d) felt they had to leave the pastorate for good because they felt stigmatized.

There is a lawsuit currently on its way to the Supreme Court.  It involves a claim by a pastor that he was terminated and then defamed by two pastors within that church.  You can read about it here:

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11000761/1/us-supreme-court-weighs-review-of-pastor-defamation-verdict-first-amendments-free-exercise-of-religion-clause-at-issue.html

While all of us should be sad that Christians feel they must use the secular legal system to settle disputes, this trend will continue until the Christian church gets its act together and allows pastors who have been unfairly treated to defend themselves in a structured and just manner.  Mainline churches have their own court systems – why not evangelicals?  Even Jesus had the opportunity to defend Himself at several trials, crooked as they were.

While I don’t believe a falsely accused pastor should publicly tell his story inside his church (then accusations will be tossed back and forth), he can do so privately, and should.  The best way to do this is to contact selected church friends and tell them your account of what happened.  The devil doesn’t want this to occur because he only wants one side of the story told: his side.  And the devil will use his side to not only defame the pastor, but to defame the church as well.  Because while Satan does target pastors and their families, he hates churches most of all.

Then when the pastor leaves, when his detractors try and smear him, there will be those who have heard “the other side.”

Maybe the biblical example of Jesus is a good pattern to follow.  While Jesus did not tell His side of the story to Caiaphas or Pilate or Herod, His disciples (like Matthew and John and Peter) did tell His side in the pages of the New Testament.  The Gospels are both apologetic and evangelistic documents.  In fact, the gospel itself encapsulates Jesus’ side.  He died – that’s the verdict of Jesus’ enemies.  He arose – that’s the verdict of His followers.  We know the full story today, but for a long time, many people only heard that Jesus was a criminal, not the promised Messiah who became the Lamb of God.

Second, he needs to act with class publicly.  And this isn’t easy, especially if the pastor believes that he’s been unjustly treated.

This kind of class starts with his resignation letter.  It should be brief rather than long, positive rather than negative, thankful rather than bitter, and unifying rather than divisive.

If the pastor is permitted to preach one more time – which he often isn’t when he’s terminated – his message should look back with gratitude and look forward with hope.  It’s not the time or the place to burn bridges.  The memory of an effective ministry can all but be wiped out with a few thoughtless public remarks.

By the way, if a pastor needs to leave a church to keep it united, shouldn’t those who perpetrated his departure leave as well?  In other words, shouldn’t the church begin again with a clean slate?

Third, he should allow a goodbye event.  Sometimes when a pastor is forced to leave a church, no one wants to throw him a party of any kind, so he just kind of slinks away.  But even if the pastor doesn’t wish for an event like this for himself, it’s part of the grieving process for the church as a whole.  If the church’s leadership doesn’t wish to throw a huge party, they can at least … order cake.  (Just make sure the pastor and his wife get some.)

A better event would be for the pastor and his wife to attend a party at the home of one of their trusted friends.  They can invite those they still feel comfortable being around.  The pastor and his wife can also arrange for photos to be taken with their precious supporters.

Fourth, the pastor should encourage people to stay in the church.  Frankly, I cannot understand how a pastor would leave a church – under any circumstances – and later want that church to be destroyed.

Which is the greater legacy: to leave a church and then have it flourish years later, or leave a church and watch it flounder and eventually die?

The growing church makes Jesus look good and enhances the legacies of all pastors who have come before.

When mistreated, some pastors will leave a church and start another one down the block or across the city – and their core group will consist of followers from the church they just left.  They will encourage people to leave that church and join them in their new endeavor.  This kind of move guarantees bad blood between those two groups for a long, long time.

It’s far better to encourage people to stay in the church and make it better.

Finally, he should not interfere with the church’s affairs.  It is a breach of professional ethics for a pastor to leave a church and yet continue to exert influence within the fellowship.  When a pastor leaves a church, in most cases, he should leave the community and not return.

If he stays in that community, there will be people in the church who will complain to him about the pastor or the board or certain decisions, and the former pastor – being human – may not be able to resist offering his opinions.  Whether or not it’s his intention, too many pastors undermine their successor through their offhand comments.

When a pastor leaves a church, he should leave in every way possible.

He can and should keep some friendships.  He can receive news about how the church is doing.  (And should rejoice when the church is doing well.)  He should pray for the church and its new pastor, and if he hears criticism about his successor, he should either support him or say nothing at all.

One of the worst church crimes imaginable is when a pastor seeks to undermine his successor.  It’s not your church or my church: it’s Christ’s church.  Can you imagine Joshua undermining Moses, or Paul undermining Timothy?

I guess some pastors, in the words of Michael Jackson, “never can say goodbye.”

Because conflict situations like a forced termination may only occur once in the life of a pastor and a congregation, it’s wise to think through some of the issues ahead of time.

May you never have to experience a situation like this, but if you do, may the Lord give you the grace, wisdom, and courage to do what is classy and right.

Read Full Post »

If You Must Terminate a Pastor

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Ten Most Viewed Articles, tagged , , , , , , , on March 14, 2011| 65 Comments »

One of the most excrutiating experiences that a supervisor can have is to fire someone from their job.  The first time I had to do this with a staff member, I felt horrible.  Although I did not hire the person initially, I felt partially responsible that the staff member didn’t work out.  I wondered, “What if I had supervised this person better?  What if I had given them more attention?  More training?  More warning?”

Most pastors will leave a church via their own resignation.  They will choose the method and timing of their departure.  In the great majority of cases, they will leave one church for another.  Sometimes they will leave a pastorate to teach in a Bible college or join a parachurch organization.  And one day, they will preach their last sermon and then retire.

But many pastors – surveys now indicate more than 25% – leave church ministry involuntarily.  They are usually forced from office by a faction of ten people or less … sometimes by their governing board.  Most of the time, the process is handled clumsily, resulting in seething anger, ecclesastical division, and incalculable damage.

How can the termination of a pastor be handled in a more biblical and optimal fashion?

An attorney can recommend the legal way to terminate a pastor.  The CEO of a company might suggest how it’s done in business.  The church’s insurance agent might propose ways the church can minimize risks.  And I could mention the way the federal government terminates employees … except they almost never terminate anyone!

If you’d like to read what the Bible says about correcting an elder/pastor, please check out 1 Timothy 5:19-21 (which applies Matthew 18:15-20 to spiritual leaders).  I believe a pastor should be removed for heresy and for immorality but that many of the reasons why boards fire pastors today have more to do with style than sin.  (Please see some of my previous blogs on these topics.)

I was a pastor for nearly four decades, and I saw a lot of my colleagues terminated in senseless ways.  If I was still in pastoral ministry, and the board decided I had to go, here’s how I would like that process to be conducted:

First, I’d like to see a possible termination coming.  If attendance was plunging, and giving was going south, and church opinion makers were unhappy, I would probably sense that my time in that place was coming to a close.  And if members of the church board had talked with me about making changes in my ministry, but I either wouldn’t or couldn’t pull them off, that would suggest to me that my days in that church were numbered.

Some pastors have confessed to me that they stayed too long in a previous pastorate and wished they had left before they did.

Last fall, I had lunch with a former mega church pastor.  He had been in his church for more than two decades, but for some unknown reason, attendance suddenly began declining at a rate where nothing he tried worked anymore.  When he preached, he sensed that people weren’t listening to him.  He eventually reached a settlement with the church board and resigned.  The Lord confirmed to his spirit that his time in that spiritual community was over.

If a board has shared their concerns with their pastor, and if matters haven’t turned around after a reasonable time frame (maybe six months to a year), then the pastor should not be surprised if the board openly talks to him about leaving.

But if the ministry is going well, and attendance and giving are holding steady, and the board has never discussed the pastor’s behavior or ministry with him in a formal way, and then the board decides to terminate the pastor … the pastor will rightfully feel blindsided, and the board may very well lose control of the situation.  While the board may have the legal and ecclesiastical right to remove the pastor from office (and in most congregational churches, they don’t have that right – only the congregation does), blindsiding a pastor with termination may be considered a destructive act that results in ripping apart both the pastor’s family and the church family.  (Just know up front that many of the pastor’s supporters will leave the church within a few months.)

If I’m going to be involuntarily terminated, I want to see it coming a mile away.  And if I do see it coming, I will try and make my own plans to depart before the board ever has to deal with me.

Second, I would like the process to be fair, not fast. When one member of a church board decides that “the pastor must go,” his anxiety can become contagious.  Before anyone realizes the full ramifications, the entire board may then fall into line and quickly decide to fire the pastor.  While anxiety drives us to make fast decisions, Jesus encourages us to make fair decisions.

Let’s say that a pastor has recently displayed inappropriate anger several times in private.  The board should not convene and decide to fire the pastor immediately.  Instead, Jesus says in Matthew 18:15 that if a believer sins [and this includes the pastor], it’s your duty to “show him his fault” in private [one-on-one, not in a board meeting].  Then Jesus says, “If he listens to you, you have won your brother over.  But if he will not listen …” then you are to take one or two witnesses along, and “if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church.”  Some scholars believe that the board should be informed between verses 16 and 17, although Jesus doesn’t say that.  In other words, the process is:

*A single believer [maybe the board chairman] talks with the pastor about his sin in private.

*If the pastor refuses to change, that single believer asks one or two more people [a staff member? a friend of the pastor?] to witness a second confrontation.

*If the pastor still refuses to change … only then does it become a board matter.

*If the pastor refuses to listen to the board (that’s three refusals), then either they can terminate him (if the church’s governing documents allow for this) or the church as a whole can vote him out of office in a public meeting (although there will be lobbying and it may become very divisive).

I don’t pretend to know how much time is needed between steps (maybe a month or two between each one?) but Jesus did not necessarily intend for the process to work instantly.  The person being confronted – in this case, the pastor – is not being corrected for getting angry, but for refusing to acknowledge his anger and make the necessary changes in his life.

Before saying, “But pastors should be able to change their behavior immediately,” how long does it take you to make a major change in your life?

That’s why we need to give a pastor some time to make changes in his life.

Third, I would expect to be offered a generous separation package.  The minimal severance a pastor should receive is six months.  If a pastor has been in a church for more than six years, then a good rule-of-thumb is that he receive one month’s salary for every year he’s served in a church.  While some board members might exclaim, “I would never receive severance pay like that at my job,” please realize the following facts about pastors:

*They are ineligible for unemployment benefits.

*They and their family members will suffer tremendously.  It is common for the older children of a terminated pastor to stop attending church and even leave the faith.  The wives of terminated pastors go from being somebodies to nobodies overnight.  If the marriage has already been strained by ministry, the couple might head for divorce.

*The terminated pastor is often in so much pain that he turns to alcohol, drugs, or illicit sex.

*They will lose almost everything dear to them by being terminated: their careers, their income, their church family, their local friends, their house (if they have to leave the community and sell), and their reputations – in other words, they will lose their life as they know it.  (This is why pastors often hang on at a church long after they should leave.)

*They will be stigmatized as a “loser” in much of the Christian community.  As a veteran pastor told me when I first entered the pastorate, if a pastor resigns with no place to go, it’s the “kiss of death.”  If he applies for another church position, his resume will most likely go to the bottom of the pile because he was fired from his previous church.  The Christian world is very small and word gets around quickly.

*They will suffer constant depression, great anxiety, and feel like God has abandoned them.

*They will be shocked to discover that many of their ministry colleagues will turn away from them.

*The terminated pastor usually has to rebuild his life and ministry, and that takes time.  The separation package allows for the pastor to pull away from ministry so he can take stock of his life and begin the healing process.  If the pastor is given a token separation package, he and his family will feel that he has been “kicked to the curb” and it will take them a long time to recover and forgive those who hurt them.

We talk a lot in the church today about social justice.  This is ecclesiastical justice.

If a board cannot or will not give the pastor a generous separation package, then they need to think twice – or ten times – about letting him go.  Getting cheap here borders on being unchristian.

Finally, I would welcome the opportunity to resign rather than be fired. If the members of a governing board want to be vindictive toward a pastor, they can fire him outright – but the word will quickly get around the church, and the board will be severely criticized by many while others will angrily leave the fellowship and encourage others to come with them.

When some churches blindside a pastor by firing him, they never recover … and it becomes easier to fire the next pastor.  When I was a kid, my dad felt forced to resign as a pastor, and after the board fired the next two pastors, the church went out of existence.

But if both the pastor and the board announce that the pastor resigned voluntarily, it takes the heat off the board and allows the pastor to leave with dignity.

The optimal win-win scenario is for the pastor to trade a unifying resignation letter for a generous separation package.  That is, the pastor cites multiple reasons for his leaving in his letter, doesn’t harshly criticize anyone in the church (especially the leaders), and encourages everyone in the church to stay and support the next pastor.  Years ago, I learned this adage: “The way you leave is the way you will be remembered.”  Leave bitter, and you will leave a legacy of bitterness.  Leave with class, and you will leave a legacy of class.

A small percentage of pastors deserve to be terminated – maybe even quickly – because they have inflicted great destruction on their ministries, their families, and themselves.  But even then, they should be treated with dignity and their families should be cared for.  But the great majority of terminations go wrong because the board wants the pastor to leave as quickly as possible, and they run the risk of dehumanizing him in the process.

Next time, I’ll talk about how to say goodbye to a pastor in a way in which everyone can win.

I just want to see Christian churches handle these situations in a more biblical and redemptive way.

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 »

Is the Pastor the Problem?

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination on March 9, 2011| 1 Comment »

Imagine that you are a governing leader in your church.  The church hasn’t been growing, either spiritually or numerically, and you’re beginning to wonder if the pastor might be the problem.

In fact, you’re privately thinking that maybe the pastor needs to leave the church, the sooner the better.

Before proceeding further, be very careful about blaming a church’s lack of progress on the pastor alone.  If a baseball team hires a great manager but the stadium is awful (think Oakland) or the players are abysmal (think Kansas City), the manager isn’t going to win.  A championship team requires the right leader overseeing the optimal players delivering clutch performances (and a lot of quality pitching!).  While the pastor obviously plays a central role in a church’s success, other factors are almost always at work as well.  Honestly ask yourself:

*How clear is our church’s mission?  How often and how well is it communicated?  (You may need to create a new mission or better present the one you have.  People forget a church’s mission within a month or so.)

*How effective is our system of church government?  Have we created such a bureaucratic nightmare that we are taking the fun out of serving the Lord?  (An increasing number of churches are letting the pastor choose the staff and the board – his own ministry team – and are seeing their churches grow rapidly.  They would say – and I don’t mean to offend anyone by saying this – that the trained professional should lead the church, not the amateurs.)

*How are other churches in our immediate area doing?  Are we in a resistant or receptive community?  (While any church can grow, the community plays a large part in the rate of growth.)

*How possible is it that we are going through a temporary time of non-growth?  (This happens in every church, regardless of size.)

*What kind of spiritual barriers might be causing the Lord to withhold His blessing?  Could there be “sin in the camp?”  (There could be, and it’s as likely to be in the staff or board as it is in the pastor.)

*How committed to Christ are the members of our governing board and staff?  Is each leader attending services faithfully?  Walking with the Lord?  Serving with joy?  Giving generously?  (Both the pastor and the board/staff must be spiritually-oriented for the church to experience God’s blessing.)

*How likely is it that our pastor has been stung by criticism, tackled by burnout, overwhelmed with responsibility, plagued by family problems, or needs some time off?  How can we discover this information so we can encourage and strengthen him?  (Ministry is more difficult today than ever before.  If a board doesn’t learn how to care for this pastor, it will need to learn how to care for the next one.  Might as well start now.)

Too many times, one or two key leaders in a church come to the conclusion that their pastor needs to leave.  While the rest of the church would totally disagree – after all, they’re attending that church largely because of the pastor – these leaders only need to persuade the other governing board members to make the pastor’s departure a reality – and sometimes that doesn’t take very long to accomplish.  Why not?  Because of anxiety.

Anxiety can ruin a church because it easily becomes contagious.  If a couple of leaders can’t rest until the pastor leaves, they can make everyone else anxious until he goes.  This is where the other board members and key congregational leaders need to stand up for patience over against anxiety.  Unless the pastor’s messages and behavior are truly destroying the church, the governing leaders need to take their time in dealing with the pastor.  When God’s people are anxious, it’s a sign they aren’t praying biblically, but when they are praying biblically, anxiety vanishes (see Philippians 4:6-7).  So take the time to bathe a situation like this in prayer first.  Who knows?  If the pastor is the problem, maybe he will choose to resign on his own initiative.

When a church calls a pastor, it’s like a marriage.  When a church chooses to remove its pastor, it’s like a divorce.  Before a married couple gets divorced, they need to make sure they have done everything possible to save their marriage.  In the same way, before a governing board forces out a pastor, it needs to make sure it is has done everything possible to identify and heal any problems it might have with its shepherd.

Sometimes a board will force out a pastor because “that’s how it’s done in business.”  (If a church is a business, then maybe Peter Drucker should have written the New Testament.  But the New Testament was written by Jesus’ apostles, and they have given us specific instructions on how a church is to be managed, and we can’t solve spiritual issues using secular solutions.)  In addition, sometimes a board will force out a pastor because it is unwilling to address the glaring problems that are on the board itself.

If I’m a governing leader, and I have concerns about the pastor’s effectiveness, here’s what I would do:

*I would set up an appointment with the pastor – maybe breakfast or lunch – and ask how he’s doing spiritually and vocationally.  I’d listen so as to understand.  Then I’d share my viewpoint about his ministry and the church as a whole, letting the pastor know that this is how I personally feel, not how my family or friends or the board feels.  I’d speak for myself, not for others at this juncture.

Sometimes this is all it takes for a pastor to turn things around.  Years ago, I was experiencing and expressing frustration with some board members, and the chairman took me out to breakfast and told me I needed to change my attitude or the board might do something unpredictable.  I changed.

*Find a way to evaluate the effectiveness of the pastor, staff, and governing board members on an annual basis.  (It’s not fair to evaluate the pastor alone without also evaluating other leaders.  Ministry is a team effort.)  The evaluation should be measured against the pastor’s job qualifications and position description – and it should be simple rather than complicated.  A friend of mine once served on the staff of a megachurch and he showed me his evaluation.  It went on for pages and pages.  It’s no wonder that he quit the minstry soon afterwards.  Churches that criticize their pastor for the least little thing slowly turn their pastors into perfectionists.  Why?  Because, pastors reason, the only way I won’t be criticized is if I’m perfect.  (But then someone will ding you for not being human enough!)

One caution: be careful about criticizing the pastor for what he’s not doing.  This is done all the time with political leaders like President Obama.  I hear people say, “He’s not doing this.  He’s not doing that.”  Well, of course – there are thousands of things that the President could do, but if you criticize him for not doing Number 65 and Number 876 and Number 1,295, you’re just not being fair.  Sometimes this same tactic is used on a pastor.  I always felt I got in more trouble for what I didn’t do than what I did do.  One person thought I should promote home schooling.  Another thought I should become more politically involved.  Different people have their own private agendas for the pastor, and he can’t possibly know or meet them all.  A leader should be evaluated on the basis of what he has been called by God to do, not by what everyone else wishes he would do.

When you have evaluated the pastor, let him respond to the evaluation.  If he’s honest, he will probably agree with much of it.  Agree together on what he will do differently.

*Measure his progress on a regular basis, maybe quarterly or semi-annually.  To be fair, measure the progress of everyone else in leadership as well so you’re not picking on just one person.  The evaluators will be more compassionate if they know they’re also being evaluated.

In many ways, this approach takes Jesus’ directives in Matthew 18:15-20 seriously.  Work the steps carefully.  Don’t rush through them or skip them.  (See my previous blog Skipping Steps on this matter).  The board can feel good that it’s clearly communicated its expectations directly and fairly to the pastor, and the pastor can feel good that there are no hidden agendas at work.  And, once again, if the pastor doesn’t like what the board has told him, he can start looking for another ministry.

It is possible that what the pastor really needs is some continuing education, or a leave of absence, or a sabbatical, or some counseling.  If the church can arrange to pay for some of these possibilities, both your pastor and your church will greatly benefit.

But what if the board creates expectations, shares them with the pastor, takes its time, and yet things spiral downward from there?

*Bring in a church consultant to work with the pastor, the board, the staff, and some of the key leaders in the church.  While this step might seem expensive (think $5,000 to $10,000), it’s a pittance compared to the price a church will pay down the road in departing attendees, withheld giving, and congregational disharmony if the pastor is forced to resign.  Remember: do everything you can to prevent a spiritual divorce, even if you are personally convinced that the pastor is the problem.

But if you’ve done all you can, and things still haven’t improved, what then?

I’ll deal with that on my next blog.

Read Full Post »

Facing Your Accusers

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Ten Most Viewed Articles on March 7, 2011| Leave a Comment »

As I write today, I have conflicting emotions.  While I am eager to put down some thoughts on paper that I’ve been carrying around in my head for a long time, I wish I didn’t have to write even one word about today’s topic: pastoral termination.

Why not?

Because in a perfect world, a pastor would be called to a particular church and stay until he retired or went home to glory.

Because in a perfect world, the leaders of a congregation would speak honestly and swiftly to their pastor about any issue they had with him, and after sufficient prayer and discussion, both parties would come to an understanding, resolve matters, and lock arms to continue building Christ’s kingdom.

Because in a perfect world, church attendees would emulate their pastor’s lifestyle, follow his leadership, and obey his teaching.  And if they couldn’t do any of the above, they would quietly leave the church rather than insist that the pastor leave.

But ours is not a perfect world, not even within the hallowed halls of our biggest and best churches.  And when there is conflict between a pastor and the governing board, or the pastor and a staff member, or the pastor and a vocal minority, life inside a church can seem more like hell than heaven.

I know.  I’ve been there – all too many times.

So if a board or a group in a church believes that a pastor needs to leave, what can they do?

Let me begin by saying that the Bible does lay down guidelines for pastoral termination.  More than thirty years ago, I served on the staff of a church where the governing board pleaded with the pastor to make some changes in his ministry, and he warned them to back off by quoting I Chronicles 16:22: “Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm.”

This pastor viewed himself as an “anointed one” and a “prophet.”  He interpreted the phrase “do not touch” to mean “do not criticize the pastor.”  He hid behind this verse as well as I Samuel 24:6,10 where David told both his men and then King Saul that he would not “lift my hand … against the Lord’s anointed.”  But we need to be extremely careful how we interpret these verses.  Prophets, priests, and kings were all “anointed ones” in the Old Testament, specially called by God to their offices.  We can make legitimate applications to modern-day leaders from these texts provided that we (a) interpret them in context, and (b) compare them with other biblical directives.

In essence, God is saying in these Old Testament verses, “Since I have chosen Israel’s leaders, they should only leave office how and when I dictate.  I will not stand for any assassinations or coups or premature attempts to destroy a leader – especially if he or she is carrying out My orders.”  While God could directly remove a leader (like taking Elijah to heaven in a whirlwind), He sometimes permitted humans to do so (like allowing the sailors to throw Jonah overboard).  But back then, Israel didn’t vote on anything.  They couldn’t vote Saul or Jeremiah out of office.  They could use violence to restrain or kill them, but God did not sanction that solution at all.  In fact, God often allowed very wicked leaders to hold office a long time (like Ahab and Manasseh).

But when we come to the New Testament, God equates pastors with elders (1 Timothy 5:17-18) and then, under the inspiration of God’s Spirit, Paul writes these words to his ministry protege Timothy in verses 19-21: “Do not entertain an accusation against an elder 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.”

This is the most complete text we have in the entire Bible on dealing with the sinful conduct of a spiritual leader such as a pastor (including staff members) or an elder (including board members).  It applies Jesus’ directives in Matthew 18:15-20 to spiritual leaders.

Anyone in the public eye will receive malicious personal attacks.  Some pastors think, “If I’m really nice, and cool, and sensitive, then no one will criticize me.”  Wrong.  Jesus was perfect yet He was both verbally and physically crucified.  There is a price to pay for spiritual leadership, a price pastors and staff members must pay as well.  No matter who you are, somebody will criticize, attack, and hate you.

Paul knew this (both by studying Jesus’ life and by his own experience), so he told Timothy “do not entertain an accusation against an elder [pastor] unless it is brought by two or three witnesses” (verse 19).  Let me tell you a story that illustrates the right way to do this.

I had been a pastor for about three years when I faced a very painful crisis.  A friend of mine, who had once been chairman of the church board, was our church’s songleader.  (Churches used to sing hymns accompanied by piano and organ and led by a songleader.  He would wave his arms to the music and dictate the pace and volume at which a hymn was sung.)  I had asked the songleader to sing a particular hymn for the next service, but he refused, telling me that no pastor had ever told him which hymns to select.  He threatened to quit on the spot.  It wasn’t pleasant.

Soon afterwards, he called the chairman and came to the next board meeting, bringing along a friend.  The songleader brought along a list of seven complaints he had against me.  He intended to read all seven in hopes that the board would legitimize his complaints, tell me to give him free reign as songleader, and then either reprimand or fire me.  He only had one or two substantive complaints but expanded them into seven and then dumped them all on the board – and me (an approach called “gunnysacking.”)

The chairman, to his credit, would not permit the songleader to read all seven complaints at once.  Instead, he asked the songleader to read the first complaint, and then the chairman asked him what evidence he had to back up his charge.  The chairman then asked me to respond to each complaint.  (The songleader did not anticipate this process.)  After presenting the sixth complaint, the songleader left the meeting.  The next morning, he called to tell me he was leaving the church.  (And he did leave, but his widow later invited me to conduct his memorial service.)

While I wish my friend would have stayed in the church (I truly loved him), the board did at least five things right during that meeting:

*The accuser presented his complaints against me to my face.

*The accuser was asked to produce evidence for each complaint.

*I as the pastor was able to face my accuser directly.

*I was able to respond to each accusation made against me.

*The board members were able to witness both of us as we discussed the issues.

While the above process is consistent with Scripture (and modern-day trials), it is used relatively rarely today.  Using the same story, let me illustrate how these situations are handled all too often.  (And to make the story more contemporary, I will substitute the phrase “worship director” for “songleader.”)

The worship director is upset with the pastor because the pastor wants the congregation to sing a certain song the following Sunday.  So one night after band practice, the worship director tells a vocalist and the bass player that is he tired of the pastor’s interference in the services.  Seeing how much the pastor’s decision hurts their friend, the vocalist and bass player go home and tell their spouses that the pastor is controlling and domineering.  After the following Sunday’s service, the bass player and his wife go out to eat with another church couple.  The bass player comments, “You know that final song?  The music director didn’t want to do it, but the pastor insisted it be done.  I don’t know how much longer the music director can stay at the church with a boss like that.”

Without the pastor’s knowledge, more and more people in the church begin to whisper that he’s a “control freak” and a “micro manager.”  Within several months, a group at the church begins meeting in secret.  Why?  Because the music director (who is their friend) claims that the pastor has been abusing him, and because an increasing number of people are now complaining about the pastor behind his back.  It’s now open season on the preacher.

The group that meets in secret begins listing all of the pastor’s weaknesses, as well as those of his wife and children.  Then this unofficial group assigns a couple members to meet with a sympathetic staff member as well as a supportive board member.  The group begins to feel exhiliration because they are finally “taking back their church!”

One night, after a regularly scheduled board meeting, the pastor is asked to step into his office.  Three board members meet him there.  They officially ask for his resignation.  When he asks about the charges against him, they rattle off a huge list.  The pastor is devastated.  It’s the first time he’s ever heard about these charges from anybody.

See the difference?  How are these issues handled in your church?

Next time, we’ll explore this issue even further.  Stay tuned!

Read Full Post »

Heaven is Watching

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination on March 4, 2011| Leave a Comment »

What’s wrong with this picture?

When I was fourteen years old, my family attended a church where we really liked the pastor.  He was a good preacher and liked to sing so much that he sometimes put on a robe and sang with the choir.  On occasion, he’d even end a message by singing a song like “He Could Have Called Ten Thousand Angels.”  (A good song, by the way.)  In my mind, I can still hear and see him singing it more than forty years later.

After that pastor resigned to became an executive at a Christian college, the church quickly called a new pastor – maybe too quickly.  To be honest, our family didn’t like the new pastor very much.  The previous pastor had curly hair while the new pastor had a crew cut.  The previous pastor came off as very loving while the new pastor seemed a bit harsh.  The previous pastor’s personality was safely predictable while the new pastor’s was unknown and so erratic by comparison.  The previous pastor had supervised a well-liked church staff but the new pastor abruptly fired a popular, long-standing staff member (who happened to be a single woman) soon after he took office.  The firing did not go over well with a number of key people in the church.

The whispering started.

Somewhere along the line, I became aware of conversations that others were having about the new pastor – the sort of discussions that remained private inside my own family.  These conversations were just “in the air.”  Since my family was far removed from the church’s inner circle, I’m not sure we knew much about what was really going on – we just knew we didn’t like the new pastor.

Why not?

Well, for starters, he wasn’t the former pastor.  That wasn’t his fault, but it was a fact.  The congregation needed time to process their grief in losing their old pastor, but someone (foolishly, in my opinion) insisted that the church call a pastor quickly (probably out of anxiety).  This guaranteed that the former pastor and the new pastor would be unfavorably compared, and the former pastor (who was becoming a saint in some eyes) completely outshone the new pastor (who couldn’t compete with a ghost).

In addition, he fired a popular staff member.  She had been a fixture at the church for years.  She had a host of supporters.  She was intelligent, funny, strong – and, as I recall, a bit brassy.  Maybe she needed to go, I don’t know.  But to fire her so soon after taking office backfired on the pastor.  I didn’t know any of the facts, but I sided with her.  Why?  Because I knew her a little and liked her – but I didn’t know the new pastor at all, and, truth be told, I didn’t like him.  My dislike of him wasn’t based on anything substantial – it was just an impression from hearing him preach.

And, of course, since our friends didn’t like him, neither did we.  While this is the lamest reason of all, it happens all the time in churches.

Eventually, the new pastor resigned in the middle of a heated business meeting.  He moved to the East Coast and, as often happens with pastors who go through such experiences, he left pastoral ministry for good.  He became a Christian counselor and did some writing – and one of the articles he wrote gave his side of the conflict.  (This was probably 25 years ago.)

After I read his article, I felt ashamed.

However small my participation – and at 14, I didn’t have any church clout – I saw what can happen in a church when a group of people make up their mind that they don’t like a pastor.

And that’s what it all comes down to most of the time: whether or not we like a pastor.  And when we don’t like him – or we feel he doesn’t like us – we feel free to destroy him.

It makes me want to weep, not only for my own evil heart, but for the entire Christian community.

This is why Paul writes what he does in 1 Timothy 5:21.  After laying out clear instructions for receiving charges against a pastor/elder, Paul expresses himself in the strongest possible language.  Please read it several times and slowly:

“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.”

Paul says that when the leaders/people of a church take action to correct a pastor for misconduct, all of heaven is watching.  Since the Father and the Son and angelic beings are scrutinizing the way that church leaders/people handle charges against a pastor, the accusers/investigators need to do everything God’s way. 

And then Paul adds two phrases that are nearly identical: such correction is to be done “without partiality” and never “out of favoritism.”  In other words, it’s immaterial whether or not we like a pastor when people make accusations against him.  We must use impartial biblical principles in such situations.

But how often is that done?

Not very often.  Rather than using biblical principles, the three primary ways that pastors are corrected in churches are (a) business practices, (b) church politics, and (c) the law of the jungle.

While it’s helpful for a church to know the best business practices for correcting executives/employees, the phrase “these instructions” in 1 Timothy 5:21 does not refer to secular company policies, but Paul’s directives in verses 19 and 20.  In fact, since Paul wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, biblical directives must trump business practices every single time.

If a staff member or board member is being corrected for some offense, the pastor is usually able to provide a biblical perspective on how to handle matters.  But if the pastor is being corrected, business practices are usually substituted for biblical directives.  Why?  Because a pastor is usually accountable to a board, and board members fall back on what they know best: business.  But in so doing, they ignore 1 Timothy 5:19-21 to their peril, the very thing Paul warns against in verse 21.  When pastors utilize biblical principles during conflict while boards fall back on business practices, the chasm between the two groups will grow even wider – and little will be resolved.

In such situations, Christian leaders also resort to church politics.  Before engaging in biblical correction, leaders try and anticipate what might happen if they make certain decisions.  They guess who might leave the church if they discipline or terminate a pastor – and how many.  They obtain a membership roster (in a church governed by a congregation) and try and guess who might vote which way.  They enter into discussions with former pastors and denominational executives and key staff and opinion makers in the congregation to insure they have their support if a showdown occurs.  While some of the above ideas have their place, we must remember that Paul said to “keep these instructions without partiality.”  He said nothing about playing politics.

Then there’s the law of the jungle.  In the absence of using any biblical counsel regarding the correction of spiritual leaders, the leaders/people of a church may degenerate into immature nastiness and pettiness.  Leaders resort to power tactics.  Individuals make anonymous phone calls or send anonymous notes embedded with threats and demands.  Mass letters and emails are distributed to people in the church who don’t even know what’s going on.  Some people call the pastor names, make exaggerated claims against him, and engage in “the politics of personal destruction.”

How petty can Christians get?  When my dad was a pastor, one of the charges leveled against him before he resigned was that he left a church party early on a Saturday night.  What was wrong with that?  (When I was a pastor, I tried not to plan anything on a Saturday night so I could be my best on Sunday.)  My father was charged with going home to write his sermon when he was simply going home to review it.  But when certain people don’t like a pastor, they will invent things and exaggerate incidents to discredit his influence in the eyes of others.

And all the while, Paul says, heaven watches – and weeps.

I once read that when Abraham Lincoln was a young man, he saw a slave being whipped unmercifully.  He told himself, “Someday, I’m going to hit that, and hit it hard.”

For decades, I’ve watched pastors and churches suffer irreparable harm because biblical principles were ignored when it came time to correct a pastor.

Like Lincoln, I want to hit that hard.

Christians speak rightfully of social justice.  (Read the Book of Amos for an eye-opening view of God’s feelings about civil and religious injustice.)  But what about ecclesiastical (church) justice?  Should we not care about righteous behavior both outside and inside the church?

And since pastors serve as the link in a church between heaven and earth as well as between a church and the culture, should we not be doubly conscientious in how we treat them, especially if and when they are charged with wrongdoing?

Paul thought so, enough to write 1 Timothy 5:19-21.  Who will teach this text to God’s people?

I hope you will.  Read it.  Understand it.  Memorize it.  Share it.

There’s even more to say about it, and I will endeavor to do that next time.

Read Full Post »

When to Correct a Pastor

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Ten Most Viewed Articles on March 2, 2011| 6 Comments »

In his book Clergy Killers, Dr. Lloyd Rediger writes about the phenomenon of church members who attack their pastor with the intent of destroying him.  While many (if not most) Christians have never met someone like that, let me assure you that these kinds of people are sprinkled throughout the Christian community.  (I have met more than my share.)  They are usually people with deep-seated personality disorders.

But Dr. Rediger writes about “killer clergy” as well, and although there are far more “clergy killers” than “killer clergy,” there are pastors who inflict damage on their churches.  In my last article, I mentioned pastors who are narcissistic, overfunctioning, lazy, non-attentive, and too nice as examples of the kinds of leaders who can cause trouble in a church.

If you attend a church where you suspect that a pastor is causing trouble, what can you do?

It all depends on what we mean by “causing trouble.”

1 Timothy 5:19-21 gives a congregation and its leaders the right to correct an elder (or a pastor; see verses 17-18)  if he sins in such a way that he dishonors the Lord or harms Christ’s church.  Please note that this passage deals with acts of sin.  It does not cover:

*a pastor’s personality.  Although they are definitely in the minority, a small percentage of pastors can be thoughtless, obnoxious, rude, dominating, or insensitive.  I have met a few of them, and maybe you have, too.  I’m always amazed at how some pastors are able to stay in the ministry with such glaring personal weaknesses, but this is not the kind of behavior that Paul is talking about in 1 Timothy.  In fact, Paul himself could be rather rude and insensitive at times.  (Read Galatians 1:8-9 and 5:12 in case you’ve forgotten.)  If a pastor occasionally displays his unattractive side, you may choose to avoid being close to him or serving alongside him, but that doesn’t mean he’s violating 1 Timothy 5:19-21 and should be disciplined or terminated.

*a pastor’s style.  I have seen a huge change in pastoral leadership style since I was in seminary.  I was trained by scholars and pastors from the builder generation.  These professors passionately taught God’s Word and believed strongly in biblical accuracy, yet they themselves were usually modest individuals.  But much of that has changed today.  Many of today’s pastors pride themselves on knowing the culture more than the Bible (and I am not exaggerating).  They refer to the Bible while teaching but do not necessarily expound it.  And many of today’s pastors are publicly brash rather than humble.  When it comes to change, they won’t wait a year or two to get to know the people and the community (like we were taught to do) – they’ll institute changes during their first year that pastors from previous generations wouldn’t institute until years later.  Given the fact that our culture is increasingly secular, and that Generation X is largely unreached, maybe we do need to accelerate the pace of change in our churches today.  But should a pastor be attacked or destroyed because he has a different leadership style than another pastor?  1 Timothy 5:19-21 refers to clear-cut sin, not a pastor’s leadership style.

*a pastor’s liberty.  When I was in seminary, we students were expected to limit the use of our Christian liberty.  The implication was that we did not want to cause another believer to stumble by emulating our lifestyle.  So many students were careful about the movies they saw (if any), some did not drink any alcohol, and some only listened to Christian music.  These particular behaviors may have been frowned upon because some of the seminary higher-ups didn’t engage in these activities or because many older people in our churches didn’t either.  We pastors were expected to be distinctive from the culture so we modeled a Christlike life.  But all of that has changed today.  Today’s Christian leaders enjoy their liberty to the hilt.  They not only see movies, they feel comfortable seeing anything and everything.  They not only drink, they revel in it.  And they feel comfortable listening to any kind of music or watching any TV program that’s out there.  Several years ago, a seminary professor friend told me that incoming students are now required to take a course on morality because they don’t know right from wrong.  I’ve felt for a long time that some boomer pastors and many buster leaders value being cool over being godly.  While some of today’s pastors may have gone too far in enjoying their liberty, Paul isn’t referring to such behavior in this passage.  Just as some Christians could eat meat sacrificed to idols and some could not, so in our day some pastors feel uncomfortable engaging in certain practices while others have no problem with it.  Much of it is just generational.

(This reminds me of a story.  Four years ago, Kim and I visited Moldova, the poorest country in Europe.  We stayed in the home of a pastor and his wife in a small village, and although we talked with them a lot, it was mostly about missional and churchy matters.  On our last night there, I happened to mention to the couple that I had brought along an iPod with a lot of songs on it, and the missionary told me he had once been in the US and had heard a song by Creedence Clearwater Revival called “Long As I Can See the Light.”  He wondered if I had the song on my iPod.  As it turns out, I did.  When I played it for him, he was in seventh heaven.  I left the iPod with him and his wife along with some Logitech speakers.  When we returned to their village three years later, that iPod (Classic) was still working and provided the music for the church’s pizza parlor – but somebody had added Tammy Wynette songs to it!  I assure you – I didn’t do it!)

If a church is run like a business, its leaders/members can discipline or terminate a pastor for any reason, including the fact that someone doesn’t like his personality, style, or liberal use of Christian liberty.  But if a church is to be run on the basis of the New Testament, its leaders/members should only discipline or terminate a pastor for violating Scripture.  His personality, leadership style, and Christian liberty may be discussed at different times and eventually negotiated, but he should not be immediately dismissed because he’s just being himself.

When Paul writes that “those who sin are to be rebuked publicly,” what kinds of “sin” does he have in mind?

I believe that Paul is referring to a clear violation of a biblical directive.  Pastors should not commit homicide, or engage in sexual sin outside marriage, or steal from the offering plate (or anywhere else), or lie about matters.  They must believe in the basics of the Christian faith (like the authority of Scripture, the deity of Christ, Jesus’ death and resurrection) and teach the gospel to believers and unbelievers alike.  Based on New Testament teaching, I would say the two primary sin categories that apply in this passage are immorality and heresy.  (And, once again, not a pastor’s personality, style, or liberty.)  Paul writes that pastors/elders “who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning” (1 Timothy 5:20).  I will talk about how this is to be done in my next blog.

Thanks for reading!

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »