Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Pastoral Termination’ Category

A Pastor’s Five Friends During a Crisis

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Forgiveness and Reconciliation among Christians, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , on April 22, 2015| 2 Comments »

Many years ago, I read a quote from a pastor describing church ministry that went something like this: “You are either entering a crisis, in the midst of a crisis, or coming out of a crisis.”

Like most pastors, I survived many crises during my 36 years in church ministry, including rebellious staff … plunging donations … crooked contractors … draining antagonists … worship wars … false accusations … and many others.

Before I resigned from my last ministry more than five years ago, I began observing how my friends … at least, people I considered to be friends … responded toward their departing pastor.

I’m unsure if my experience is typical, but I offer this up especially for my pastor friends who have gone through a crisis that still affects them … especially a forced termination.

I believe that pastors have five kinds of friends when they go through a crisis:

First, a pastor has professional friends. 

This list includes pastoral colleagues and denominational leaders.

At least in my case, most of my pastor friends simply weren’t there for me.

If you’re a pastor and you’ve gone through a forced termination, you’ll discover that many – if not most – of your pastor friends will distance themselves from you.  They won’t contact you … listen to you … encourage you … or pray with you.

And in most cases, when you leave your church, your relationships with those pastors will end forever.

Is it because they’re busy?  Lack the time to find out what happened?  Don’t want to interfere with a pastor/church conflict?

I don’t really know.  But I’ve come to learn that those friendships usually vanish.

As far as district personnel … those relationships usually end as well.  Most district ministers relate to the pastors in their jurisdiction as professionals, so when a pastor leaves, he’s quickly forgotten … and the district minister tries to forge a relationship with that church’s new pastor.

To his credit, my district minister – even though he had only been on the job one month – met with me … heard me out … encouraged me … and called me the month after I left … which is more than most district ministers ever do when a pastor has been forced to leave.

Second, a pastor has church friends who betray him.

This includes:

*those who believe the first accusations they hear about the pastor

*those who quickly forge ties with the pastor’s detractors

*those who cut off all contact with the pastor

*those who initially support the pastor when he’s around but turn against him after he leaves town

If someone never liked their pastor … or criticized him incessantly … that person cannot by definition become guilty of betrayal.

Betrayal is reserved for those who were friends with the pastor but turned against him when it became expedient or popular.

In my case, I was surprised by some of the people who turned against me.  I had spent hours with certain individuals … in counseling, in ministry, outside of church … and thought our friendship could withstand almost anything.

So I was initially shocked that some deserted me so quickly … but I’m not alone.

Jesus’ disciples all ran for their lives after His arrest, didn’t they?

And Paul wrote to Timothy, “At my first defense, no one came to my support, but everyone deserted me.  May it not be held against them” (2 Timothy 4:16).

As I wrote in my book Church Coup, many pastors view people in their congregations as friends, but those same people really don’t view the pastor as their friend … only as their current minister.

When I had strong proof that someone had betrayed me, I unfriended them on Facebook.  I wasn’t going to give them a portal into my life or feelings.  In one case, a woman whom I had unfriended made three requests to be friends again on Facebook, but I ignored her … especially when I discovered that she had severely criticized my wife in a public meeting after we left.

When you’re pastoring a church, you have to be “friends” with everybody.  When you’re no longer pastoring that church, you can choose those you want as friends.

It’s an empowering choice.

But sometimes a friend still believes in you, but the friendship dies anyway.

There was a man in my last church that I considered a good friend.  We did some things outside church together, and he was fiercely loyal when the bullets started flying over my head.

A couple of years after I left, I returned to the community where our former church was located, and I invited him out for a meal.  He did most of the talking, and never asked me one thing about how I was doing.

As painful as it was to accept, I knew that relationship was history.

Third, a pastor has friends who remain supportive but with whom he loses contact.

When some pastors experience a forced termination, they encourage their loyal followers to leave the church, and if they sense enough of them are willing to go, they consider using those people as a core group to start a new church … but I believe that’s unethical.

In my case, I encouraged everyone to stay at the church … both publicly and privately.

But while many initially stayed, more and more left over time.

Sometimes they called or wrote and told me why they left.  Sometimes I heard from someone else that they had left.

Some of those friends went to another church or stopped going to church at altogether … casualties of the conflict.

Some moved away from the community but chose to stay in touch via Facebook or email … at least for a while.

There is a natural attrition to all of our relationships, most of which are geographically based.

When we’re living in the same community with someone, and we see them all the time, it feels like that friendship will never end.

But when one of those friends moves away, the relationship changes, and in many cases, withers away.

But I am grateful to every single person who remained supportive, even if we’ve lost touch over time.  And if we make contact again, I hope we can pick up where we left off.

Fourth, a pastor has church friends who stay in contact with him.

On my final Sunday morning more than five years ago, I stood in the pulpit and preached one last time.

If I had surveyed the congregation and guessed which individuals would still be my friends five years later, I would have guessed wrong.

Some that I thought would be friends forever surrendered our friendship for good … but thankfully, others I didn’t anticipate stepped up to take their place.

In fact, I have developed many new friends through this experience, none of whom care about my history … and many of those friends are pastors who have undergone their own crises.

I have also discovered that on the whole, women are much more loyal as friends than men.  They are better listeners, more understanding, more empathetic, more responsive than men, and more spiritually oriented.

It was exclusively men who initially turned on me … even if their wives were supportive of their actions.  Maybe this shouldn’t surprise us since women were much more loyal to Jesus after His death than His own handpicked disciples.

Here’s a basic rule of thumb: I can still be good friends with those who attend my former church, but in most cases, I can be better friends with those who no longer attend the church.

Those who still attend the church naturally feel loyal to their current pastor and leadership team.  But that means that neither of us will ever feel entirely comfortable discussing what is happening at the church currently … and that may color how we view incidents from the past.

It’s easier for me to be authentic with those who no longer attend the church because we’re freer to be transparent.

Finally, a pastor has personal friends who will always be there for him.

When a pastor comes to a church … especially if he plans to stay for many years … he gradually comes to view his church family as his real family.  I suppose this kind of thinking is necessary for a successful ministry because the pastor’s whole life revolves around that congregation.

But the flip side is that the pastor often ends up neglecting his family members and old friends who live elsewhere because he is so immersed in congregational life.

In my case, all of my old friends remained my friends.  And when I moved back home to Southern California, many wanted to get together again, even though we hadn’t seen each other in decades.

These friends didn’t care about a conflict in a church hundreds of miles away.  They just wanted to renew our friendship and laugh about old times.

And I can’t say enough for my family members … on both my wife’s side and my side.  Over the past five years, I have gotten to know them much better, and have developed an abiding love and respect for them that I wouldn’t trade for anything.

For those of you who have stuck by me these past few years, I now know who my real friends are.

And I thank God for your listening ears (and I haven’t always been easy to hear) … your encouragement … and your prayers.

You have not only demonstrated real friendship, but authentic faith as well.

You mean more to me than you’ll ever know … and I hope I can be half the friend to you that you’ve been to me.

Read Full Post »

The Church Meeting That Never Happens

Posted in Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , , , , on April 15, 2015| Leave a Comment »

Good afternoon, church family.  I’ve called this meeting today to share with you some additional perspective about the resignation of our now-former senior pastor, George Anderson.

Pastor George served our church effectively for nine years.  Under his leadership, our attendance doubled, we’ve made inroads into our community, and many lives have been changed.  For much of this time, I’ve served on the church board alongside him, and now serve as chairman.

As you may know, Pastor George had big dreams for our congregation’s future, and he was eager to share those dreams both in public and in private.

But over the past several years, two groups opposed to his plans emerged inside our church.  One group was dead set against Pastor George’s desire to build a new worship center.  The other group felt that it was time for Pastor George to leave.

When I first heard about these groups and their dissatisfaction with the pastor, I involved other elders and met with leaders from both groups separately, listening to them, answering their questions, and letting them know that I cared for them.

I told them our policy here at Grace Church: if you have a problem with the pastor personally, then you need to sit down and discuss it with him directly.  But if you have a problem with our future plans or church policies, then you need to sit down and discuss your concerns with any of the elders.  If we believe your concerns have merit, we’ll take them to the next elder meeting, discuss them, and get back to you with our decision.

This is exactly what we did on several occasions with members from both groups.  They seemed satisfied for a few weeks, but then they’d start complaining all over again.

Then somewhere along the line, the two groups merged into one.

In the meantime, various members of this new group began bypassing the board and complaining directly to the pastor.  But they didn’t just express their concerns: they began verbally abusing him, threatening his position and career, and promising to leave the church en masse if he did not agree to their demands.

At this point, I stepped in, trying to mediate the situation between Pastor George and this new group.  But The Group wouldn’t budge an inch.  They all threatened to leave the church if Pastor George did not resign.

Looking back, I made two mistakes at this juncture:

First, I should have recommended bringing in a conflict mediator or a conflict consultant to try and resolve matters between the pastor and The Group.  Whenever a group in the church says, “Either he leaves or we leave,” the conflict cannot be resolved from inside the church.  I didn’t know this at the time.  Now I do.

Second, I should have stood more solidly behind the pastor. There are several individuals in The Group with whom I have been friends for years, and I couldn’t bear for them to leave the church.  But The Group interpreted my wavering as a lack of support for the pastor and turned up the heat for him to resign.  They began spreading rumors about him and his wife that simply weren’t true, and unfortunately, some people began to believe them.

When some people began attacking Pastor George and his family, he came to me with tears in his eyes and said, “This has got to stop.  We can’t take this anymore.  I am willing to offer my resignation in exchange for a severance package that will allow me to support my family until I can discern God’s next assignment for me.”

So the elders reluctantly accepted Pastor George’s resignation and unanimously decided to give him a fair and generous severance package so he and his family can heal in the days ahead.

But not only must Pastor George and his family heal: the people of Grace Church need to heal as well.

I have learned that in almost every situation where a senior pastor is forced to resign, the elders/church board do their best to act like nothing happened.  They sweep sinful behavior under the rug, pretend to start over, and privately blame the departing pastor for everything negative that happened.

But that is not going to happen here at Grace.

Let me briefly share four steps that the elders are going to take to bring healing to our church:

First, the elders are going to identify and confront the members of The Group with their abuse toward Pastor George.

We made it very clear to members of The Group how to handle their disagreements with Pastor George, and they handled matters with power, not with love, which is not the way the New Testament specifies.  Therefore, the elders will be meeting with every person in The Group.

We will ask each person to repent of their sin toward Pastor George, the elders, and this church family.

If they refuse, we will ask them to leave the church.

If they agree, we will ask for them to contact Pastor George and apologize.  We will also let them attend the next meeting of the elders to apologize to us as well.

If they wish to stay in the church, they cannot hold a position of leadership for at least two years, and we will carefully monitor their conduct.  We don’t want a repeat performance with a new pastor.

If you have been part of The Group, and you’d like to confess your part in our pastor’s departure, the elders will be available here at the front after today’s meeting.

Second, the elders will not tolerate any attempts to destroy Pastor George’s reputation or career.

The elders felt that Pastor George was a man called by God when we invited him to be our pastor, and we still feel that way today.  As a human being, he made some mistakes at times during his tenure here, but he was never guilty of any major offense against Scripture.

When many pastors are forced to resign, some people inside that church later scapegoat the pastor for anything and everything that went wrong during his tenure.  But this is playing into the devil’s hands, and we will not allow this to occur.

We believe that once he heals, Pastor George has a bright future in ministry, and the elders will do all in their power to make sure that Pastor George is spoken of in the highest terms here at Grace.

Third, the elders are aware that some people are going to leave the church over this situation.

If you came to this church because of Pastor George’s ministry … and most of you did … I ask that you stay and help make Grace a great church.

If you find that you miss Pastor George a great deal, will you come and speak with me or one of the elders?  If after a few months, you wish to leave the church, just let us know that’s why you’re leaving.

If you want to leave the church because of the way the elders are handling things today, then be my guest.

I didn’t know this until the last several weeks, but whenever a pastor is forced out, many people leave the church.

When the elders keep quiet about why the pastor left, the healthy people leave.

When the elders are open about why the pastor left, the troublemakers leave.

Guess which group we want to stay?

Finally, the elders welcome your questions, comments, and concerns.

In many churches, when the pastor resigns under pressure, the elders put a gag order on the staff and congregation, telling them they are not to discuss matters at all.

But that’s how dysfunctional families operate, and we want to operate in a different manner: we want to tell the truth in love.

There are some matters that we will not discuss openly, not so much for legal reasons, but because we prefer to handle matters behind the scenes.  If the elders sense that we need to go public with an issue, we may do that through the church website, the newsletter, through small group meetings, or through another public congregational meeting.

Our methodology is to tell you as much as we can rather than tell you as little as we can.

If you want to know why Pastor George resigned, please contact him directly.  If he wishes to speak, great.  If he doesn’t, that’s his business.  We are not going to try and control him, and he is not going to try and control us.

The unity of a church is fragile at a time like this, and we’re tempted to blame various groups or individuals for what’s happened.

But I believe that unity is based on truth … not on cover ups or lies … and we’re going to put that theory to the test.

Do you have any questions for me?

 

Read Full Post »

Shrink Your Church, Keep Your Job

Posted in Change and Conflict in Church, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , on March 13, 2015| Leave a Comment »

A pastor friend who reads this blog told me a story recently that seems paradoxical.

My friend became the pastor of a church several years ago that averaged 45 people on Sundays.

Three years later, the attendance had tripled and the ministry was going great … except that the rapid growth upset some key leaders.

They began making accusations against the pastor … who was shocked by what they were saying and how they started treating him.

So he eventually resigned … those who came to the church because of him left … and the church reverted to its original size.

This pastor was asked recently to attend a function where many of his pastoral colleagues were present … and many of those men pastored congregations on the small side … even smaller than 45.

But they still had their jobs, and if history is any indication, most of them will remain as pastors for a long time.

We might put this ministry paradox this way:

If a pastor grows a church too rapidly, he can find himself unemployed … but if someone pastors a stagnant church, he may keep his position for years.

For an existing church to grow in 2015, a pastor must institute change … which usually involves risk … which creates anxiety among some people … which leads to complaining … which can lead to antagonism, plots, secret meetings, charges, demands, threats, and the ultimate resignation of that pastor.

Let me give you an example of this scenario from my own ministry:

Many years ago, I pastored a church that was growing at a steady pace.  I initially focused primarily on teaching and shepherding … and the ministry went very well.

We crowded out two services in our worship center, so I had to put on my leader hat and make plans to build a new worship center on our property.

This meant putting together a building team … allotting special funds to hire an architect … letting the architect explain his ideas to the congregation … letting the congregation respond to the architect’s proposal … hiring a contractor … starting a capital funds drive … collecting pledges … overseeing construction … dealing with the planning commission … dealing with resistant neighbors … calling in a federal mediator to help with the resistant neighbors … holding a groundbreaking ceremony … overseeing construction for a year … getting final city approvals … and holding a dedication Sunday.

And I’m sure I missed at least a dozen other steps!

I kept the congregation informed at every key juncture.  Every vote that our church took on every building-related issue was unanimous.  In my view, I handled the changes well.

But there was still fallout.  We lost around 8% of our regular attendees.  Some didn’t want to contribute to the building.  Several leaders tried to sabotage the entire project.  And when the building was finally unveiled, some people complained about colors … furnishings … room functionality … you name it.

I once heard that 70% of all pastors resign soon after completing a building program.  I can see why.  You’re so worn out by the time the building goes up that you have little energy left to grow the church.

But just constructing a worship center (called “architectural evangelism”) never attracts new people.  The pastor still needs to exercise leadership to fill the building, and when he begins taking risks again, the whole anxiety/complaining/antagonism/plots/threats cycle starts all over again.

If a pastor chooses to exercise true leadership in a church, then someone is going to attack him.  Most pastors instinctively know this, and because so many pastors are sensitive individuals, most opt not to lead, which is why 80-85% of all churches in America are stagnant or declining.

But when a pastor does lead, he invariably makes some enemies.

If those people perceive that the pastor is strong, they will probably leave the church.

If they perceive the pastor is weak, they may organize to try and force him to leave.

But if a pastor chooses not to lead … but to focus on administration and teaching and shepherding instead … the chances are much greater that he’ll keep his job for a long time … even if his church never grows.

I visited a church several years ago where the pastor had been there for more than three decades.  The church had been in decline for years (the attendance was half of what it once had been) but the pastor was allowed to stay because he functioned best as a teacher and a shepherd rather than a leader.

Although the boat was taking on water, at least the pastor wasn’t rocking it!

By contrast, Dennis Maynard mentions in his book When Sheep Attack that the 25 clergy he interviewed for his study were all leading growing churches when they were forced to resign.

Maynard states that “… several of our participants noted that they believed that returning the parish to its former state of mediocrity was what they thought the antagonists really wanted.  They observed that the antagonists often objected to the increase in attendance and new members.  They resented the expanded program.  They particularly objected to having new leadership raised up in the congregation.  Once the parish is returned to its former size and activity the antagonists are in a better position to, as one priest wrote – ‘run things themselves.'”

The idea that many of the pastors of rapidly growing churches lose their jobs while the pastors of stagnant/shrinking churches keep their jobs isn’t based on a scientific study.  It’s just a personal observation.  But in my mind, it seems to ring true much of the time.

All of this leads me to ask four questions:

First, is it better for a pastor’s career prospects for him to focus on teaching/shepherding rather than leading in any meaningful way? 

In other words, should a pastor focus on a few things and leave the leadership to the staff … the board … or other influencers?

Second, at what point do a church’s lay leaders begin to turn on the pastor of a growing church?

Is it when their friends/spouses threaten to leave?  When the church grows beyond their control?

Third, to what extent can a pastor be run out of a church for doing too much good?

Can a pastor be too successful?  How does a pastor know when he’s in career jeopardy?

Finally, why do Christian leaders permit this kind of sabotage in our churches?

Why aren’t our seminaries teaching prospective pastors that church success can very well lead to eventual unemployment?  Why don’t our denominations support productive pastors over against damaging antagonists?

Jesus wasn’t executed because His following was insignificant, but because His influence and popularity were expanding.  He was crucified for being too effective.

Twenty centuries later, the careers of many pastors end for the same reason.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Stopping Slander in Our Churches

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , on March 3, 2015| 4 Comments »

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

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

“They had an affair.”

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

Why would a church do this?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*They concoct a story that’s untrue.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But lying happens at times inside Christian churches as well.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why?

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

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

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

Third, correct any misinformation that you hear going around.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That should have put an end to the matter.

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

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

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

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

That pastor has little recourse.

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

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

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

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

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

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

And it took me three years to write it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Slander in the Church

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , on February 27, 2015| Leave a Comment »

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Let me share two fictional scenarios to illustrate my thesis:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*Pastor Bob has been mismanaging church funds.

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

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

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

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

“Why specifically am I being dismissed?”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The lies had done their work.

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

It evens happens in theological seminaries.

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

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

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

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

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

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

But here’s what I want to know:

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

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

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Identifying Church Powerbrokers

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , on February 18, 2015| 2 Comments »

My pastor was under attack.

He couldn’t sleep.  He couldn’t study.  His personality turned inward.

He was a wreck.

Why?

Years ago, in my third church staff position, a small group of vocal members began to criticize the church’s pastor … who was also my supervisor.

Their main claim?  That he didn’t preach often enough, an indication that he was lazy.

35 years ago, many Protestant churches had:

*Sunday School

*Sunday morning worship

*Sunday evening service (with youth group meetings before or after)

*Wednesday night prayer meeting

That’s a lot of teaching time to fill!

My pastor’s main gift was shepherding – not teaching – so he utilized a team of teachers on Sunday nights and Wednesday nights.  I was happy with the arrangement because I enjoyed hearing others speak … and because I got to speak once a month as well.

I can’t recall what set off the grumbling, but many of us started feeling heightened anxiety around the church campus.  One night, someone caught me in the parking lot and told me that 10% of the church was going to leave if the pastor didn’t start preaching on Sunday nights.

Now what would you do with that information?

Some Christians would keep it to themselves.

Some would tell family and friends from the church.

Some would throw in their lot with the 10%.

Honestly, I wasn’t sure what to do.

I had a friend in the church – a man who went on to become an evangelist – and he and I discussed the situation.  We decided to visit the most influential man in the church … a layman known for his teaching, integrity, and straight talk.

My friend and I sat in his living room and said something like this, “There are people in this church who are attacking the pastor.  They are threatening to leave if he doesn’t start preaching on Sunday nights.  The pastor is devastated by this news and seems paralyzed to do anything about the situation.  What can we do to help him?”

Looking back, I don’t know whether or not this man was supportive of the pastor, but we had to take the risk.

He told us, “Gentlemen, when Paul talked about troublemakers in the church, he named names.  Who are these people?”

Wait a minute.  If we mention the names, isn’t that gossip?  Aren’t we tattling?  Couldn’t we get in trouble if we said too much about what was happening?

And some of those people were our friends.  How could we single out friends like that?

But this man was right.  Paul did name names – along with John, the apostle of love:

Some have rejected these and so have shipwrecked their faith.  Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme.  1 Timothy 1:19-20

Their teaching will spread like gangrene.  Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have wandered away from the truth.  They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some.  2 Timothy 2:17-18

Alexander the metalworker did me a great deal of harm.  The Lord will repay him for what he has done.  You too should be on your guard against him, because he strongly opposed our message.  2 Timothy 4:14-15

I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will have nothing to do with us.  So if I come, I will call attention to what he is doing, gossiping maliciously about us.  Not satisfied with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers.  He also stops those who want to do so and puts them out of the church.  3 John 9-10

With biblical precedent upholding us, my friend and I divulged the names of the troublemakers we knew about – especially the ringleaders.

I learned an important lesson that day.  Sometimes church powerbrokers are successful in making threats and demands because nobody has the courage to identify them by name.

Think about this:

Last night, my wife and I watched a recently-produced film on Solomon’s life.  The film opens with King David near death – but he hadn’t yet chosen his successor.

So one of David’s sons engaged in a pre-emptive attempt to be anointed as king –  in league with David’s top general.

Their names?  Adonijah and Joab.

Not “one of David’s sons” – but Adonijah.

Not “a high-ranking military officer” – but Joab.

They were both executed for committing treason against David’s choice for king … Solomon.

One of Jesus’ 12 disciples betrayed him.

His name?  Judas from Kerioth.

Not just “one of the Twelve” – but Judas.

Before anyone could finger him, Judas took his own life.

Paul wrote in Romans 16:17:

I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned.  Keep away from them.

If you’re in a church, and you hear that someone is plotting against your pastor … do something about it.

Warn the pastor.  If you sense the board is supportive, talk to the board member you know and trust best.

Believe me, the pastor and/or board may have no idea of any division inside the ranks.  Your information may give them time to head off an attack before it ever takes place … or give them a key piece of information they lacked.

If you know that an individual or a group is planning on “going after” your pastor, speak to someone in authority – even if the plotters are your friends.

Because if you don’t, your church will eventually experience months of tension, division, and ugliness.  Friends will separate, donations will plunge, and people will leave.

If you know something, tell somebody!

Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.  James 4:17

Read Full Post »

Seven Principles for Resolving Pastor-Church Conflict

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged on February 13, 2015| 5 Comments »

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

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

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

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

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

Principle 1: Expect that your pastor will be attacked.

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

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

Pastors are often attacked when:

*They institute major change.

*They ask people to increase their giving.

*They take a stand on a controversial cultural issue.

*They try to discipline a staff member.

*They make attempts to reach the surrounding community.

*They initiate a building program.

*They preside over declining attendance.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The process must come before the product.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is thoroughly biblical.

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

*The accusers need to go on record: “One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed.  A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.”  This idea of multiple witnesses is repeated in Matthew 18:15-17 and 1 Timothy 5:19-21.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is where church boards often blow it.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Let him go.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Principle 6: Aim for restoration, not for winning.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And believe me, the lies hurt.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

_______________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Why Pastors Under Attack Hibernate

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

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

Most people don’t handle criticism very well.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“I no longer know who to trust.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So you hibernate.

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

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

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

How would you feel?

Confused … hurting … fearful … frightened.

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

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

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

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

Just the interaction on the phone helped keep me sane.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

The Access-Influence Theory and Pastoral Termination

Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , on February 6, 2015| Leave a Comment »

Pastor Tim sighed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Harold was not a happy camper.

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

Harold had had enough.

In his mind, there were only two options:

*Leave the church immediately.

*Get rid of Pastor Tim.

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

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

_______________

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

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

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

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

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

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

_______________

People become antagonistic toward pastors for a variety of reasons:

*They lack spiritual depth.

*They become emotionally reactive when they’re hurt.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And this is the killer:

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

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

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

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

He wanted complete access to me as pastor.

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

What did the leader want?

He wanted to run the church through me.

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

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

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

_______________

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

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

When a Pastor Suspects Conflict

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , on February 3, 2015| Leave a Comment »

No pastor is infallible.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Maybe that’s just their personality.”

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

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

“Maybe my suspicions aren’t justified.”

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

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

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

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

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

I trusted them again … and they were incredibly accurate.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But never ignore your intuition about an individual or group.

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »