Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Pastoral Termination’ Category

Jim Harbaugh is a great football coach.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kawakami goes on:

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

Their solution:

-Talk about ‘winning with class’;

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

-Pretend it was a ‘mutual separation’;

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

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

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

Does all of this sound familiar?

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

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

Getting rid of him is their goal.

What’s their plan beyond that?

Zilch.

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

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

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

*Hire an interim pastor.

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

*Placate the departing pastor’s supporters.

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

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

In addition, they’ll have to deal with:

*Reduced attendance as the pastor’s supporters leave.

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

*Decreased giving as donors walk out the door.

*Keeping the staff intact with that decreased giving.

*Preventing the staff that supported the pastor from leaving.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The future of many pastors and churches is at stake.

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

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

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

These signals include church members:

*Making inquiries about church attendance and giving patterns.

*Requesting copies of the church constitution and bylaws.

*Calling district or denominational headquarters.

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

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

In addition:

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

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

*Staffers may become secretive while talking on the phone.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Before long, rumors of discontent became reality.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

For example, when a pastor is under attack:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Think about it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

When a pastor is under attack inside the church where he serves, it is amazing how quickly many people choose a side.

No matter what, some churchgoers will automatically back their minister … even before hearing any evidence against him.

Conversely, some attendees will believe almost anything bad about their pastor … even if every accusation amounts to smoke.

I was a solo or senior pastor for 25 years, and spent 10 1/2 additional years serving as a staff member in 5 different churches.

In every one of those churches, people approached me to criticize the pastor … one of the unknown hazards of working on a church staff.

I never took the side of the pastor’s critics.  I couldn’t.  He hired me and trusted me, and I could not betray that trust … even if I thought some people’s complaints had merit.

But over the years, I learned that it was smart to be on the side of four practices whenever the sheep attack the shepherd:

First, be on the side of Scripture.

The New Testament is full of admonitions to submit to church leaders.  There aren’t any verses that advocate rebelling against a pastor or trying to force his resignation.

For example, Hebrews 13:17 counsels us to “obey your leaders and submit to their authority.”  1 Peter 5:5 adds, “Young men, in the same way be submissive to those who are older.”

Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 5:13 to “hold them [those who are over you in the Lord] in the highest regard in love because of their work.  Live in peace with each other.”

But what if someone suspects the pastor of sin?

1 Timothy 5:19, speaking of those “whose work is preaching and teaching,” says, “Do not entertain an accusation against an elder [the context includes paid pastors] unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.”

This means that if someone suspects the pastor of sinning, they (a) have seen or heard him commit an act of sin, (b) consider the sin serious enough to merit investigation, and (c) are willing to go on the record about what they’ve seen or heard … even in front of the entire congregation (implied in verse 20).

But when a pastor is under attack, how often do his critics search for, cite, and observe biblical parameters?

Hardly ever.

A church with a weak view of Scripture may understandably have a weak view of pastoral leadership.

But a church that espouses a strong view of Scripture should never permit people to bypass God’s Word in the interests of emotion or expediency.

Second, be on the side of patience.

The New England Patriots destroyed the Indianapolis Colts in the AFC Championship Game last Sunday.  I watched the game until it became unwatchable … and that didn’t take long.

But the next morning, there were charges circulating that 11 of the 12 footballs that the Patriots used in that game were under-inflated … presumably so that Patriots’ quarterback Tom Brady could grip the ball better during wintery weather.

Four days later, this controversy is still in full swing.  Coach Belichick and Quarterback Brady both deny that they had anything to do with deflating those footballs.

If they didn’t reduce the pressure in those balls, then who did?

We … don’t … know … yet.

If you’re interested in this story, how much does it bother you that we don’t know who under-inflated those footballs?

Can you live with the ambiguity … the mystery … the anxiety?

Judging from what I’m seeing in the news and sports media, many people want to know what happened RIGHT NOW!

The same attitude hovers over churches when pastors are under attack.

People want answers RIGHT NOW.

They want to know what their friends think RIGHT NOW.

They want to know if the pastor is staying or quitting RIGHT NOW.

They want closure … RIGHT NOW.

When church leaders exude calm during a sheep attack, that calm filters out into the congregation.

However, many members can’t handle the anxiety … so they talk … and email … and gossip … and text … and speculate … because they want matters resolved RIGHT NOW.

But unfortunately, it’s this RIGHT NOW attitude that makes conflict worse.

Galatians 5:22 says that patience is a fruit of the Spirit’s work in a believer’s life.  When believers begin to become impatient during a sheep attack, more patient believers need to calm them down rather than rouse them up.

During a sheep attack, some members post nasty things about their pastor on social media like Facebook or Twitter, which only makes things worse.

When I experienced a sheep attack more than five years ago, someone who habitually criticized other church leaders online began ripping into me on social media.  Thankfully, a church leader who knew this person contacted them immediately and told them, “Take it down!”  Fortunately, they did just that before the innuendos could spread any further.

While some people angrily take several steps toward the pastor, take several steps backwards and patiently survey the entire situation first.

Third, be on the side of a fair and just process.

This process needs to be biblically-based and conducted with patience.

Many times, that process has already been spelled out in the church’s governing documents … usually in the church bylaws.

That process may also be delineated in a separate document … or a contract/covenant the pastor signed when he was called to the church … or in denominational polity.

But sadly, some factions inside a church either aren’t aware of these documents, or could care less about them … so they resort to mob justice.

This is where a church’s governing leaders need to take charge.  Whether through a verbal announcement on a Sunday … an all-church email … or a letter to the entire congregation … the leaders need to let God’s people know that they (a) are aware of what’s happening, (b) are planning a fair and just investigation, and (c) will let the church know when they have something solid to share.

I can’t say for sure, but my guess is that more than half of all pastors under attack would be able to stay in their churches if the governing leaders used a fair and just process to investigate people’s complaints and charges against their minister.

A fair and just process would include:

*Telling the pastor what the charges are against him.

*Telling the pastor who is making the charges.

*Letting the pastor face his accusers in the presence of the governing leaders.

*Letting the pastor respond to each charge against him as it’s made.

*Insisting that those who make false accusations against the pastor repent and ask his forgiveness.

*Insisting that the pastor be rebuked publicly for any serious misconduct (1 Timothy 5:20)  and/or letting the pastor resign instead.

Once again, the only way the governing leaders can carry out such a process is if they are first on the side of Scripture and on the side of patience.

In fact, when charges against the pastor begin circulating, I believe the first thing the governing board should do is to meet and agree on a deliberate process.

But too many boards become anxious and start asking themselves, “Is the pastor guilty or innocent?”  Then they make a quick decision … and blow their church apart.

Finally, be on the side of truth.

For a believer, the boundaries of truth are set by Scripture, but I’m thinking here about two things in particular: facts and accurate reporting.

Several years ago, I had lunch with the staff supervisor of one of America’s largest churches.  He told me that two women in the church had recently accused a staff member of a serious charge.

The staff supervisor did not immediately take the side of the women.  He conducted his own investigation into their charges.

His conclusion: the staff member did not use his best judgment, but was not guilty of a major offense, and could continue to serve on the staff.

However, the women were not satisfied with this exoneration.  They continued to share their charges with others, hoping in some way to harm the staff member.

The staff supervisor heard about what the women were doing and put an immediate stop to their actions.  In fact, he told them that if they continued to criticize the staff member, he would institute disciplinary action against them.

They stopped.

Please notice: the staff supervisor wanted to know two things:

First, how truthful were the charges the women made?

His determination: the issue was not as serious as they made it out to be.

Second, how accurately did the women handle the staff supervisor’s decision?

His determination: they were now spreading lies rather than speaking the truth.

I haven’t watched the original CSI program in years, but in the early days, Gil Grissom used to tell his forensic team to “follow the evidence wherever it leads.”

Those six words well summarize the idea of “being on the side of truth.”

______________

This Sunday morning, imagine that you enter the worship center of your church, and one of your friends pulls you aside and says, “There are people who are saying that the pastor has been misusing church funds and that he should resign immediately.”

Please, don’t take the side of those who say, “The pastor is guilty and must fry.”

And don’t take the side of those who say, “The pastor is so godly that he’d never do anything wrong.”

Don’t let immature, dysfunctional, and overly-reactive people destroy your pastor and church.

Instead, take the side of Scripture, patience, a fair and just process, and truth.

Do your best to encourage your friends … your family … your ministry colleagues … your church staff … and your governing board to follow these principles as well.

God will smile upon you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

After a pastor has been forced out of a church, he goes through an incredible amount of pain.

*He loses his position … and maybe his career.

*He loses most of his church friends … and sometimes his wife and/or children.

*He loses his income … and can’t file for unemployment.

*He loses his joy and drive … and his ability to trust people.

Statistics indicate that 45% of the time a pastor experiences a forced exit, a small faction was responsible for his departure.

Only 7% of the time is the pastor’s misbehavior the real reason for his leaving.

And yet … after his last day … forces inside the church will informally conspire to blame everything on him.

What are these forces?

First, many interim pastors blame the previous pastor for any conflict that ensued.

I hear these stories all the time.  They have become predictable.

An interim is hired … comes to a church that’s just pushed out their shepherd … and concludes, “The pastor deserved to leave.”

Why does the interim do this?

*He wants to curry favor with his new employers.

*He wants to discredit the previous pastor so he will look good by comparison.

*He wants to make friends with “the faction” so they won’t turn on him.

*He wants the shadow of the previous pastor to stop hovering over him.

*He wants to “forget the past” and move on.

But in the process, many … if not most … interims allow the reputation of the previous pastor to be trashed.

And what’s sad is that in most cases, the interim has never even met the previous pastor.

Wouldn’t it be better if an interim pastor said this publicly instead?

“I have never met your pastor, so I don’t know him at all.  From what I’ve heard, he did a lot of good while he was here.  I’m sure that many of you have fond memories of him, especially when he ministered to you during a time of need.  Although I don’t know all the events surrounding his departure, as long as I’m here, we’re going to honor him for the good that he did, and pray that God will eventually bring about reconciliation between the pastor and anyone who might be upset with him.”

But when is the last time you heard an interim pastor say something like that?

Second, the church board blames the previous pastor as well.

They say things behind the scenes like:

“He always wanted his own way.”

“He wanted to change things too fast.”

“He refused to cooperate with us.”

“He never listened to our ideas.”

These charges sound credible because members of the governing board both knew and worked with the pastor.

But there are two problems with these statements:

*The pastor isn’t around to defend himself.  He may have a vastly different interpretation of the circumstances prompting his departure.

*The church board ends up taking zero responsibility for their part in the pastor’s exit … leaving them in a position to repeat their error.

During my 36 years in church ministry, there were many staff members who worked under me.  Sometimes, those situations didn’t work out.

When they left, I asked myself, “What did I do to contribute to their lack of success here?”

If it was a character issue, there may not have been anything I could do.

But if it was a supervisory issue, then maybe I did bear some responsibility for their leaving … and I didn’t want to repeat my mistake with the next person hired.

Wouldn’t it be better for a church board to say this publicly instead?

“We are sad that our pastor has left.  He was called here by God.  He loves his wife and children.  He worked hard as pastor.  We felt that his preaching was biblical and instructive, that he cared deeply for the people of this church, and that he will be very much missed.  Although we aren’t able to share all the details of his departure, we believe that he still has a future in ministry.  Therefore, we will not tolerate anyone trying to destroy the pastor’s reputation.  If we hear any talk along this line, we promise that you will be confronted and corrected.  Let’s not cause any more pain for the pastor or our people.”

But when is the last time you heard a board say something like that?

Third, the faction that drove out the pastor must blame the pastor. 

They have to.  It’s part of their narrative.

The faction could be a group of old-timers … or seniors … or traditionalists … or staff members … or the church board … or a synthesis of these groups.

The faction … often as few as 7 to 10 people … will blame all the church’s problems on the previous pastor for a long time.

They want the spotlight on him … not on them.

But this isn’t the tactic of a mature believer, but of a child.

When I was in second grade, some girls were bothering me.  One recess, my friend Steve and I handled things … unwisely.

The girls told the teacher.  The teacher came over to me in class and shook me … hard.

Thinking fast, I blamed everything on Steve … and it worked.

I don’t remember what happened to Steve, but I quickly found myself in the clear.

The girls shouldn’t have done what they did.  And Steve shouldn’t have helped me scatter them.

But I bore responsibility for my actions.

And when a faction plays a part in pushing out a pastor, they are responsible for their actions.

But for some reason … and I will never, ever understand this … nobody at the church holds them responsible.

In fact, they’re usually forgiven (which really means excused) without demonstrating any kind of repentance.

Their false accusations … malicious charges … gross overreactions … and attempts to destroy someone called by God are all ignored by the interim pastor … church board … and church staff.

And then, to guarantee future immunity, this group cozies up to the interim and the new pastor.

Wouldn’t it be better for the pastor’s attackers to say this publicly instead?

“We were angry with the pastor.  He didn’t always do what we wanted him to do.  His resistance made us anxious.  And so we overreacted.  We spread vicious lies about him.  We ran him down every chance we could.  We used the telephone and social media to make him look bad.  Even though our accusations clearly hurt him, we kept things up, even attacking his wife and children.  But we were wrong.  Although we can’t bring the pastor back, we admit our part in his departure, and will submit to any correction that the church board deems fair.  And we promise to apologize to the pastor for the way we treated him and his family.  We have asked God to forgive us and ask you as a congregation to forgive us as well.”

But when is the last time you heard a faction say something like that?

When pastors leave a church prematurely, they may have made some mistakes … but that doesn’t mean their reputations should be besmirched in their former church … among their former church friends … or in the wider body of Christ.

The single best way to protect the previous pastor’s reputation is for the remaining church leaders to properly assess responsibility for the pastor’s departure.

If the pastor was guilty of heresy, sexual immorality, or criminal behavior, okay, then maybe he’s fully or almost fully to blame for his leaving.

But if a faction rose against him … and the board turned against him … and some staff betrayed him … then how can the previous pastor be 100% to blame?

He can’t be.

God forgive us for the way many Christians thoughtlessly harm the reputations of a former or current pastor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Pastor Paul was in great pain.

Paul had been the pastor of a medium-sized congregation for four years, and as far as he could tell, things were going great.

After years of decline, attendance had turned around.  Giving was up.  There were plans to buy additional land and construct a new building.

It was evident that people felt great about their church.

Most people.

But a handful weren’t happy.  They no longer had access to the pastor … weren’t involved in making important decisions … and disagreed with the pastor’s direction for the church.

So eight people began meeting in secret.  They pooled their complaints and pledged to return the church to its pre-Paul state.

But to do that, they first had to bounce Pastor Paul.

And to get rid of him, they had to fight dirty.

They made lists of his flaws … wrote down “questionable” expressions in his sermons … and pulled others into their web.

They even recruited a staff member and two board members to their cause.

Before long, that group of eight had swelled to twenty-three … about five percent of the entire congregation.

When the “charges” going around finally reached Pastor Paul, he panicked.  He began having anxiety attacks … started isolating himself from people … and began breaking down emotionally.

Sensing their strategy was working, the pastor’s critics turned up the heat.

The pastor started preaching less assertively.  He was guarded around members, not knowing who was for or against him.

When his wife began folding under the strain, Pastor Paul negotiated a severance package with the board and quietly left.

Now here’s a question I’d like you to answer:

Should the church board … or members of the church staff … or the local denominational executive … tell the congregation the real reason why the pastor resigned?

The tendency in evangelical churches is to do the following:

*The board issues itself a “gag order” and refuses to discuss the situation inside the church.

*The board puts the staff under the same “gag order” … even threatening their jobs if they say what they know.

*The leader of the denominational district responds to inquiries by using stock phrases like “some people disagreed with the pastor’s direction” or “this problem goes back many years” or “there were philosophical differences” … phrases designed to make people stop asking questions.

*The pastor is given a severance package in exchange for not saying anything about why he left.

*An interim pastor comes to the church and says, “Let’s forget the past and focus on the future.”

But do these actions truly bring healing to the former pastor … church board … staff members … and congregation?

In the meantime, do we as followers of Jesus ever stop to ask ourselves, “Is this really the healthiest way to handle matters?”

In Dennis Maynard’s book Healing for Pastors & People Following a Sheep Attack, the former pastor, author, and church consultant writes the following:

“The healing moment for the wounded members of the congregation will come when the real reason for the pastor’s leaving is brought into the light.  If the former pastor’s leaving was the consequence of a sheep attack then the interim period must be used to bring that out of the shadows and into the open.  It is not a secret!  The denominational executive and the remaining lay leaders may try to pretend so.  The antagonists will put their spin on it.  Most every member of the congregation already knows otherwise.”

I almost cried when I read those words.  Finally, a prominent Christian leader believes that only the truth will really set a church free!

Maynard says that if this step isn’t taken, then those who forced out the pastor will continue to blame him for everything.  But “the spin of the antagonists only deepens the anger in the congregation.  Resentment will build among those members that desperately want the truth to be brought into the open.  The end result is that their alienation from the parish is made complete…. The real dysfunction that is common knowledge in the congregation … is that the pastor was targeted, bullied and attacked.”

After a pastor is forced to leave a church, some people … perhaps many … will eventually leave.

You can’t hold onto everybody.

If church leaders fail to tell the truth, they’ll lose the good people.

If they do tell the truth, they’ll probably lose the antagonists and their friends.

Seems like a no-brainer, doesn’t it?

So why not the tell the truth?

Maynard continues:

“Pretending that the systemic dysfunction does not exist will not correct it.  It must be named and confronted.  I also contend that openly naming and discussing what happened is a critical component in the healing process.  The hurting hearts of the injured members of the congregation need it.  To do otherwise will only cause many faithful lay people wounded by the experience to leave.  Far too many of them will permanently walk away from the Church sad, angry and disgusted.  Some will stay but become passive to inactive members.  Their bitterness toward the denominational authorities and the antagonists will accelerate.  Others will seek a new congregation but will choose to become uninvolved.  Many will never return to their former ministries of leadership in any parish.”

Dennis Maynard is a leader in the Episcopal Church, which is considered to be a mainline denomination.  I believe that what he writes is biblical and true to reality, even though it may not be politically correct among evangelical leaders who seem to prefer expediency to honesty.

When a group of bullies forces a pastor to resign, why won’t anybody talk about what happened openly?

I’d love to hear your thoughts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Alex Trebek was not happy.

The thirty-year host of the TV game show Jeopardy was hosting Kids Week on the program during the first week in December.

One of the contestants ended up $1400 in the red, and according to show rules, she couldn’t compete in Final Jeopardy.

Trebek said to the girl: “We have bad news for you, because you’re in a negative situation, it means you won’t be around for Final Jeopardy, but you’ll automatically pick up $1000 for a third place finish.”

The girl was visibly upset and ran backstage.

The girl’s mother later wrote a letter to Sony, the show’s producers: “If he had taken the time, he would have known, like you do, that my daughter is not a sore loser, and does not become emotional solely over losing a game,” she wrote. “She was upset about not being able to completely play the game to the end… I don’t think I’ll ever forgive him for that.”

Trebek was accused of not making a credible effort to make the girl feel better and was asked to re-tape the moment right before the girl became upset and ran backstage.

Pastors go through this stuff all the time.

During my first pastorate, I was reading William Manchester’s biography of General Douglas MacArthur called American Caesar.  I discovered that I knew next to nothing about MacArthur or his accomplishments … like writing Japan’s constitution after World War 2 ended.

During one sermon, I selected an illustration from the book, a story where the Americans won and the Japanese lost.

A young couple attended our church.  The wife was Caucasian … and her husband looked Caucasian.

His wife later told me that he was part Japanese, part Caucasian … and that because of my story, he probably wouldn’t be coming back to the church.

How could I know that he was part Japanese … and how could I know that my story might offend him?

From the beginning of my pastoral ministry, I wrote out my sermons word for word, and then discarded my manuscript as much as I could.

I realize this style isn’t in fashion nowadays because congregations expect their pastors to speak without notes.

But one reason I chose to write out my messages was because I had time to think through how to say what I wanted to say so I would offend the fewest possible people.

But just like Alex Trebek, a pastor never knows when he’s going to say something offensive … or who is going to be offended.

My wife runs a preschool in our home with about 25 kids attending at various times.  She can say the exact same thing in the same way to 24 kids and they’ll comply, but the 25th child will burst into tears.

Should she then aim her directives toward the 24 kids or the one kid who is overly sensitive?

And should a pastor speak to the congregation as a whole or change his language so some people won’t be offended?

I once heard Bill Hybels from Willow Creek Church say that about 15% of his congregation might be classified as dysfunctional, while the other 85% were pretty healthy people.  (This was at least twenty years ago, so the percentage of dysfunctional people might be higher now.)  Hybels believed that a pastor should direct his message toward the 85% and direct the 15% toward counseling.

How does that sound to you?

Pastors have two choices when it comes to preaching: they can speak in a politically and emotionally correct way … in which case they won’t say much at all … or they can be themselves before God and just let it fly.

But it’s not just up to the pastor, but up to the church board as well.

If the church board backs the pastor’s right to say whatever he wants before God … even if some don’t always agree with him … that pastor’s ministry can flourish.

But if the board demands that the pastor speak in such a way that he doesn’t offend the wrong people … that pastor’s ministry may not succeed because he’ll always wonder if he’s offending somebody by what he says.

During my last ministry, I said something in a message that really upset one couple.  They complained to the church board and wanted my head.

The board chairman listened to a recording of my message, felt I didn’t say anything wrong, and told the couple just that.

They didn’t stop their crusade against me until they left the church … livid … but I felt supported, and free to continue to say whatever God wanted me to say.

In the end, Alex Trebek wrote the following words to the show’s producers: “If you all think I should retape the opening, I will.  But I want to say that for 30 years I’ve defended our show against attacks inside and out.  But it doesn’t seem to operate both ways.  When I’m vilified, corporate (and certainly legal) always seems to say ‘don’t say anything and it’ll blow over,’ and I’m not feeling support from the producers, and that disappoints the _______ out of me.”

As a former pastor for 36 years, I understand where the Jeopardy host is coming from.

When you’re attacked, if you sense support from those you account to, you’ll forge ahead with greater confidence and boldness.

But if those you account to collapse on you when you’re attacked, your morale will plunge, and you’ll start looking for a way out … which is why Alex Trebek ended his statement by saying, “Maybe it’s time for me to move on.”

My favorite verse on preaching is John 1:17: “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.”

Fundamentalists focus on speaking the truth … but often without grace.

Liberals focus on speaking with grace … but usually have little to say.

But biblical pastors prioritize truth in content … and grace in presentation.

And those are the ministries that make it to Final Jeopardy.

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

My wife recently gave me a unique birthday gift: a three-hour “Tragical History Tour” of infamous locations in Hollywood appropriately called “Dearly Departed Tours.”

We saw the house where Michael Jackson died … the bungalow where John Belushi died … and the hotel room where Janis Joplin died … and heard some gruesome but fascinating narration.

While it all sounds a bit morbid, we also saw the Cunningham’s house from the TV show Happy Days and many other memorable locations in the greater Hollywood area.

All this got me to thinking: what if I took you on a tour of churches in your community?  The narration might go something like this:

Welcome to the Church Conflict Tour!  My name is Jim, and for the next 90 minutes, we’ll visit four churches in your community, as well as hear the back story behind their histories.  Since this tour frightens some people, I want you to know that once we leave our beginning point, you must complete the tour.

The first church we’re going to visit is Trinity Bible, the tall white building on your immediate left.  Back in 1994, Pastor Don tried to update the music and add video screens so the church could attract the unchurched.

The governing board voted unanimously to support Pastor Don’s vision, and for two years, the church grew from 211 to 326.  But several vocal members opposed Pastor Don and complained to their friends on the board, threatening to leave the church if Pastor Don didn’t quit.  When the board succumbed and asked Pastor Don for his resignation, he complied.

See the parking lot there that’s overgrown with weeds?  That’s where many of the discussions opposing Pastor Don took place.  And the chipped paint on the sanctuary walls … the overgrown bushes and grass … and the deteriorating church sign all indicate that this church is just a ghost of its former self.

Now barely 45 people attend the church, which is composed primarily of people who don’t have families and consider this church their family.  And Pastor Don?  He’s selling insurance, trying desperately to make ends meet.

The lesson from this church?  It’s far better for the governing board to follow their pastor than chronic complainers.

The second church is about a mile away and is called Unity Baptist.  The church began in a storefront in 2002 when Pastor Rick – who had recently graduated from seminary – moved to our community with his wife and baby daughter.

Pastor Rick wanted his church to be characterized by love, which is why he called the church Unity Baptist.

Things went well for the first four years.  The church grew from a core group of 18 to 163 people on Sundays.  People were coming to Christ … serving with joy … and enjoying the fellowship.

But a faction arose within the church and opposed Pastor Rick’s ministry.  There were only six of them, but they were aggressive and determined to bring down Pastor Rick.  At first, they were very quiet … researching his background, contacting his previous churches, and looking online for any dirt they could find about him.

Then the rumors began: Pastor Rick was lazy … he was buying his sermons online … he was really a dictator … and on and on.

The rumors spread throughout the church, and by the time Pastor Rick heard them, too many people believed the lies.

Pastor Rick was never given a chance to respond to anything said about him.  He was never allowed to face his accusers.  And no one ever produced any evidence that the charges were true.

So Pastor Rick resigned.  His wife was devastated, and began drinking heavily to medicate her pain.  The couple are still married, but they’re a shell of their former selves.

After Pastor Rick left in 2006, the church has had three more pastors … two of them pushed out by the same faction.  With only 22 attendees left, the people are discussing closing their doors.

The lesson?  At the first sign of vicious rumors against the pastor, insist that those making charges meet with the pastor and governing board and make their accusations to his face … or leave the church.

Just two more churches to go.  You there … you can’t leave the van while I’m driving!  Only 40 minutes to go.

The third church today is Serene Community.  The church began in a school but moved to a light industrial building in their eighth year.  The church was 14 years old when Dr. Steve was called as pastor in 2005.  Under Steve’s leadership, the church grew from 273 to 681 people in just six years.  In 2011, this was THE church in town to attend.

Dr. Steve had two teenage sons: Robert and Jake.  Unfortunately, Robert was caught one day after school smoking pot.  Pastor Steve and his wife went to the police station and brought him home, but the news spread quickly throughout the community, and within a week, there were calls for Steve to resign.  Some people said he couldn’t manage his family.

Steve knew nothing about Robert’s “problem,” and when he found out, he took swift but loving steps to keep his son drug-free, including counseling.  But some people in the church pounced on this news and wanted Steve removed from office at once.  One group of about twenty people stopped attending and giving until Steve was dismissed.  When that didn’t work, they began demanding that Robert “repent” of his sin in front of the entire congregation.

Steve was torn between his calling and his family.  When the board wouldn’t stand up for him, Steve negotiated a severance package and left the church quietly.

Meanwhile, most of the people at the church were devastated by what happened.  The serenity at Serene Community quickly disappeared, and for the next two years, those who supported Pastor Steve refused to interact with those who opposed him.  In the end, most of the happy, healthy people left the church, and the church faced some rough days.  Within another two years, the church had dwindled down to barely 100 people.

Ironically, two of the leaders who had opposed Steve ended up having teenagers who also had drug problems.  They didn’t ask their kids to repent in front of the church, and they didn’t view themselves as poor parents.

Pastor Steve went back to school, earned a PhD, and is teaching at a Bible college in the Midwest.  Although he still loves Jesus, he attends church sporadically, but spends lots of time with his family … including Robert, who just married a fine Christian woman.

The lesson?  Only a congregation that extends grace to their pastor is deserving of the name Serenity.

Finally, let’s drive by Christ Church.  See it there on the right?

Christ Church was founded by Pastor Garth in 1997.  The church grew steadily until 2001 when The Group began making accusations against Garth.

They claimed that he didn’t show his emotions when he preached … that he was ignoring some of the older members … and that he was making changes too quickly, among other things.

Up until this time, the church had grown from a handful of people to 475.  But when the complaints began, the church stopped growing and began declining … and The Group laid the decline squarely at Pastor Garth’s feet.

Fortunately, Pastor Garth had taught his people from Scripture how to handle conflict situations.  When members of The Group complained to board members about their pastor, the board members all said, “Let’s go speak with Pastor Garth about that issue.”  In every case, The Group members backed down.

Then they called the district minister of the denomination and complained to him, but he stood solidly behind Pastor Garth as well.

The Group then began circulating emails filled with gossip and innuendo, implying that Pastor Garth was having an affair.  When one of the emails was sent to a board member, he tracked down where it originated, called another board member, and made an immediate visit to the home of the complainer.  After listening to her complaints for 30 minutes, the two board members told her: “If you want to stay in this church, then we ask that you stop your complaining right now, confess your wrongdoing, and support our pastor completely.  If you don’t repent, we will return with a third board member and you will be asked to leave the church.  Do you understand?”

She never attended the church again … and mysteriously, all the complaining instantly ceased.

Just like in Acts 6, once the conflict was resolved, the church exploded with growth, and last year, Christ Church became the largest church in our city, reaching nearly 1800 people every weekend with the Word of God.

The lesson?  When rumors about a pastor begin, they must be dealt with swiftly and firmly or the pastor may be forced to leave … and the church will take a nosedive as well.

As we drive up to our starting point, that completes our Church Conflict Tour.  I’d like to say, “I hope you enjoyed yourself,” but maybe I should say, “I hope you learned how to handle church conflict much better” instead!

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

I recently ran across a book on church conflict, antagonism, and pastoral termination that was new to me, although it was first published in 2010.

It’s called When Sheep Attack by Dennis R. Maynard.  Dr. Maynard has been in church ministry for 38 years.  He once served as the pastor of a church in Houston that is the largest Episcopal church in the United States.  He has also served as a consultant to more than 100 churches of various denominations in the United States and Canada.

Dr. Maynard conducted a study of 25 pastors who had been forced out of their churches.  At the time they were attacked, each pastor was leading a dynamic and growing congregation.  In other words, these were all highly competent individuals.

After examining the data, Dr. Maynard came to the following conclusions:

“We can no longer afford the luxury of denying that there are dysfunctional personalities in congregations that want to hurt clergy.”

“The methods used by the antagonists to attack clergy and divide congregations follow an identifiable pattern.”

“The impact of these attacks on clergy, their families and the congregations they serve is devastating.”

“Ultimately, in order to neutralize the work of the antagonists all the ‘players’ in the congregational system must work together.”

Dr. Maynard then made the following points, followed by my comments:

We are dealing with a generation that believes they are the authorities in all areas despite the fact that they have no training or experience.”

There are handfuls of people in every church who believe they know how to lead, preach, administrate, and shepherd better than their own pastor.  There’s just one problem: God hasn’t called them to church ministry.  But believing themselves the most important individuals in their church, they set out to force out their pastor by any means necessary.

“Antagonists … thrive on being critical.  They enjoy conflict.  They have extremely controlling personalities.  They get their feelings hurt easily and turn those hurt feelings into anger, bitterness, resentment and ultimately revenge.  They are bulldozers fueled by a tank full of grudges.”

I remember one man who left our church in a huff.  He tried to negotiate his way back by demanding that I give him access to me 24/7.  I couldn’t do it.  He was full of rage.

“Every clergy person reported that they inherited an ‘untouchable staff member often in the guise of an active retired clergy or a retired rector [pastor]’…. They are untouchable because of the political alliances they’ve made with the ‘right people’ in the congregation.”

This is the first time I’ve ever read such a statement, but it makes perfect sense.  Some staff members always survive because they’re far more political than spiritual.

“Would it surprise you to know that in my consultations more often than not it was the active or retired pastoral associate that was the chaplain to the antagonists intent on tearing down the rector?  If not, then it won’t surprise you to learn just whom the antagonists wanted to be named as the next interim or possibly permanent rector.”

The current associate pastor is likely to become “chaplain” to the antagonists and be their choice as the interim or next pastor.  My experience resonates with this statement.

“Antagonists … have no interest in dialogue, compromise, forgiveness or reconciliation.  Their goal from the beginning is the removal and often the destruction of the rector.”

How very sad.  Those who oppose the pastor refuse to use biblical or relational means of resolving their differences with their pastor.  Instead, they demand that he leave the church.

“The antagonists refuse to deal with their own flaws by demanding perfection in their priest.  As long as they are able to stay focused on the priest’s failure to achieve their impossible standards they don’t have to consider their own.”

The other night, I asked a longtime pastor friend why pastors are breaking down at such an alarming rate.  He believes the problem is perfectionism: the pastor demands perfection of himself, and the congregation demands perfection of their pastor.  What a toxic and unbiblical combination!

“Every priest reported that the experience of being attacked by the antagonists had a negative impact on them physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually.  Their descriptions ranged from battle fatigue to severe illnesses.  Most all reported suffering from depression.  Others described the emotional impact as feeling broken, defensive, withdrawn, fear, panic, a loss of creativity, energy and profound sadness.”

Amen to the above description.  I’ve been there.  In my case, I wasn’t suicidal … I just wanted to vanish.  I spoke with a well-respected veteran Christian leader recently who told me he’s surprised by how long it takes pastors to recover after they’ve been beaten up.  It doesn’t take months … it takes years.

“The majority of the clergy reported that both they and their spouses had been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome and have had to continue in treatment for years after the experience ended.”

I wasn’t diagnosed with PTSD, but my wife was.  I’m haunted during the day by what happened to me.  She’s haunted at night.

“Every congregation experienced negative repercussions when the priest left the parish.  The negative impact on the parish was seen immediately.  Attendance and giving decreased dramatically.  Membership declined and program growth became stagnant to non-existent.  Empty pews at Sunday worship and declining parish collections were the most noticeable consequences.  On average, 28% of the worshippers left these parishes and united with another.  19% left the parishes completely and have yet to return to that parish or any other.”

Based on the aftermath after a pastor’s removal, how can we conclude that these antagonists are doing God’s work?  It’s obvious that they’re serving someone else.  I now believe that many of them are either very immature believers … regardless of how they appear to others … or unbelievers.

“It should be clearly agreed at the beginning that if the governing board initiates the dissolution of ministry action, the rector shall receive a minimum severance package.  Depending on the size of the parish this should be a minimum of eighteen months and for larger parishes where the job possibilities for a removed priest are fewer it could go up to five years salary and benefits.”

Some churches that toss out an innocent pastor offer no severance agreement.  Others offer three to six months.  Maynard lobbies for at least 18 months because it can take that long for dismissed pastors to find a new ministry.  If a church board doesn’t want to pay such a severance, then they should work matters out with their pastor.

“It is the wise rector that uses an outside consultant…. The majority of the clergy in this study did employ a consultant.  In none of the twenty-five cases was a consultant able to stop the antagonists from achieving their goal.”

In my situation, I used a consultant.  He flew to our community, interviewed staff, witnessed attacks firsthand, exposed the plot against me, wrote a report, and helped negotiate a severance agreement.  But the knowledge that consultants could not stop the antagonists freezes me in my tracks.

“Any senior pastor caught in an irresolvable conflict should not hesitate to consult an attorney.  The majority of the clergy surveyed did employ an attorney.  Most felt the need to do so to protect themselves and their families.  Several reported that their attorneys did advise them that they had legal grounds to sue their antagonists for slander and defamation.”

Most pastors aren’t comfortable doing this, but if they plan to continue a ministry career, and if they love their family members, this step is essential.  I hate to say this, but inside their churches, pastor under attack usually have zero rights, so they need to know their rights as an American citizen.

“… the biggest red flag of all.  If such a staff person has played an active role in the removal of a previous senior pastor, then they need to be removed by the appropriate authorities before a new senior pastor is even announced.” 

If a staff member – regardless of who it is or how long they’ve been in the church – cannot support an innocent senior pastor, that staff member needs to resign and leave the church rather than be allowed to undermine the pastor from the inner circle.  The longer a Judas stays among the disciples, the more destruction he or she will cause.

“The overwhelming majority [of the twenty-five pastors surveyed] began new ministries as professional interim ministers.  For clergy that have been attacked by antagonists, it appears that interim ministry may just be the best avenue for them to pursue.”

Most pastors who have been attacked have to be well-connected to find another church ministry … and be younger than 55.  Without a PhD, pastors can’t even teach in a Bible college.  The interim pathway is beneficial for those who want to keep leading and preaching, but the lifestyle involves travel that separates the interim from his kids and grandkids, friends, support system, belongings, and house.

“Those diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome will most likely be plagued by nightmares for the greater portion of their lives.  All our participants, spouses and children now have a more cynical attitude toward the Church and people.  Most all confessed to continuing to have problems trusting others.  The loss to the Church of spouses, children and lay members that formerly were faithful and enthusiastic about their lives in the Church is a damning judgment on the work of the antagonists.” 

A longtime Christian leader told me that going through this experience is like suffering a concussion as a National Football League player.  Once you’ve suffered one, you remain in protective mode because you don’t want to suffer the disorientation of undergoing another one.

“If the antagonists begin directing their attacks toward your spouse or children, employ an attorney and make it known that you have employed an attorney.”

Some pastors who are removed from their positions later experience divorce.  Many pastors’ kids quit going to church and abandon their faith for good.  If a pastor can stop direct attacks upon his family members using legal means, then he needs to do so.

Dr. Maynard’s book is relatively brief (137 pages), concise, and true to church life.  He covers much more material than I could possibly hope to share here.  I recommend it highly.

My prayer is that Christian leaders wake up to the reality of sheep attacking their shepherds – and do something about it – so that far fewer pastors and believers sit on the bench until Jesus comes.

Read Full Post »

The chairman of the church board called the pastor into a side room after his sermon one Sunday.

When the pastor entered the room, he was told by the chairman that he was being dismissed effective immediately.

The pastor had been in the church for years.  He thought the ministry was going well.

He was never told what he had done wrong.  He was not afforded a severance package or a farewell party.

His ministry … and possibly his career … now seemed over.

Nearly half the congregation left over the next several months.

The pastor’s wife was forced to work two jobs.  The pastor looked for a new ministry in vain.  And the pastor’s two kids swore they’d never darken a church door again.

One of my passions as the President of Restoring Kingdom Builders is to advocate that churches – especially church boards – utilize a biblical, just and fair process to address any issues they have with their pastor.

But much of the time, church boards become emotionally reactive and make decisions that harm the pastor and decimate their congregation.

So let me suggest a five-step process that a board can use when they’re concerned about their pastor’s behavior:

First, the church board needs to address their concerns with deliberation and patience.

If a church board is upset with their pastor, it’s important that they slow things down and discern a fair process.

Why?

Because there are usually board members who want to take shortcuts … and fire the pastor outright.

Maybe this is how some board members handle their own employees: “When in doubt, push him out.”

But a pastor isn’t just any employee.  He’s someone called and gifted by God.

And the New Testament makes it clear that pastors deserve “respect” and “the highest regard” (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13) as well as “double honor” (1 Timothy 5:17-18).

Handling matters with deliberation means that official leaders read, understand, and follow:

*New Testament directives on correcting a spiritual leader (Matthew 18:15-17; 1 Timothy 5:19-21).

*Pertinent passages in their church’s bylaws.

*Labor laws in their own state.

Handling matters with patience means that official leaders make decisions using realistic timetables rather than rushing toward a predetermined outcome.

When church boards are ruled by anxiety, they end up hurting a lot of people.

But when boards take their time, they handle matters with greater wisdom and dignity.

Second, those who are upset about the pastor’s personal conduct need to speak with him directly … or let things go.

Pastor Bill Hybels from Willow Creek Community Church – America’s largest in the 1990s – stopped at the church one night and parked in a “No Parking” zone.

The next day, Pastor Bill received a note from a church custodian reminding him not to park in that spot.

Some pastors would have demanded that the custodian be disciplined for his insolence … but not Pastor Bill, who commended the custodian and said, “I need to be an example, not an exception.”

I love that story because a custodian felt he had the right to correct the pastor … and the pastor received and learned from that correction.

But pastors aren’t always examples.  They mess up from time-to-time.  And when they make mistakes, those who witnessed their misbehavior need to speak with them directly and lovingly call them on it.

But what happens in most churches is that people talk about the pastor without ever speaking with the pastor.

One time, a friend came to me before a meeting and said, “So-and-So is mad at you.”

I immediately asked, “How many people has she told?”

Counting with both hands, he stated, “Ten.”

My offense?

I didn’t say hi to her one Sunday morning.

Maybe the woman in question just needed reassurance that I cared about her.  That’s fine.  We all need reassurance at times.

But wouldn’t it have been better if she had simply spoken with me about her feelings personally?

And if she didn’t want to do that, wouldn’t it have been better to let things slide rather than involving ten other people?

This goes for board members, too.

Sometimes a church board member becomes angry with the pastor over a personal matter, but rather than speak with the pastor directly, he complains to other board members.

There are two dangers with this approach:

*Some board members may take their friend’s side in the matter, which makes them feel increasingly powerful.

*A pastor’s personal offense against one person can easily morph into an official offense against the entire board … or church.  The pastor’s perceived offense is used as a pretext for his removal.

And I have a hard time believing that God would approve of such actions.

Third, the board needs to determine the severity of a pastor’s offenses before taking action.

Sometimes pastors are guilty of a misstep and commit a spiritual or moral citation … like the equivalent of jaywalking.

Maybe the pastor skips a church event without telling anyone … or promises to visit someone in the hospital but doesn’t … or forgets to answer an important email for two weeks.

In my view, if these offenses wind their way up to the church board, they are only worthy of a citation.

Proverbs 19:11 says, “A man’s wisdom gives him patience; it is to his glory to overlook an offense.”

Just like in marriage, some “offenses” need to be overlooked … forgiven … and forgotten as soon as possible.

If not, the church board will become the church police.

But sometimes pastors commit spiritual or moral misdemeanors.

My initial staff position was in a church that held a week-long missionary conference.  We had a missionary speaker every night of the week!

I attended the first four nights faithfully.  But on the fifth night, the movie “Gone with the Wind” was playing at a local school (this was before videos or DVDs), and my girlfriend Kim (now my wife) really wanted to see the film.

So we went, and had a great time.

However, when I next saw my pastor, he was not happy with me.

He asked me, “Where were you last night?”  I told him.  He said, “People came to me last night and wanted to know where you were.  I didn’t know what to tell them.”

I apologized to him.  Then he advised me, “Look, if you had asked me if you could go to the movie, I would have said yes.  Then if people asked where you were, I would have said, ‘I know where Jim is.  Everything’s fine.'”

Going to a movie was okay … but going without permission was not.

That was a misdemeanor because it couldn’t be quickly forgiven and forgotten.  I needed to be confronted.

When a pastor commits a spiritual or moral misdemeanor, someone needs to love him enough to confront him.  The pastor needs to know that he did something wrong … admit it was wrong … and take steps not to do it again.

And when the pastor apologizes and asks forgiveness, that should be the end of it.

But sometimes pastors are suspected of committing spiritual and moral felonies, and if so, those overseeing the pastor need to launch an investigation into the offense, as Deuteronomy 19:18 specifies.

Which offenses are felonies?

Heresy, for one.  Sexual immorality, for another.

I would also include criminal behavior, including beating one’s wife, certain kinds of theft, and committing fraud.

And in my opinion, if a pastor openly, blatantly, and knowingly lies to his congregation, he should at least be suspended, if not terminated.

Most of the time, when a pastor commits a spiritual or moral felony, he has forfeited his position as pastor, and needs to resign or be dismissed.

But all too often, some Christians … including church boards … turn offenses meriting citations into misdemeanors, or misdemeanors into felonies, because they want to get rid of the pastor and are willing to use anything they can find.

While I admit the Bible doesn’t make distinctions between these offenses, our culture does, and those distinctions can help us determine the severity of a pastor’s misbehavior.

Fourth, let the pastor face his accusers and explain his actions.

Read the Gospels.  Jesus was accused of many offenses by the Jewish leaders, but they always let Him defend Himself … even on the morning of His crucifixion.

Read Acts 7.  Stephen was accused of speaking against the temple and the law (Acts 6:13) but still offered a self-defense.

Read Acts 22 … or 23 … or 24 … or 25 … or 26.  Paul was accused of bringing Greeks into the Temple area and speaking against the Temple and the law (Acts 21:28).  But he was still allowed to face his accusers and offer a defense.

As Festus told King Agrippa in Acts 25:16, “… 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.”

During my second pastorate, a church leader began making charges against me to anyone who would listen.  His “concerns” finally made their way to the board chairman, who invited the leader to the next board meeting.

The leader brought a list of seven “concerns.”  After he shared each issue, the chairman asked me to respond, which I gladly did.

The leader was so disheartened by my responses that he never finished his list … and announced the next day that he was leaving the church.

The charges sounded plausible when he was sharing them with friends and family …  but when he shared them in my presence, his entire case wilted.

In his book Beyond Forgiveness, Don Baker writes about the time he received credible information that a popular staff member had slept with multiple women in previous churches.

Pastor Baker didn’t fire his staffer outright.  Instead, he met with him privately, told him what he’d heard, and let him respond.

Even if a board is convinced their pastor has committed an impeachable offense, the entire board – or chairman – should first meet with the pastor and hear his side before taking any action.

If the board meets with the pastor before deciding his fate, the pastor might convincingly refute the allegations … shed light on his accuser(s) and their motivations … or confess and offer his resignation.

In the majority of cases that I hear about, the church board fires the pastor outright … without telling him his offenses … letting him face his accusers … or allowing him to explain his actions.

And those kinds of decisions destroy a pastor and his family and throw a church into turmoil.

Finally, give the pastor sufficient time to change his behavior.

If a pastor is guilty of multiple citations or occasional misdemeanors, he should be given time to correct his behavior.

Three months isn’t enough time.  Two years is too long.

Isn’t redemption a Christian virtue?

If the board follows a process, and the pastor has made progress, then he should be allowed to stay, with the board monitoring those areas where he’s deficient.

If the pastor hasn’t made progress, then it’s okay to ask for his resignation after 12 to 15 months … although most pastors would probably resign long before they’re asked.

The pastor and congregation will be far better off one year later if the board follows a biblical, just, and fair process than if they become anxious and swiftly force out their shepherd.

_______________

Today marks my 400th blog post.  Thanks to every one of you who reads what I write!

My readers include pastors, staff members, church leaders, and lay people.

If you’d like me to cover a certain topic, please leave a comment or write me at jim@restoringkingdombuilders.org.

And because I enjoy responding to your comments, please feel free to interact with anything I write.

Thanks again for reading!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

In his well-written, insightful, and practical book Pastor Abusers: When Sheep Attack Their Shepherd, my friend Kent Crockett relates many true stories about pastor abuse.  Here’s a sampling of these stories told by actual pastors:

“Some unyielding deacons and angry members didn’t like my ideas of reaching out to people who don’t know Christ, so they forced my resignation.  In my final business meeting, I told the congregation, ‘I believe the Lord is leading me to step down and resign as pastor, effective immediately.’  As soon as I said that, about fifteen people who had opposed me stood up, started applauding, and shouted, ‘Hallelujah!  Praise God!’  In the two years I had been their pastor, they had never clapped in church or shouted praise to God.  In fact, they had always opposed displays of emotion in the worship service.  I hadn’t even seen them smile until I resigned and then they all had big grins on their faces.”

_______________

“The deacon board chairman came to see me one evening.  He never called to set up an appointment, but just showed up unannounced clutching his gripe list.  The deacon asserted that he represented a ‘growing’ number of disgruntled people who were angry with me, and had appointed him as the liaison of church solidarity.

With seeming delight, he claimed that other members were ‘flooding’ him with concerns about me, although he wouldn’t disclose names because he wanted to ‘protect their identities.’  I later proved his list was contrived and his alleged ‘growing’ number was actually a small group the deacon had recruited.

Casting gentleness to the wind, the deacon tore into me with outlandish accusations.  When I asked what specifically I had done wrong, the deacon sidestepped the issue.  He wasn’t interested in repairing and restoring fellowship, so I refrained from further discussion.  Since I wouldn’t bow to his intimidation, the deacon started a false rumor about me.  Because of the misery I suffered at the hands of this cruel deacon, I resigned as pastor.”

_______________

“That small group got against me.  They started lying.  They said I was a gambler.  And then they attacked my wife.  When they can’t get anything on the minister, they go after his wife or his children.  Only by suspending the bylaws were they able to fire me.”

_______________

“In one year, 27 ministers in my district were forced to resign their pastorates, without charges of wrongdoing, unethical behavior, or immorality.  Many because they were causing growth.  Most cases it was the power bloc that ran the church that had them removed.  Many have lost their pastorates, many their reputations and many have lost their enthusiasm about staying in the ministry.”

_______________

“As I reflect on 35 years of ministry, I realize that many of my former colleagues are no longer pastors.  Somewhere along the line, they left their ‘calling’ and undertook a different path for their lives.  Reflecting on my friends who used to be pastors, I realize that they are now a majority.  Those, like me, who have stayed in ministry are actually the minority.  The attrition rate has been high and the cost to souls is astronomical.

The majority of my acquaintances encountered such turmoil and situational conflict (from church members) that they felt they could not continue to pastor.  Congregations overwhelmed my pastor friends with unrealistic expectations, negative criticism and misplaced anger.  Some congregations even assumed the perfect pastor was ‘out there,’ so their fallible pastor was terminated.”

_______________

Let me make four brief observations about these stories:

First, these stories are not an anomaly – they are all too typical.  While the names of the pastors, church leaders, and congregations are all different, the patterns of pastoral abuse remain the same across the board.

I saw a quote recently from a denominational executive.  He said that when a pastor started telling him his termination story, the denominational leader could accurately predict the entire aftermath.

Since there are patterns to pastoral abuse, the Christian community must band together and stop this evil.

Second, the inability of Christians to get along – especially with their pastor – negates the gospel of reconciliation.

Jesus told His disciples the night before His crucifixion, “A new command I give you: Love one another.  As I have loved you, so you must love one another.  By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another” (John 13:34-35).

Jesus didn’t say, “Love the people in your group only.”  He didn’t say, “Love everyone in your church but your pastor and his family.”  Three times in these two verses, He commands His followers to “love one another” … and that includes the pastor and his family.

When believers visibly love each other, Jesus says, then “all men” will notice that “you are my disciples.”

But when believers avoid each other and hate each other, the world concludes, “The Christian faith doesn’t work.”

As 1 John 4:20 states, “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ yet hates his brother, he is a liar.  For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen.”

Third, the pastor’s enemies almost always slander him to force his resignation.

Forgive me for sounding like a broken record, but how can professing Christians blatantly lie about their spiritual leader?

Did Jesus ever lie about a spiritual leader?

Did Paul?

Did Peter … or John … or James … or Luke?

Who in the New Testament has a reputation for lying?

Satan.

Then how can those who claim to follow Jesus … who is the Truth and always spoke the truth … join hands with the evil one?

How strong is your case against a pastor if you have to use exaggeration and innuendo and false statements to get rid of Him?  Isn’t that the same tactic that was used on Jesus?

I wish churches had trials and the liars could be exposed for everyone to see.

Why aren’t we exposing the liars?

Instead, after the pastor leaves, they end up on the church board.

Here’s what I read yesterday during my quiet time:

“Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his evil deeds will be exposed.  But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God” (John 3:20-21).

Finally, believers need to give control of their church back to Jesus Christ.

Doesn’t Colossians 1:18 say that Jesus “is the head of the body, the church” and that “in everything he might have the supremacy?”

We don’t read that any pastor is “the head of the church,” nor the church board, nor the charter members, nor a particular faction.

Instead, we read that Jesus is the head of the body.

Maybe churches should have an annual service where the leaders and congregation acknowledge that “Jesus is the head of this church” and not any specific individual or group.

Let’s be honest: too many people are fighting for control of a church when it isn’t theirs to begin with.

_______________

I don’t mean to sound cynical, but after reading the above stories … and many more like them, not only in Kent’s books, but in other books on church conflict … I have one unanswered question:

How can people who use slander and hatred to destroy their pastor really be Christians?

What do you think?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »