Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Pastoral Termination’ Category

Exaggerating a Leader’s Mistakes

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , , on October 1, 2012| 2 Comments »

My first few years as a pastor, I wanted to quit every other Monday.

And there were some people in my second church ministry who wanted to help that process along.

One Saturday morning, our church held a workday.  We had a small gymnasium, and at the front of the gym were two rooms used for storage.  One room contained several boxes of hymnbooks that were so old even the rescue mission wouldn’t take them.  They were at least three generations old … and nobody, but nobody, wanted them.

So I took the boxes and threw them in the church dumpster.

I should have thrown them out after the workday, however, when no one else was around … because my all-time greatest church nemesis (I’ll call him Phil) discovered the hymn books in the dumpster even though I thought I had covered them up pretty well.

Phil went around and told everybody … not that I had thrown out the old hymnbooks … but that I was throwing out the old hymns!

Phil’s charge simply wasn’t true.  I grew up on hymns and love many of them to this day.  While our church was learning new praise songs at the time – this was the late 1980s – we still sang hymns all the time.  Phil wasn’t comfortable with the changes I was making with our worship service, so he needed some issue against me.

So he did what many pastoral antagonists do.

Phil gathered a group around him, and they began writing down all kinds of things they didn’t like about me.

For one thing, they didn’t like the short dresses worn by the wife of a band member.  One critic demanded that I put a stop to her sleazy attire.  But this woman was struggling with her faith and her marriage … and I wasn’t about to drive her away from the church by telling her how to dress.

The group also attacked my wife, my nine-year-old son, and my six-year-old daughter for the flimsiest of reasons.

But the coup de grace occurred when they read the church constitution and noticed that I recommended that the constitution be null and void after five years.

Their conclusion?  After five years, I planned on taking over the church and running it as a dictatorship.  In other words, I would become the constitution!

The truth is that I just wanted to force us to update our governing document every few years … an idea I borrowed from Christian management guru Ted Engstrom.

The group came up with a lot more charges against me … most of which I mercifully cannot remember.

But here’s what I want you to know: they were almost all exaggerated.

When an antagonist decides to attack a pastor, that person usually takes a flaw in the pastor’s character or a mistake the pastor made and blows it up so the pastor looks evil.

And one of the tipoffs is that the antagonist along with his/her group never talks to the pastor directly about their issue(s).

What would happen if they did?

Most likely, the pastor would offer an explanation that would neutralize or negate the charges.

Because the antagonist cannot let the pastor interfere with his/her plan, the antagonist goes around the pastor and shares his charges with others as if they’re fact … and he/she has to exaggerate the charges to make the pastor look as bad as possible.

And wonder of wonders … a few people actually believe the overstated charges.

This is the devil’s modus operandi.  Isn’t this the same tactic Satan used against Jesus?

Jesus was accused by the Jews of blasphemy (because He called Himself the Son of God … which He was) and by the Romans of sedition against the state (because Jesus admitted He was a king … which He was) because they had only one king: Caesar.

And the sad thing about exaggerating charges against someone is that it often works … even though it’s evil.

Paul writes his ministry protege Timothy and urges him in 1 Timothy 5:19: “Do not listen to an accusation against an elder [includes pastors; see verse 17] unless it is confirmed by two or three witnesses.”

In other words, if you’re going to charge a pastor with wrongdoing, you better get it right … because all of heaven is watching the process very carefully (5:21).

Whenever you discuss someone’s misbehavior, make sure you are as accurate as possible.  While you don’t have to minimize misconduct, make sure you don’t maximize it, either.

And if you’re ever going to get rid of the old hymnals, load them in the trunk of your car and throw them out at home.

Read Full Post »

Staying Out of Triangles

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , on September 26, 2012| 2 Comments »

You’re not getting along with a co-worker.

Or a family member.

Or a classmate at school.

Or a neighbor with a barking dog.

At first, you try to smile and be nice and find a pathway to commonality, but your efforts fail … and your problems with the co-worker … family member … classmate … or neighbor just get worse.

What do people do when they try to get along with someone but can’t pull it off?

Too often … they triangle another person into their dispute.

They take their anxiety and look for a third party … and then dump their issues onto that person … hoping the third party will resolve matters for them.

Examples:

*A wife is not getting along with her husband, so she seeks out a third party … her mother, a friend, her pastor, a counselor … whom she hopes will solve the conflict for her.

*A mother is tearing her hair out over the behavior of her teenage daughter … so mom waits her until her husband comes home from work and then hands the problem over to him.

*An employee is going berserk trying to work with his immediate supervisor who is constantly bullying him … so he goes to human resources to learn about his options.

*A small faction in a church is upset with their pastor … so they telephone the district minister to complain about him.

It feels natural to “triangle” a party you’re not getting along with … if you’re three years old and your older brother Johnny is trying to glue your Luke Skywalker action figure to your best outfit.  (“Mom!  Help me!  Johnny’s doing it again!”)

But as you mature, you’re supposed to be able to handle most conflicts with others yourself.

If you consult with someone on how to handle a conflict, that isn’t necessarily triangling … as long as you’re just seeking advice on how to handle a relational problem person.

But it is triangling when you want the other person to take the problem away from you and solve it.

In Luke 12:13, a man came up to Jesus and said, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.”

This man and his brother were not in agreement about their inheritance, so this man asked Jesus to solve the problem for him.

He didn’t ask Jesus for advice or for options … he asked Jesus to tell his brother to split the family money with him.

Jesus refused to take the bait, replying, “Man, who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you?”  While everyone knew that Jesus was a wise man, He did not have jurisdiction in the field of family finance, so he declined the man’s demand.

In other words, Jesus chose not to form a triangle against the second brother by siding with the first.

Churches are breeding grounds for triangles, and the person who gets “triangled” the most is the pastor.

Example:

A woman in the church is upset with her pastor for not asking her to be a deaconess.  She doesn’t want to talk to her pastor directly, so she complains to her friends about him … adding a lot of colorful details about other times that he’s angered her.

There are two basic ways her friends can reply.

First, her friends can tell her, “We’ll pray for you, but we cannot do anything about your problem with the pastor.  You need to set up an appointment and go talk to him yourself.  We’re staying out of it.”

In other words, this woman’s friends refuse to solve the problem for her by forming a triangle against the pastor.  They put the responsibility for reconciliation back onto her shoulders.

Second, her friends can tell her, “You know, we’re upset with the pastor, too.  In fact, do you know what he said to me a few weeks ago?”  And then everyone can pool their gripes against the pastor.

Suddenly, the gripe poolers have formed an alliance … with the pastor as their enemy.

This is how church division starts.  People carry the offenses of others as if those offenses are their own.

It often starts with one person who is upset with the pastor about a personal offense who never tells the pastor how they feel.  Then they attempt to gain allies so that others carry their offenses for them.

Today’s lesson on church conflict is simple: STAY OUT OF TRIANGLES!

If somebody tries to consult with you about a problem they’re having with someone at church, it’s okay to share advice with them but don’t even hint to solve the problem for them.

The monkey needs to stay on their back because it’s their problem.

Don’t say, “I’ll try talking to him for you.”

Don’t say, “I’ll go to the board and get their advice.”

Don’t say, “Tell me more!”

However you say it … whatever you say … communicate loud and clear:

“THIS IS YOUR PROBLEM, AND YOU WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT … NOT ME.”

I’ll write more about triangles next time.

Read Full Post »

Repeat Offender Churches

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , , on September 12, 2012| 5 Comments »

Someone recently asked me the following question:

“What is the likelihood that a forced termination or major conflict could happen at the same church more than once?  (Let’s say within a 10-15 year span.)  Are there any statistics on that subject?”

Yes, there are.

Leading Edge, a resource for leaders of healthy churches, reported the following statistics in September 2003:

*25% of US pastors have experienced a forced exit at some point in their ministry.

*33% of US churches have had a pastor leave due to a forced exit.

*62% of ousted pastors were serving a church that had forced one or more pastors to leave in the past.

And the most chilling statistic of all:

*10% of US churches have forced three or more pastors to leave in their past and are considered “repeat offenders.”

The driving force behind a pastor’s forced exit is usually a small faction inside the congregation … composed of only 3-4% of the people.

The second largest catalyst is a member of the church’s governing board.

The typical size of the small faction is 7-10 people.

Once a faction or a board forces out their pastor, they know the template and may feel free to use it on the next pastor … and the one after that.

Let’s freely acknowledge that a small percentage of pastors should leave due to heretical teaching, sexual immorality, or a criminal offense.

But in most cases, the pastor hasn’t done anything worthy of banishment.

Presuming that a pastor is innocent of any major offense, how can the people of a church that has experienced this tragedy prevent the forced exit of their next pastor?

First, identify the perpetrators by name.  A congregation needs to know the identities of those who forced their pastor to leave.  If you don’t know who did it, you won’t be able to stop them from doing it again.  This is biblical.  (Paul fingered Hymenaeus, Philetus, and Alexander the coppersmith as troublemakers, while John cast a spotlight on Diotrephes.)

Second, confront the perpetrators for their divisive actions.  Even if a congregation identifies the perpetrators, little has been accomplished if those same people are quickly placed into leadership positions.  See Titus 3:10-11.

Let me say this as emphatically as I know how: it is spiritually and morally wrong for a congregation to place people into leadership who used deception and destruction to force out the previous pastor.

If you doubt me, read the Book of Numbers sometime soon.  Moses and Aaron were frequently criticized by various leaders and factions in Israel … but God always sided with his chosen leaders and always disciplined those who attacked them.

And God never said to the perpetrators, “You know, you guys are right.  Moses shouldn’t be in leadership.  I’ll open up the earth and swallow him up … and let you guys lead Israel instead.”

In fact, in Numbers 16, God opened up the earth and swallowed the 250 people who stood with Moses’ three critics instead.

Third, prayerfully ask the perpetrators to repent for their actions.  However, this rarely happens.

I know a church where four staff members tried to force out their pastor many years ago.  The pastor threatened to expose them … and three of them quickly resigned.  (The perpetrators in such cases fear public exposure more than anything.)

About five years later, one of the four wrote the pastor a letter of apology, admitting that what he had done was wrong.  The other three?  He’s still waiting to hear from them.

I don’t know why this is, but some people demonize their pastor and then believe that they are justified using any and all means to force him to quit.

Such methodology damages more than the pastor, though: it damages a church’s soul.

Finally, realize that pastors are most vulnerable between years four and five.  Most pastors enjoy a honeymoon of a year or two when they first come to a church, especially if they don’t initiate much change.

During year three, the pastor’s critics begin to emerge.

Between years four and five of a pastor’s tenure, the pastor typically announces and promotes a specific agenda for the church’s future.  Because change provokes anxiety, some people will rebel against the pastor’s agenda.

The pastor’s critics will begin to question everything he does and says.  They will talk to others who feel the same way.  If a leader emerges, they will form a faction to take back their church.

If the pastor is a strong individual … and especially if he has board support … he will continue to communicate the direction he believes God wants him to take the church.

And this will force much if not all of the faction to leave the church.

But if the pastor collapses emotionally … or his family wilts under the pressure … or the pastor’s health is affected by the constant criticism … and especially if the board caves on him … then the pastor will choose to resign instead.

And a tiny, vocal faction will privately take credit for getting rid of their minister.

This information is contained in Carl George’s brilliant article called “The Berry Bucket Balance.”

Many years ago, I did a study of pastoral tenure in my district.  I examined the tenures of 60 pastors.

The average tenure of those pastors was 4 1/2 years … midway between years four and five.

This is a time to be hypervigilant … but an attack can come at any time.

A few years ago, I wrote my doctoral project at Fuller Seminary on church antagonism.

During my research, I analyzed five major conflicts that my church at the time had experienced over the years.

I discovered that the church’s culture was one of non-confrontation.  When people acted up … or committed evil … nobody did anything about it.

The perpetrators felt free to attack, criticize, and even destroy people because they knew that nothing would happen to them.

We have to hit this issue head-on or there will be even more repeat offender churches in the future.

Your thoughts?

Read Full Post »

Four Observations About Pastoral Termination

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment! on August 27, 2012| 2 Comments »

I’m in a celebrating mood today because this blog just reached a milestone!

After nearly 20 months and 216 postings, we finally hit 20,000 views last night … an average of just under 100 views per article.

My top 5 articles according to readership are:

*If You Must Terminate a Pastor

*When to Correct a Pastor

*Pastors Who Cause Trouble

*Facing Your Accusers

*When You’re Upset with Your Pastor

The articles I’ve written about my family members (especially my son’s wedding) and about music also have lots of views, but this blog is primarily about pastor-church conflict.

And as you can tell from the above titles, I write primarily for lay people – board members included.  I’m trying to help them deal with their feelings about their pastor when they’re frustrated with the way he’s leading, preaching, or acting.

After talking with pastors and researching this topic for years, I have four observations to make about pastoral termination:

First, few believers know how to terminate a pastor sensitively and wisely.

If a pastor works for the governing board of a church, and the board decides to fire him, the board will probably:

*Ignore biblical principles for correcting a spiritual leader.

*Brush aside the governing documents of their church.

*Skip any kind of due process for the pastor.

*Fail to anticipate how the congregation will react to the pastor’s ouster.

Instead, they’ll just put their head down and remove the pastor using any means at their disposal … even unchristian ones.

I recently talked with a pastor who told me what happened with his church board.

The pastor heard about a conflict training program at a Christian university.  He invited the board to go along.

One board member attended with the pastor.  The other two declined to go.

One week later, those two board members met with the pastor and fired him.

Why didn’t they want to attend the training program?  Because they didn’t want to learn new skills that might prevent them from forcing their pastor to leave.

It’s important that we train boards how to handle conflicts with their pastor before they choose to fire him … because most people … even Christian leaders … cannot control how messy things become when they forcibly terminate their pastor.

Second, boards usually blindside their pastor when they fire him.

I recently spoke with a pastor who had been at his church for nearly two decades.  The church had a large impact in their community and the pastor thought he was doing a great job.

One day, the board called a meeting with the pastor and fired him.

The pastor wasn’t guilty of heresy, or immorality, or any major offense.

And to this day, he has no idea what he did to deserve being terminated.

Here’s the typical scenario:

*Nobody on the board ever sits down with the pastor and talks to him about any concerns they have.

*Nobody confronts or corrects him.

*Nobody allows the pastor to face his accusers and their charges.

*Nobody loves him enough to carry out Matthew 18:15-20 or 1 Timothy 5:19-21.

*Nobody asks God what they should do … but ask God to bless them after they’ve made their decision.

Instead, the board meets in secret, negatively evaluates the pastor’s performance, and fires him without ever giving him the chance to (a) know the complaints against him, and (b) make any necessary adjustments.

Is this legal?  It is if the governing documents of a church say the board can act that way.

Is this moral?  No.

Is it spiritual?  Hardly.

It’s an indication that the board views the church as a business … instead of a spiritual organism … and that they view the pastor as an employee … instead of someone called by God to lead that church.

It’s also an indication that they either lack the time or expertise to correct him … or that they feel the pastor is unredeemable … which seems like a contradiction for people who claim to believe that the gospel of Jesus Christ can transform anyone.

Third, the congregation never hears the truth about why the pastor left.

Under the guise of “confidentiality,” the board makes a pact to refuse to tell anyone the reasons why the pastor has departed.

This may be because the pastor did something immoral and the board is protecting the pastor’s career.

This may be because the pastor did something illegal and the board is protecting the church.

This may be because the board handled things unwisely and they’re covering up their mistakes.

If the pastor was allowed to state publicly why he was forced to leave, he might persuade people that he was treated poorly, which might provoke sympathy for him, turn people against the governing board, and cause people to leave the church.

If the board was allowed to state publicly why they forced the pastor to leave, they would undoubtedly blame everything on him, take no responsibility for their own failures, and have to explain themselves to the congregation.

Because boards just want the pastor gone, they often grant “severance for silence.”  They give the pastor a small compensation package if he’ll leave quickly and quietly … and not tell anyone how badly they handled things.

In fact, because this is such a common problem, I toyed for a while with calling my new book Bungled.

Finally, the perpetrators almost never admit they’ve done anything wrong.

When an individual sins, he or she may or may not admit it.

When a pastor sins, he may or may not admit it.

When a board sins, they almost never admit it.

It is the nature of groups to make a decision and, even if they’re wrong, protect and defend each other afterwards.

How often have you heard the White House … a news organization … a corporate board … a sports team … a school board … a homeowners association … or a state government agency … admit together that they did something wrong?

It rarely if ever happens.

In fact, if even one member of an organization admits that their group has done something wrong, the other members will invariably disown that person or try to remove them altogether.

This is why once a board decides to terminate a pastor, they act like they’re 100% faultless and he’s 100% blameworthy.

And this is why that board and the pastor never reconcile.

I recently spoke with a top Christian leader who told me about a church that called a new pastor.

The pastor wanted to see God renew the church, and he did everything he could to make sure that happened.

But there was just one thing remaining … he wanted the church to reconcile with some of its former pastors who had been mistreated.

The new pastor wasn’t around during the years these pastors served, and the church had many newcomers who had no idea what had happened in the past.

But this pastor called all these men back, and one Sunday, he stood up and confessed that the church had wronged these men of God and asked for their forgiveness on behalf of the church.

I wish this sort of thing would happen more often.  There are too many wounded pastors and churches in our country.

But this kind of thing is rare because of pride.  We convince ourselves that if we did or said something, it was right … but if the pastor did or said something … it was wrong.

Is life really that black and white?

If you’ve been reading for a long time, thank you.  Some subscribers have told me they’ve read every article I’ve written.

If this is your first time here, check out some of the categories on the right side of my blog.  You might find an article or two that will help you deal with the way you feel about your pastor.

And even if you’re an occasional reader, thanks for visiting this site.  We’re honored when you come around.

I love it when people ask questions and leave comments, even if you disagree with something I’ve said.  Since this is the way we all learn, feel free to give me feedback.

I’m still learning a lot about pastoral termination, church conflict, and conflict in general.

And I invite you to keep reading as we learn together.

Read Full Post »

“Lord, I Don’t Want to be a Prophet!”

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Fighting Evil, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories, Please Comment!, tagged , , , on August 22, 2012| 15 Comments »

I have a spiritual gift I wish I didn’t have.

The gift of prophecy.

I wish the Lord had given me the gift of exhortation, or giving, or healing instead.  But I wasn’t consulted in the matter, because the Lord distributes the gifts as He wills (1 Cor. 12:11, 18).

I’ve taken many spiritual gift tests … and asked others to take those same tests with me in mind.  In fact, I took a class called “Discerning Your Ministry Identity” for my doctoral program, and the results always come out the same.

Teaching is my top gift.  Prophecy is second.

I can’t foretell the future, so please don’t ask me who’s going to win the World Series or the election in November!

But I do sense the freedom to speak openly and candidly about cultural and personal issues from a biblical standpoint.

Here’s how this gift – featured in 1 Corinthians 14 – manifests itself in the life of a modern-day prophet:

First, prophets are drawn to controversy.  I first discovered this at age 19.  When I taught publicly, I wanted to talk about issues that others wouldn’t talk about.

Stephen Brown, author, pastor, and radio preacher, lived by this motto whenever he preached:

WHEN IN DOUBT, SAY IT.

Brown believed that whenever a pastor said something unplanned, those words would be more memorable and impactful to a congregation.

Maybe so … maybe not.

Some of the best things I’ve ever said … and some of the stupidest … occurred when I practiced that motto.

But like the prophets of old, sometimes I have to say things … because God’s word is like a fire in my bones.

Second, prophets feel free to talk about any subject.

Over the years, while having conversations with pastor friends, I’ve discovered that many of them are uncomfortable talking about certain issues from the pulpit.

Examples?

Giving to God’s work.  Sex … even inside marriage.  Homosexuality.  Couples who live together outside marriage.  Hell.  The wrath of God.  Intelligent design and creationism.

And you don’t know how many times I wanted to wade into politics … but didn’t.

But a pastor with the gift of prophecy says to himself, “If I don’t speak about these issues from Scripture, how will people know God’s mind on these topics?”

This is why I’m drawn to people who do talk about these issues.

It’s why I thought the late Chuck Colson was the best Christian speaker I’ve ever heard.  When the Jim Bakker scandal broke in the late 1980s, I heard Colson publicly critique the prosperity gospel in a biblical, succinct, and devastating way.  He was a modern-day prophet.

It’s why I’ve appreciated Bill Hybels’ ministry over the years.  I used to become quite upset when Christians would criticize Hybels for watering down the gospel because I never found it to be true.  He gave the best messages I’ve ever heard on substitutionary atonement … and hell … and abortion … and homosexuality … and he never pulled punches in the process.

I’m currently writing and talking about the devastating effects that the forced termination of pastors has on Christians,  churches, and pastors and their families.  This is not a topic most believers want to hear about, but this problem is becoming an epidemic in our country … and people are leaving their churches … and even their faith … because of the way these situations are being handled in local churches.

Someone has to speak up … and pray that God’s people will pay attention.

As a wise man once told me, some practices inside Christian churches can only be changed by people who are angry enough to speak out.

Third, the prophetic gift can go against one’s personality.

My two favorite Bible characters are Jeremiah and Timothy.

They both shrank from their calls to ministry.

They both felt unsuccessful.

They both felt like quitting at times.

And they were both sensitive men.

God took a sensitive man like Jeremiah … called him to be a prophet … told him in advance that his ministry would fail … and then insured that he was always alone!

That’s how it feels at time to have this gift.

If God gives someone the gift of prophecy, shouldn’t He give it to a person with an iron will and nerves of steel?

But sometimes He gives this gift to a person with a tender, bleeding heart.

You feel like a spiritual schizophrenic.

Prophets may feel fear before they speak … but they go out and speak anyway … with the authority of God Almighty behind them.  As Paul said to the church at Corinth: “I came to you in weakness and fear, and much trembling” (1 Cor. 2:3).

But he still preached Christ to them … in the power of God’s Spirit.

Finally, prophets always pay a price when they use their gift.

Some prophets are abrasive and obnoxious when they exercise their gift.  Keith Green … whose music I love … believed God had given him the prophetic gift, but he had a habit of slamming people when he used it.  Before he died, he apologized for the way he used his gift.

Prophets are free to speak the mind of God to the people of God … they just have to do it in love.

Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13:2, “If I have the gift of prophecy … but have not love, I am nothing.”

Four years ago, the state of California was getting ready to vote on the definition of marriage … that marriage was between one man and one woman.

I have pastor friends who chose not to speak on that topic, stating that they weren’t going to change anybody’s mind about it.

But I believed … and still do … that we preachers had the opportunity to clearly delineate what God’s Word says on this issue.  But as Paul says about prophecy, we needed to do it for people’s “strengthening, encouragement and comfort” (1 Cor. 14:3).

So I talked on “Defending Biblical Marriage.”  Gay marriage proponents loudly proclaim their position … and if we Christians are silent, don’t they win the argument by default?

When I gave the message, I knew some people would applaud me … some would attack me … and some would abandon me.

But I had to do it … and would do it again in a heartbeat … even though I believe that message angered the enemy … and that he gradually began to cause damage from that moment on.

The church of Jesus needs prophets who proclaim the whole counsel of God.

And when they do, we need to pray for them, encourage them, and stand behind them … even when they say something that others don’t like … or even we don’t like.

The alternative is for the church of Jesus Christ to be biblically illiterate, culturally irrelevant, and spiritually impotent.

I am not the body.  You are not the body.

I need your gifts … and you need mine.

Even the gift of prophecy.

Follow the way of love, and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy.  1 Corinthians 14:1

Read Full Post »

Selecting a Church’s Governing Leaders, Finale

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, tagged , , on August 10, 2012| Leave a Comment »

The single greatest human indicator of a pastor’s success in a church is his relationship with the governing board.

A pastor can be a visionary … and a great Bible teacher … and an insightful counselor … and a superb administrator … but if he does not work well with the board, his ministry will go nowhere.

For most of my ministry life, the boards I served with let me know they were there to support my vision for the church … although they reserved the right to tell me when I was suffering from temporary insanity.

But if a pastor wants to take a church in one direction, and the board wants to go in a different direction, the eventual aftermath will be heartbreaking for everybody involved.

This is why the selection process for church leaders is so crucial.

How should the process be managed?

*The selection process should begin months before leaders are approved.  If you wait to the last minute to select leaders, you will pay for it by securing people who are available but not necessarily competent.

*Nominations can come from the congregation, a nominating team, the board itself, or the pastor.  However it’s done, you can’t allow yourself to be pressured by lobbying.  I’ve found that the best people are initially reluctant to serve and that some who appear eager just want power.

*There needs to be some kind of vetting process for each nominee, including a criminal background check.  Some churches require the written approval of a supervisor at work and/or people in the community (consistent with 1 Timothy 3:7) as well.

*I don’t know how far to push this, but the pastor needs to find out the giving levels of all prospective board candidates in general terms (not specific amounts), especially if the board oversees church finances.  You cannot allow someone on the board who does not give generously to the church.  Board members need to set a financial example and can’t be managing tens of thousands of dollars when they haven’t invested in their own local ministry.

Besides, giving is always an indicator of a person’s spiritual temperature.

I once read that about half of all pastors know how much the people in their church give every week, and that half do not.  (Some pastors come into the office on Monday and the giving records from the weekend are already on their computer.)  While I was one of those pastors who never wanted to know (and never did know) how much people gave, I would make one exception: the pastor has to know whether any prospective board member is already a generous giver … or that person should be dropped from consideration.  (This suggestion came to me from a former district minister.)

*Before board members are officially approved, the pastor and/or chairman should sit down with each candidate and let them know what is expected of them in writing … maybe asking them to sign a document to that effect.

*I believe that if a church votes on/ratifies its board members, the percentage necessary for election should be greater than a simple majority.  In fact, I believe it should be the same percentage that a senior pastor candidate has to receive (usually 75%).

When I was still a teenager, I was selected to count the votes for elders and deacons at my church two years in a row.  Out of 95 votes cast the first year, one man had 20 votes against him.  The second year, one man had 11 votes against him.  Since a simple majority was all that was required for election, both men were put into office … and both men later crashed and burned morally.  I always felt that the people who voted against those men knew something they weren’t sharing.

However, my former church in Phoenix never votes on elders.  The board nominates three men every year, and their brief biographies are placed in the program.  Then the men are introduced in each worship service, and the congregation is encouraged to write down how they feel about the nominees.  If you think they should be elders, or you have reservations, you can write those down … and I assume someone follows up those responses.  (The basis for this process is Titus 1:5 where Paul tells Titus to appoint – not elect – elders in every city.)

*I do not believe that a staff member … with the possible exception of an executive pastor … should sit on a church board.  If the pastor supervises the staff, as in most churches … and the board supervises the pastor … how can a staff member be put in the position of supervising the pastor?  When the staff member is having problems with the pastor, the staffer will inevitably share his concerns with a board member, who may very well take the staffer’s side against the pastor … a classic recipe for a major conflict.

This scenario blurs the lines of accountability.  Who supervises whom?

I’ve tried it both ways, and believe that allowing a staff member to sit on the church board eventually results in one of two scenarios: either the staff member aligns himself with the board and pushes out the pastor, or the pastor aligns himself with the board and pushes out the staff member.

If you know of cases where this works well, please let me know.

*There needs to be some kind of an installation service for new board members … maybe with former board members laying hands on them and praying for their ministry.

*The board needs to find a way to report to the church on a regular basis about what they’re doing, whether orally or in writing.  A board that resists accountability will claim that everything is confidential, which is often an excuse for cloaking things in secrecy.

Whenever I placed a priority on the selection of governing leaders, the ministry went forward at a steady pace.

But whenever I neglected to select leaders carefully, the board, the church, and their pastor paid a heavy price.

Your thoughts?

Read Full Post »

Selecting a Church’s Governing Leaders, Part 2

Posted in Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination on August 8, 2012| 2 Comments »

True or false:

It is possible for a pastor to oversee the selection of a church’s governing leaders according to biblical qualifications and yet experience conflict with those same leaders later on.

It’s oh so true.

Why?  Because insuring that a church’s governing leaders are spiritual is only half the selection battle.  A pastor … and a church … need to ask themselves one additional question before allowing anyone to join a church board:

How supportive are those prospective leaders of the pastor and his vision for their church?

My first suggestion for selecting governing leaders is to choose people whose lives reflect the biblical qualifications.

My second suggestion is to narrow the focus even more and to choose people who will completely support their pastor and his vision for their church.

This assumes that the church has a direction and that the pastor has communicated it to the congregation consistently.  Hopefully, many people were instrumental in contributing to that vision … but once it’s in place, the pastor cannot in good conscience surrender it or negotiate it away.  He has to stand by it … even if others wish to change it.

Here are some lessons I’ve learned along this line:

First, be willing to ignore the minimum number of governing leaders called for in the church’s governing documents.  For example, if church bylaws state that the board must have a minimum of four leaders … but only two individuals are biblically-qualified and fully support the pastor and his vision … then go with just two board members for a while.

As I can personally attest, putting the wrong people on a board just to hit that minimum number can lead to disaster.

I cannot emphasize this point enough.

Sometimes I hear about churches that have a board of thirty or forty people.  In my view, that’s a recipe for insanity.

How can all those people meet at the same time?  How can everyone have their say in a meeting?

And how can those leaders ever agree on anything?

Remember: Jesus only selected twelve disciples.

It’s far better to have an odd number of governing leaders … like five or seven … so the board can make decisions without getting stuck with tie votes.

Personally, I prefer having five leaders than seven.  The fewer, the better.  You can get more done … and more quickly.

For 21 months, I attended one of America’s top megachurches.  More than 15,000 people attended that church every weekend.

Do you know how many governing leaders they had?

Nine.

You don’t select governing leaders so they can represent all the groups in the church (men, women, youth, singles, children, pioneers, newcomers, and so on).

You select governing leaders to make decisions that advance the pastor’s vision for the church.

Nearly all the problems I’ve had with board members over the years occurred because we clashed on church direction.

Second, secure an agreement from each governing leader that they will share any concerns they have with their pastor directly and swiftly.  If necessary, put such an agreement in writing … and discuss it several times a year.

Many governing leaders lack the courage to speak directly with their pastor when they disagree with him.  So they share their concerns with other governing leaders in hopes of gaining allies.  This is often the point at which church division begins.  The pastor’s detractors then go underground … meeting secretly without him, making decisions behind his back, and then imposing those decisions on him at board meetings … and this kind of decision-making makes governing leaders feel powerful.

However, unless the pastor is guilty of heresy, immorality, criminal behavior, or some other major offense, the governing leaders have violated the trust that should exist between them and their pastor.  When matters get to this point, the leaders feel they have to come up with some charges to justify their clandestine meetings … and this is when all hell breaks loose in a church.

The leaders eventually accuse the pastor of major offenses … but the pastor doesn’t know anything about them because the governing leaders lacked the courage or confidence to share them with the pastor as the “offenses” arose.  The pastor then tries to defend himself, but the leaders have gone too far to back down … and often demand the pastor’s resignation.

And then it’s all hush-hushed … not because the pastor did anything wrong … but so the congregation doesn’t find out how poorly the board handled matters.

1,300 pastors are forcibly terminated from their positions every month in America.  If board members would share their personal or policy concerns directly with their pastor, we could probably cut the number of terminations in half.

I once had the privilege of visiting one of America’s great churches.  While wandering around, I spotted a framed document on the wall.  It was signed by the pastor, staff members, and over 100 church leaders … and it specified the direction the church was going to take in the future.

I was impressed!

And that direction cannot be carried out unless the leaders support their pastor’s leadership.

Finally, identify and wait for premium leaders.

I once heard one of America’s leading pastors say that he had identified a man in his church to become a governing leader.  However, this man’s work took him overseas for many months.

But it didn’t matter to this pastor.  He saved a spot on the board so that when the man returned from the Far East, he immediately became a governing leader.

Rather than put an unqualified rookie on the board and hope that he worked out, this veteran pastor saved a place for a great leader instead.

If you fill up a board with unqualified or non-supportive individuals, there may be no room for qualified, supportive people later on … and the good leaders won’t want to serve with the not-so-good leaders.

I’ve never forgotten this adage I learned years ago:

It’s better to have no one than the wrong person.

Boy, is that ever true!

Marry the wrong person, and it may cost you for the rest of your life.

Ask the wrong person to become a governing leader in a church, and everyone may end up paying for it: the board, the pastor, the staff, lay leaders, and the entire congregation.

The stories I could tell …

Any stories or feedback you’d like to share?

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Book Excerpt: What Happens to Clergy Killers? Part 2

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , on August 3, 2012| 3 Comments »

This article is the second half of the answer to the question, “What happens to clergy killers?”  In other words, when a group attacks and consequently “takes out” a pastor, how do the people of the average church respond to such an attack on their minister?

The answer might surprise you.  Here’s part two from my upcoming book:

In some situations, mature Christians hang around to see if church leaders will correct the instigators. But if nothing happens after a while, these believers may leave the church permanently, especially if they see the perpetrators serving in visible positions. During such conflicts, a church is going to lose somebody. Isn’t it better to lose divisive people than mature believers?  Anderson comments, “The result is that the church keeps the dissenters and loses the happy, healthy people to other churches. Most healthy Christians have a time limit and a tolerance level for unchristian and unhealthy attitudes and behaviors.”[i]

I had a conversation recently with a Christian man.  We were discussing what should be done (if anything) to churchgoers who join forces to push out their pastor.  This man believes that a church should remain passive toward perpetrators because God will eventually punish them.  He told me about an associate pastor who engineered the ouster of his senior pastor.  The associate later contracted cancer and his wife died a horrible death.  Christians don’t need to address the perpetrators, he said, because “God’ll get ‘em.”

It is true that God may get them.  The law of sowing and reaping still applies in this life (Galatians 6:7) and God promises to repay us all according to our deeds in the next life (2 Corinthians 5:10).  There are cases in the New Testament where God executed swift punishment against professing believers like Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) and staunch unbelievers like King Herod (Acts 12:19-23). Most pastors can tell stories about the eventual demise of attendees turned into attackers.  For example, a man who led an attack on one of my pastors died of a heart attack the day he was moving out-of-state.  While God may not “take out” every perpetrator, how are twenty-first century believers to interpret all the biblical admonitions to confront divisive individuals in a local church?  Have God’s words now become irrelevant?

When I was a rookie church staff member, I witnessed an event that I have never forgotten.  A few hours before a Sunday evening service, the elders met to discuss what to do about three church leaders who were involved in sexual immorality.  I watched as the door to the pastor’s study swung open and various elders piled into cars to drive to the homes of those leaders and confront them. The serious looks on the leaders’ faces told a story – they didn’t sign up for this – but to their credit, they did it.  Eventually, one offending leader made a public apology (without naming his sin) but all three families affected chose to leave the church.

Where is the courage today that those elders displayed?

        [i] Leith Anderson, Leadership That Works: Hope and Direction for Church and Parachurch Leaders in Today’s Complex World (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1999), 31.

Read Full Post »

Book Excerpt: What Happens to Clergy Killers? Part 1

Posted in Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories, tagged , , on July 30, 2012| 9 Comments »

It’s been a while since I’ve presented an excerpt to my upcoming book, which should be published in September or October.  The book is a real-life story about a group of people who joined forces to force a pastor to resign … using any and all means at their disposal.

The last chapter of the book presents FAQs on this kind of conflict.  In most churches, there are churchgoers who know which perpetrators have launched an attack on their pastor … but to keep their friendship, they usually remain silent.

I’ll divide this question into two parts.  Here’s the first part:

What usually happens to the perpetrators?

Realistically?  Nothing.  Biblically, however, perpetrators must be corrected before they strike again. This can be done by staff members, the governing board, or deputized members.  However, if a transitional/interim pastor is hired after the pastor’s departure, he may have to oversee this thankless task.  (Some transitional pastors are trained to deal with powerbrokers and request absolute authority before being hired.)  Unrepentant individuals who target their pastor sense they are immune from correction and feel free to use the same template with the next pastor.  However, in such situations:

Peace mongering is common. With tranquility and stability reigning as premium values, congregational leaders adapt to their most recalcitrant and immature people, allowing them to use threats and tantrums as levers of influence. Malcontents’ complaints never seem to cease. Unwilling to confront the constant critic, leaders set the table for the unhappy souls to have a movable feast of anxiety.  By appeasing rather than opposing, leaders give control to reactive forces.  Feed them once and leaders can be sure they will be back for more.[i]

As far as I know, no one took action against any non-board perpetrators in our situation.  My counsel to any successor is, “Watch your back.  They know the template.”  Trull and Carter note:

Generally speaking, an incoming minister does not need to fear those who speak well of the predecessor. Those who loved, appreciated, respected, and supported the former minister will likely do the same with the new minister.  The church member of whom the minister should be wary is the one who speaks ill of the previous minister. Those who criticize, find fault with, and express disappointment in the former minister will probably react to the new minister in the same way over time.[ii]

I have to confess, this really bothers me.  For decades, pastors have been told that whenever there’s a major conflict in a church they’re leading, they need to resign to keep the church intact. But why should the pastor leave while those who initiated the conflict are permitted to stay?  I suppose it’s easier to remove one person than many.  And spiritually-speaking, the shepherd lays down his life for the sheep, just as Jesus did (John 10:14-15).  But why don’t God’s people band together and ask the perpetrators to leave as well?  If the pastor can find another church, they can find another church – and it’s much easier for them than for him. I saw the highlights of a basketball game in which both players involved in a fight were instantly removed from the game.  Why doesn’t this happen in churches?  Aren’t we rewarding people for their divisiveness without expecting them to change?

If I was a layman and my pastor was pushed out by non-board antagonists, I’d approach a board member and say, “If you confront those who perpetrated this conflict, I will stay in this church.  But if you don’t deal with them, I will leave and find a church where they take Scripture seriously. And if anybody asks why I left, I will feel obligated to tell them.” While this may sound harsh, how can church leaders take no action against those who have driven out their minister?  Steinke writes:

In congregations, boundary violators too often are given a long rope because others refuse to confront the trespassers. When boundaries are inappropriately crossed and people are harmed, no one wants to name the violation.  It’s as if the disturbance of the group’s serenity is a greater offense than the viral-like behavior.  Boundary violators go unattended and suffer no consequences . . . . The lack of attention only enables the repetition of the invasive behavior.[iii]

Your thoughts?

        [i] Steinke, Congregational Leadership in Anxious Times, 102.

        [ii] Trull and Carter, Ministerial Ethics, 129.

        [iii] Steinke, Congregational Leadership in Anxious Times, 85.

Read Full Post »

The Great Sin of Pastors, Part 2

Posted in Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Pastoral Termination on June 1, 2012| Leave a Comment »

Pride.

It’s the name of a song by U2.

It’s the last name of a country singer.

And it’s one of the seven deadly sins … maybe the deadliest.

And for some reason, it’s a sin that pastors – of all people – are susceptible to.

Pride is something we recognize in others.  Years ago, I remember hearing the pastor of a prestigious church speak during a conference at my seminary.  While he was an excellent speaker, he turned out to be the hero in every story he told.

I could detect the pride in his life … but all too often, miss it in mine.

C. S. Lewis said that the first step to combatting pride is for a person to admit that he or she is proud … but most of us are really good at convincing ourselves that we’re never proud.

Say it with me: “Sometimes I can be a pretty proud person.”

So can pastors.

Last time, I shared three ways that pastors display pride in their ministries.  Let me share two more ways:

Fourth, pastors are conscious that they stand between God and people.

In the Old Testament, a priest represented people before God, while a prophet represented God before people.  But in both cases, these leaders knew they had been called to do something special.

Represent the Almighty.

As a pastor, I sensed that I represented God whenever I preached, or baptized someone, or offered communion, or led in public prayer, or engaged in counseling, or did an infant dedication, or shared my faith.

And it doesn’t take long for a pastor to look around and notice that he’s doing things that nobody else in that spiritual community is doing.  That can make you feel … special.

This doesn’t automatically lead one to pride … but representing God sure can be heady stuff.

In his classic book A Minister’s Obstacles (a book inscribed by my grandfather on May 9, 1949), Ralph Turnbull writes:

“The minister is the prey of pride because he traffics in holy things and is in danger of familiarity with sacred elements of truth and life.  Pride goes with us frequently to our studies and there sits with us and does our work, chooses our subject and words and ornaments, and even accompanies us into the pulpit.”

On rare occasions, while I was preaching, this unwelcome thought would enter my head: “You’re presuming to speak for the God of the universe.  Wow!  You’re really something.”

I’d do my best to bat that thought away before it took root … but the thought would assault me from time-to-time.

Where do thoughts like that come from?  From the Proud One himself.

And they must be resisted as soon as they occur.

Finally, pastors sometimes conduct ministry in their own strength.

Warren Wiersbe, a great pastor to pastors, once wrote that a pastor should be broken before God, but bold before men.

But there is a real temptation in ministry to be bold before men without being broken before God.  Pastors who serve churches in their own strength cause manifold troubles in churches.

Some pastors are naturally charismatic people.  They can get up on a Sunday morning and be interesting without studying or praying or preparing in any way … a few times.  But eventually, it catches up with you.

Someone once told me about a pastor who played tennis on Sunday mornings.  The storyteller used to drive to the tennis courts and pick up the pastor for morning worship.  The pastor would clean up and get dressed just in time to slip through the back door onto the platform and preach his sermon.

Of course, an arrangement like that doesn’t last very long.  Pride, indeed, goes before a fall.

In fact, I believe that many pastors are involuntarily terminated not because they’re inexperienced, or incompetent, or indecisive, but because their pride keeps them from adapting themselves to the leaders and people in their church.

It’s my belief that a pastor needs to constantly remind himself of these truths:

“I am a creature.  God is my Creator.  I am a sinner.  God is my Savior.  I have been called to ministry by God’s grace.  There is nothing in me that made God choose me.  As long as I remember that God is God and I am merely His servant, He may choose to bless my life and ministry.  When I start thinking that I am God and He is my servant, I’m in deep trouble.”

If you’re a pastor, just remember that you are who you are because God graciously called you into ministry.

If you’re a parishoner, pray for your pastor’s walk with God … that he might continually glorify God – not himself – and resist the ever dangerous temptation to be proud.

It’s a battle many of us will fight our entire lives.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »