Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Pastoral Termination’ Category

Stupid Pastors

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Jim's Ten Favorite Articles, Pastoral Termination on November 28, 2011| 8 Comments »

I shared a meal recently with a widely-respected Christian leader.

He told me why he eventually quit supervising pastors for a living.

In his view, too many pastors are stupid, and “you can’t fix stupid.”

To my knowledge, there aren’t any studies out there as to how many pastors are wise and how many aren’t.  My guess is that the vast majority of pastors are spiritually mature and possess great wisdom.

But my friend’s comments made me wonder:

What are the qualities of a stupid pastor?

First, stupid pastors think they know it all.

They come into a church with the attitude: “I know everything about the Bible and the gospel and church growth, so I don’t need to learn anything from anyone in this church.”

They don’t want to learn about a church’s uniqueness, or its past, or its community, or its people.

In fact, they purposely choose to ignore all of that.

They could learn from Christian authors, or neighborhood studies, or ministry mentors, or church consultants, but they don’t need anyone else’s help.  They already know what to do … and then proceed to show that they know nothing at all.

That’s stupid.

Second, stupid pastors do ministry by themselves.

They don’t believe that anyone in the church can do ministry better than they can.

They teach better than anyone.  They lead better.  They pastor better.  They cook better, they watch nursery kids better, they work with youth better.  Their motto is: “Anything you can do, I can do better, I can do anything better than you.”

Because they think they’re superior to others, they gradually come to control everything in the church.

In the process, they devalue the biblical role of spiritual gifts and act like they’re the entire church body … or at least, its head.

That’s stupid.

Third, stupid pastors are insensitive.

They say the wrong thing to the wrong party at the wrong time – but they think they’re being authoritative or clever or witty when they’re really being obnoxious.

And the problem is … they have no idea how they come across … and they don’t care.

Rather than building bridges between people, they construct walls … and they’re surprised when those they’ve offended leave the church.

That’s stupid.

Fourth, stupid pastors surround themselves with equally stupid people.

Here is what I read from Ecclesiastes 10:5-7 in The Message this morning:

Here’s a piece of bad business I’ve seen on this earth,

An error that can be blamed on whoever is in charge:

Immaturity is given a place of prominence,

While maturity is made to take a back seat.

I’ve seen unproven upstarts riding in style,

While experienced veterans are put out to pasture.

It’s one thing for a pastor to choose his own ministry team.  It’s another for him to ignore the wisdom of spiritually mature individuals because he’d prefer to serve with hangers-on who need him to feel valuable.

That’s stupid.

Fifth, stupid pastors attempt to superimpose a model onto their current church.

A wise pastor comes to a church, and studies its history, and its leadership, and its community.

He solicits ideas about a church’s future from its people and leaders.

But too many pastors come to a church, ignore its uniqueness, put their head down, and try to turn that church into another church they know about.

A pastor may as well try turning his wife into a former girlfriend.  Ain’t gonna work.

It’s good to have church models, but a pastor needs to spend a long time studying his current church before he knows which model might work best.

But too many pastors think they know best … and try and turn First Church into North Point West or Saddleback North.

That’s stupid.

I’m just getting warmed up, but I’d like to hear from you.

What do you think stupid pastors are like?

And what should churches do with them?

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

 

Read Full Post »

Conflict with the Pastor

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories on August 29, 2011| 2 Comments »

Today is my 100th blog post!  I’d like to celebrate by telling you a story about the second pastor I worked for.

He was a tall man with loads of charisma.  He wore colorful shirts, loved to crack jokes, and had a thing for Star Trek.  I enjoyed listening to him speak, either from the pulpit or in private.  He was primarily an evangelist who had spent a lot of time traveling and speaking at revival meetings.  We got along well.

But it was soon evident that he wasn’t getting along with the Church Council, the church’s governing body.  At first, I only heard his side of things, but it wasn’t long before the Council’s view started to leak out.

The pastor told me that the church couldn’t grow because of the way the facility looked.  The facility was 90 years old and looked it.  There were cracks in the exterior church walls as well as the parking lot.  Some rooms hadn’t been used – or cleaned – in years.  Trained in the Robert Schuller style of church leadership, the pastor believed that the entire campus needed to be renovated before the church could attract new people.

However, there were two different perspectives on the Council.  One group – headed by the chairman – was ruthlessly legalistic, criticizing the pastor for every little thing he did wrong.  In all my years of serving Jesus, I’ve only met a few church leaders whose salvation I’ve questioned – but I did question his.  He was just plain mean.  I’ll never know how he became chairman.

Another group on the Council was more spiritually-oriented.  They wanted the pastor to feed them from God’s Word and lead them in a biblical manner.  They also wanted the pastor to work a full week.  (He only came in 6-8 hours a week at the church office.)

The pastor told the Council that if they requested his resignation, he would give it to them.  They eventually requested it.  He countered by quoting “Touch not the Lord’s anointed” from the Old Testament and promising the Council he would meet them in a business meeting to settle matters.

I was only in my second year of seminary, but I knew things were about to get ugly.

It was a tough situation for me.  On the one hand, I liked the pastor a lot, and thought that some people were exaggerating his faults.  On the other hand, the pastor didn’t seem to work very hard, almost as if he’d stopped trying.

When the business meeting was announced, I felt sick inside.  It should never have come to that.

Both sides began campaigning.  Since the church rolls hadn’t been cleaned up in eons, people invited their long-gone friends to show up at the meeting and vote their way.  One party traveled four hours just to vote.

The pastor assumed that it would take a huge vote to remove him from office – either 2/3 or 3/4, I don’t remember.  He was confident that the opposition lacked the votes to oust him.

The district minister came and talked for a few minutes, but most people didn’t even hear him.

When the vote was taken, there were 63 votes to remove the pastor and 54 to retain him.

The pastor believed that he had carried the day.  However, the moderator declared that the pastor had been officially removed from office.  As it turned out, the constitution was so poorly written that it didn’t specify the percentage of votes necessary to remove a pastor.  The last paragraph stated that in those areas where the constitution didn’t designate a percentage, any vote would revert to a majority.

The pastor was angry.  He verbally castigated those who voted against him.  The next day, he knocked on my office door and told me, “There are some very evil people running this church.”  I did not disagree with him.

That was the last time I ever saw him.

The church survived.  The district sent over an interim pastor who had a big wart on his nose but who loved Jesus.  I worked with him for a while until I was called to serve at another church.

Although they later changed their name, there is still a church on that property.  I visited it several years ago.  Churches are incredibly resilient.

I share this story because I know what it’s like to be in the middle of a big church fight – and it’s disorienting for everyone involved.  Even though I wasn’t the target, the whole experience resulted in heartache and the severing of relationships.

To be honest, the entire conflict was bungled from top to bottom.  That was the church where I learned how not to do things.

One of my primary goals with Restoring Kingdom Builders is to teach pastors, governing boards, and lay people biblical ways to correct and, if necessary, remove a pastor from office.

When these situations are handled well, it’s because the leaders patiently followed Scripture rather than business practices or the law of the jungle.

When these situations are bungled, it’s because Scripture was ignored or violated.

For the sake of our Lord Jesus and His kingdom, Christian leaders and churches must do better when they have a conflict with their pastor.

Thank you for reading my blog today!  In case you’ve missed some articles, there are 99 of them waiting to be read.  And you can subscribe to the blog so it will come directly to your computer or cell phone as soon as it’s published.

And if I write something that really resonates with you – and you think it might resonate with others – please link your friends to it via Facebook.  My best days for views have resulted from other people’s links.

On to the next 100 articles!

Read Full Post »

Why Attack Pastors? Part 2

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment! on August 5, 2011| 11 Comments »

In my last article, I mentioned the book Crushed by former pastor Gary Pinion.  Although most of the book is about the pain that pastors in general are experiencing today in ministry, the author relates a personal story about one of his own pastorates.

One day, a governing leader came to Pastor Pinion and told him that several people in the congregation had complained to him about the pastor.  When the pastor asked how long this had been occurring, the leader replied, “Several months now.”  The pastor then asked the leader, “Have you told even one of the complainers to come and visit with me about their concerns?”  The answer was, “No.”

When a pastor hears that people have been publicly pooling their complaints about him, it makes the pastor uneasy, because he knows this is how major conflicts in a church are launched.  And when a leader fails to encourage the complainers to speak with the pastor personally about their issues, unbiblical behavior begins to snowball.

When Pastor Pinion learned that one of the complainers was “a catalyst for all the lies and innuendos that had been circulating,” he invited the man to his office.  When the pastor confronted the man, he began to yell and scream, “You are not feeding me and I have been at this church a lot longer than you and I have sure given a whole lot more money to this church than you and I’m not leaving!”  Pastor Pinion laments that “that was the beginning of my ‘forced exit.'”

Why do professing Christians abuse and attack their pastors?

Last time, I mentioned three possible reasons:

First, they are angry with God, and blame His audible, visible messenger for something God did or didn’t do.

Second, they are angry with their father and blame the man of God because he reminds them of their father in some way.

Third, they feel that the pastor slighted them in some way.

Here are four more possibilities:

Fourth, they want their pastor to be someone he’s not.  Most Christians have a favorite pastor from their past.  Maybe he always said hi to them, or baptized them as a child, or helped their family through crisis.  Or maybe they have an affinity for a particular pastor on television or radio.  Or maybe they’ve combined the attributes of many pastors into one perfect pastor.

Although they may not be aware of it, they measure all subsequent pastors by their mental ideal.  And when they finally discover that their current pastor cannot be the person they want him to be, they feel hurt, disappointed, and angry.  They want their pastor!  And if they can’t have him, they’ll begin a whispering campaign or call their favorite pastor and complain about the current one.

Fifth, they want to retain their friendships.  Have you ever had this experience?  You’ve been reading your Bible recently and feel convicted about the way you sometimes talk harshly about other people.  So you resolve that you’re either going to keep your mouth shut or only say kind things about others.

One day, you go out to eat with some church friends, and one of them starts criticizing your pastor.  You instantly recall your pledge to the Lord, but you also want to join in the conversation.  Before you know it, you’re agreeing with some of their criticisms and adding a few of your own.  Although you feel guilty as soon as you leave the restaurant, you convince yourself that no real harm was done.

Why did you do it?  You wanted to fit in with your friends.  After all, when the pastor isn’t around to defend himself, he doesn’t seem so great, does he?  In my previous article, I shared the story about Pastor Pinion’s friend who flipped on him and couldn’t tell him why he did it.  I know why: his destructive friends meant more to him than his godly pastor.

Where are the Christians in our day who know how to stand up for what’s right?  If we can’t stand up to fellow Christians when they are committing evil deeds, how authentic is our faith?

Sixth, they think the pastor is attacking them through his preaching.  Think about this: the only person in our culture who consistently tells adults how to live is the pastor.  The president gives speeches but doesn’t talk about divorce or sexuality.  Your boss may give occasional talks but she never encourages you to love God or others.  Your spouse may not like the way you manage money but he never sits you down for a 30-minute lecture on tithing.

Christian pastors regularly give unpopular messages about unpopular topics from an unpopular book – and occasionally in an unpopular tone.  The worst possible response I could have to a talk I gave was to have no response at all.  As Spurgeon used to say, you want people to be “glad, sad, or mad.”  But when some people get mad at a pastor – often just for preaching what the Bible says – they can go on the attack and harshly criticize him to others.

Finally, they want the pastor to leave.  The man who came to see Pastor Pinion told him, “I have been at this church a lot longer than you and … I’m not leaving!”  When people get to this point – whether they say it to their pastor’s face or not – they’re saying, “Either he’s going to leave or I’m going to leave … and it’s not going to be me.”

Sadly, there seem to be people in every church who assign themselves the project of getting rid of the pastor.  Sometimes they’re members of the governing board or staff.  Sometimes they’re a long-time member or a former pastor or the leader of a coalition.  But they have made up their minds that they cannot co-exist with the pastor.  By all rights, they should leave the church – quickly and quietly.  Instead, they convince themselves that this is their church – not his – and that he needs to leave their church as soon as possible.

Unless the pastor is guilty of heresy or destructive behavior, this is a supremely selfish action.  After all, most of the people who attend that church are there because of the pastor, not because of the board or a long-time member.  Besides, every church belongs to Jesus rather than chronic complainers.

If people would put the same energy into praying for and encouraging their pastors as they do into criticizing and attacking them, everyone would benefit.

What is God asking you to do for your pastor?

Read Full Post »

Why Attack Pastors?

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment! on August 3, 2011| 4 Comments »

I’ve been reading a book by Gary Pinion called Crushed: The Perilous Side of Ministry.  A pastor for 30 years, Gary knows the dark side of the church firsthand.

He tells the story of a pastor who moved to a church in the South hoping to stay for a lifetime.  The pastor received a 96% affirmative vote from the congregation.  The church had a competent staff, a large bank account, and claimed that all they needed was “a good leader.”

After a short while, the church expanded from one to two services, and the church appeared successful.  But several of the governing leaders began engaging in “guerilla warfare” behind the scenes.

After 21 months, the pastor was shaking hands at the end of the second service when he was asked to go immediately to his office.  When the pastor arrived, he was shocked to see 21 men there who asked for his resignation by 5 pm that evening.

The pastor called aside a man in the group – someone he thought was his friend – and asked, “Why?”  His friend could not give any reason and seemed to be embarrassed to be part of the lynch mob.

Why?  Why do some people attack their pastor?  Why do they verbally crucify him to others?  Why do they start a whispering campaign against him?  Why do they meet in secret, exaggerate charges against him, fail to speak with him directly, and then covertly attempt to force him to resign?  Why?

For starters, some people are angry with God.  They view the pastor as God’s leader and messenger in their church.  They aren’t comfortable verbally attacking God – after all, He’s invisible and inaudible – so they pursue God’s visible and audible servant instead.  My guess is that they aren’t conscious of what they’re doing, but they do it anyway.

When King Herod Antipas arrested, imprisoned, and then executed John the Baptist, the real culprit behind the execution was his new wife, Herodias.  Because John had been telling Herod that “it is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife,” we’re told that Herodias “nursed a grudge against John and wanted to kill him” (Mark 6:18-19).  But John wasn’t the source of the Jewish law: God was.  John was merely God’s messenger.  Some people attack godly leaders – including pastors – because they are angry with God about something.

Second, some people are angry with their father.  Paul told several churches that he was their spiritual father (1 Cor. 4:15; 1 Thess. 2:11) and that they were his spiritual children.  That’s a great metaphor if you sensed that your father loved you when you were a child.  But if your relationship with your dad involved pain, it’s easy to transfer that pain to another father-like figure: the pastor.

When I was a pastor, I didn’t mind if some people viewed me as a father figure.  If a person was raised by an abusive or cruel father, I tried to show them by example that a man can be loving and kind.  But I can think of several situations where I had to say something tough to someone – even though I said it gently – and they reacted with anger against me.  When I thought about it later on, I realized that I may have sounded like their father.  While I don’t think people are conscious of doing this, the pastor usually isn’t aware of the dynamics, either.

Third, some people feel their pastor has slighted them.  In my first pastorate, we had a service every Sunday evening.  One night, there were 25 people present, and I got a brainstorm: let’s go around the room and offer words of encouragement to each person present.  Everyone thought it was a great idea.

The people loved saying kind things about each other and hearing others say positive things about them.  It was only later that I discovered, to my horror, that we had missed Norman completely.  I wish someone had pointed it out, and I didn’t do it on purpose, but the damage was done.  (To his credit, Norman didn’t attack me – but he and his wife slowly vanished from church life.)

This is why I was always careful as a pastor about complimenting individuals in public.  If I thanked the music director for a great song but not his vocalists, they would be upset.  If I thanked a staff member for an achievement but didn’t thank the other staff, they would be upset.  When it comes to hurts, some people are turtles while others are skunks.  When hurt, the turtles – like Norman – pull into their shell.  The skunks – and I could give you a whole list of names! – spray a foul odor on anyone they meet.  The lesson is clear: never slight a skunk!

When Paul wrote Romans 16, he greeted several dozen people by name at the church in Rome.  I wonder if he missed anybody?  If I had one chance to be immortalized in the pages of Scripture, and found out I was slighted … you get the picture.

I’ll share four more reasons people attack their pastors next time.  Can you think of any more?

Read Full Post »

A Story of Reconciliation

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Forgiveness and Reconciliation among Christians, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories on July 20, 2011| 2 Comments »

Ever work alongside someone with whom you just didn’t get along?

How did things end for you?

The first church that I served as pastor met in a school cafeteria.  The district gave us advance warning that they had sold the property to a developer and that we would have to move by a certain date.

A sister church nearby invited us to merge with them, so after a brief period of negotation, we did just that.

One of the board members from the other church was a man I’ll call Bob.  When the two boards initially met, Bob stood out because he was outspoken and opinionated, even though some of his views didn’t make much sense to me.

I liked Bob personally.  He seemed to be a good husband and father and was warm and kind to our family.  In fact, after I’d been at the church only 18 months, he arranged for me to attend an event at a midwestern seminary and to stay with his son and his family.  Bob even leant me his heavy coat for the meetings.  (The wind chill that week got down to -35 degrees.)

While I was very grateful to Bob for his kindness, I wondered if he had ulterior motives.  Was he trying to buy my favor in some way?

As our church slowly made changes designed to reach younger people, Bob and his wife began to express their dissatisfaction to those in the church’s inner circle.  While most of those people supported me, Bob was becoming increasingly vocal.  Our board held a weekly meeting for spiritual enrichment but Bob was always the odd man out.  His views on everything were vastly different from those of the other board members.

One Sunday, Bob’s wife stopped coming to church.  She couldn’t handle the changes.  A month later, Bob stopped coming as well.  Even though I was suffering from a cold, two board members and I visited Bob and his wife in their home to find out why they were so disgruntled.

They told us they hated the music.  They disagreed strongly with the changes that were being made.  And then Bob’s wife left the room and began to work in the kitchen.

The meeting was essentially over.

In consultation with the board, we decided to move ahead and implement the changes we had already planned on making.  While I heard rumbles from Bob and his wife from time-to-time, they chose to attend another church, for which I was very grateful.

Then a year later, everything changed.

A board member from my first church had been teaching a Bible class for seniors on Sunday mornings.  This man had been a pastor for many years but was now a school teacher, and yet he longed to be in ministry again.  He began to criticize some of the changes that our church had been making.  This may have been his way of feeling important again, but his sentiments began to sabotage our ministry.

Before I knew what was happening, some of the people in this class invited Bob to return to the church and help them.

One Sunday, I was scheduled to speak from Mark 6 where King Herod Antipas beheads John the Baptist.  Bob sat several rows from me with his arms crossed, staring me down the whole time.  When the service was over, Bob told the board chairman that my message was aimed directly at him.  To his credit, the board chairman told Bob, “Look at the bulletin.  We were in Mark 5 last week.  We’re in Mark 6 this week.”  But Bob remained unconvinced.

So Bob and his new followers decided to get organized.  They scheduled a “secret meeting” at someone’s house.  When one of the board members announced his intention to attend the meeting, it was quickly cancelled.

Eventually 17 people met with one goal in mind: to get rid of me as their pastor.

They used every trick in the book to accomplish their mission.  They accused me of being a dictator.  They made charges against my family.  They called up people who had left the church to find dirt on me.  They compiled a list of all my faults.

It wasn’t an easy time to live through.  To be honest, I don’t know how I made it.  The board and I had worked together on all the changes, and we implemented them very slowly – almost too slowly.

In fact, the whole board told me that if I quit, they would all leave the church together, in effect giving the church to Bob and his minions.

Bob then went to the district minister and laid out his case against me.  When the district minister and I spoke on the phone, he recommended that I resign.

I chose to stay and fight instead.  It proved to be the right decision.

It all came to a head when our denomination held their annual meetings in the city where our church was located.  Bob and his group left our church and started a church in a school one mile away.  They had between 20 and 25 people meeting there.  Our church was their only mission field.

Some of our people visited that church because they had friends there.  But in almost every case, they returned to our fellowship.

Anyway, Bob wanted recognition from the district for his new church.  I told the district minister that if they recognized Bob’s church – which was organized not to perpetuate the gospel but to fire missiles at our church – that we would leave the district.

It wasn’t a pretty time.

At the annual meetings, Bob did something unprecedented.  While my wife and I were working with scores of children upstairs, Bob was downstairs passing out literature about his new church – which had not been sanctioned by the district.  And every chance he had, he took verbal shots at me.

I asked our district leaders if they would do something about Bob’s conduct.  They said they didn’t have the authority to do anything.  Finally, a couple pastor friends collected the literature about Bob’s church and threw everything in the trash!

It’s hard for me to believe that I lived through those days.

Bob and I went our separate ways after that.  After a year, his church disbanded.

Without Bob and his crew, our church eagerly looked forward to the future, and several years later, we had tripled our attendance.

I felt terrible for the people who had followed Bob to his new church.  They were now spiritually homeless.  While I had initially assumed they had left our church because they disliked me, I found out that wasn’t the case.

They didn’t dislike me or our church at all – they were seduced by someone who made them feel important.

One night, I was informed that a woman who had left our church for Bob’s church was dying.  She didn’t have long to live.  When I went to visit her in the hospital, who did I run into there?

Bob.

While this woman slept, Bob and I talked across her hospital bed.  Life had changed for both of us.  While Bob wasn’t doing well, life was on the upswing for me.

I don’t remember much about what we said to each other that night, but I do remember that Bob had pegged me all wrong.  He had completely distorted my motives.  He had some issues with authority anyway, and viewed me through the lens of unresolved conflicts from his past.

The fighting was over.

We left the room, went down the elevator together, and spoke with each other outside the hospital before parting amiably.

We had finally reconciled.

And I was glad we had, because several years later, Bob’s best friend – who attended our church – died suddenly.  When Bob and his wife came to pay their respects at their friend’s home, we were all on speaking terms and worked together to bring comfort to the family.

Bob and I never really understood each other.  It was appropriate that we parted ways.  God had given our church a clear mission that Bob couldn’t support, so he needed to find a church whose mission he could get behind.

I truly wish that every conflict story ended with reconciliation.  A few do, while most don’t.

But I try to live by the words of Paul in Romans 12:18: “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.”

Is there someone that God wants you to reconcile with today?

What is it possible for you to do to make that a reality?

Read Full Post »

How Would You Handle This Church Nightmare?

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Jim's Ten Favorite Articles, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , on July 1, 2011| 2 Comments »

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

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

Here’s what happened:

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

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

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

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

Which option did you select?

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

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

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

2.  What should the leaders do now?

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

Which option did you select?

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

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

Tom shared that he believed the pastor was innocent.

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

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

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

One leader chose to resign.

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

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

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

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

Which option would you select at this point?

The leaders chose the last option once again.

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

4.  What should Tom and Diane do now?

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

Which option did the leaders select?

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

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

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

Which option did you go with?

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

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

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

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

The church’s reputation and future were preserved.

The decision of the leaders was vindicated.

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

Let me quote Steinke on this issue fully:

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

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

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

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

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

The women around the cross wept uncontrollably.

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

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

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

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

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

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

That is … if unity is more important than truth.

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

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

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

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

Humanly speaking: no.  What a travesty of justice!

20 centuries later, Jesus’ followers can do a better job of handling nightmarish accusations against pastors.

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

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

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

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

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

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

They opted for truth instead, and the truth will set you – and everyone else – free.

Read Full Post »

Before Terminating a Pastor

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination on June 3, 2011| 9 Comments »

Every day, it’s the same thing.

The number one phrase that people enter into their search engine that directs them to this blog is “how to terminate a pastor.”

Yesterday, there were three phrases using the terms “terminate” and “pastor,” as well as a fourth entry: “forcing out a pastor.”

There have been days when I’ve woken up and my article called “If You Must Terminate a Pastor” has been read multiple times.  It makes me wonder if it’s been read by an entire board somewhere that’s struggling with this issue.

I’d like to offer five suggestions to church leaders before they act to force their pastor out of his position:

First, talk to your pastor about your concerns.  When my kids were growing up, if they messed up in some fashion, I corrected them immediately.  They knew what I expected and were given time to change their behavior.

A pastor should be treated in a similar manner.

I realize it’s never easy to correct a pastor, but if he’s saying or doing something wrong – or there’s something he’s neglecting to do – then a member of the governing board needs to discuss it with him as soon as possible.

Let’s say a pastor is delving too much into politics in his messages.  In all likelihood, a few people from the church will contact him and tell him they think he’s crossing a line.  This might alert the pastor to a problem, but he might ignore their opinions and plow ahead anyway.

One of the board members then has to talk with the pastor, and the sooner, the better.  If it was me, I wouldn’t wait until the next official board meeting.  Instead, I’d invite the pastor out for a meal and share my concerns with him – and I would speak only for myself, not for the rest of the board.

Many pastors would realize they’ve crossed a line and would stop injecting politics into their sermons right away.  Mission accomplished.

After a private conversation – recommended by Jesus in Matthew 18:15 – the issue should now be closed.

However, some board members just can’t bring themselves to talk to the pastor in private.  So they begin talking about the pastor to each other.  Joe has one complaint against the pastor, Bill has another, and Reed has still another.  All of a sudden, Joe’s complaint is adopted by Bill, and Bill’s is adopted by both Reed and Joe.

This is how church conflict begins: by pooling complaints.

As they do this, the board members start to believe that maybe the pastor should leave.  In fact, they find it easy to blame him for everything that is wrong with their church.

However, the pastor isn’t at fault.  He doesn’t even know about the conversations the board members are having with each other.  Because they failed to use the biblical principle of confronting him directly before involving others (Matthew 18:15), everything that happens from this moment on will largely be the responsibility of those three board members.

If a pastor messes up – and he will from time-to-time – then one person should speak with him in private without involving others.  Ideally, if there are five members on the church board, then all five should approach him separately.

Wouldn’t you like to be treated that way?

Second, be clear about the change you expect.  While pastors are gifted individuals, they are not mind readers.  If you want your pastor to change the way he does ministry, you have to define the change you want.  Don’t make him guess what you’re thinking.

I served with one board that asked me to stop wearing a suit on Sundays and dress down a bit more.  Except for funerals and weddings, I never wore a suit after that.

One board member asked me to quit putting down the Dodgers in my messages.  They were his favorite team and he felt attacked every time I did it.  I stopped.

Here’s the template: “Pastor, I’d like to ask if you’d start/stop doing _____ for this reason: _____.”

I don’t believe that such a statement should be presented as a demand but as a request.  However, unless it’s a matter of doctrine or ethics, you may have to let the pastor make up his own mind about your request.

Many years ago in my first pastorate, two deacons called on a Saturday night and asked me if they could come over and talk with me.  When they arrived, I climbed into one of their cars and heard them out.

They wanted me to give altar calls every Sunday morning.

A public invitation is when a pastor invites people to receive Christ in a church service, often by praying right where they are.

An altar call is much more public.  It’s when a person is asked to walk to the front of the church before receiving Christ, like at a Billy Graham crusdade.

I wrote my thesis in seminary on “a theological evaluation of the altar call.”  I didn’t want to start doing it because we had a church of 40 Christians with few visitors.  Since everybody was already saved, nobody was going to walk forward, even if I was Billy Graham.  Then they would judge my ministry a failture.

Besides, the practice isn’t mentioned anywhere in Scripture and comes out of the 19th century camp meetings.  It’s an option, not a necessity.

So I told them I wouldn’t do it.  (I had more guts at 27 than I do now!)  They accepted my decision – and they never brought it up again.  But I was grateful that they spoke with me about making a specific change.

Third, give the pastor time to change.  With an issue like mentioning politics in a message, the pastor should be expected to stop right away.  If he crosses a line again, then the person who initially spoke with the pastor might choose to take one or two more people with him to speak with the pastor (Matthew 18:16).

However, many pastors develop habits where it’s difficult for them to change overnight.

I was never very good at home visitation.  When I had to visit shut-ins, neither one of us enjoyed the experience very much.  When I stopped by to see newcomers who had visited our church the previous Sunday, they rarely came back.

The boomers didn’t want a pastor coming to their house.  (There were too many things to hide before he got there.)  But many in the builder generation expected that kind of personal attention from their pastor.

If I was asked to visit in homes, I could probably do it for a week or two, but since it’s unnatural for me, I’d find reasons to quit doing it as soon as possible.

It takes time for pastors to change their behavior or learn new skills.  Board members need to realize that.  Maybe the pastor’s progress could be measured on a monthly or quarterly basis.  But give him a chance to change first – and give him points for trying.

Fourth, realize your pastor is unique.  Many Christians have a favorite pastor from their past.  Maybe he led them to Christ, or baptized them, or married them, or counseled them – and he became their pastor forever.

But then he resigned or retired, and while he’s not around anymore, precious memories still linger.

There are times when a board member wants to terminate a pastor because he isn’t Pastor So-and-So from my past.  Over the years, many people have told me about their favorite pastor.  At first, I felt a little intimdated, but then I realized that it’s okay to form a special bond with a man of God.  It’s one of the primary ways God causes us to grow.

But on some level, there are people – even board members – who become upset or even angry with their current pastor because he doesn’t do things the way their favorite pastor did.  They canonize his personality and his methodology.

If this could be the case with you, I beg you: please ask God and a few loved ones around you to tell you the truth as to whether you’re being fair toward your pastor or not.

Because even if you get rid of him, that favorite pastor is not coming back.

Finally, take time to pray that your pastor changes.  Many board members come out of the business world, and prayer is not a business principle.  But prayer works wonders – even with a pastor.

Instead of persuading fellow board members to fire the pastor, why not ask the King of Kings to change him instead?

I once had a pastor who had an annoying habit.  I prayed fervently for him without talking to him about it.  He not only changed, he told the church he had changed!

That principle isn’t in Good to Great, is it?

But it is in the Bible!

Let me put this in a nutshell: before relying on business practices or playing church politics, resolve that you will handle any problems with your pastor in a biblical and spiritual manner.

If you do, the odds are good that you won’t have to terminate your pastor because he’ll respond to you in kind.

Think about it.

Read Full Post »

Book Excerpt: Protecting Reputations

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Pastoral Termination on May 11, 2011| Leave a Comment »

There is a plague that continues to make its way through Christian churches in our day: the forced termination of pastors.   The same church board that carefully checks out a prospective pastor over time discards that same pastor overnight.  The same people that act like loving Christians in hiring a pastor act like Satan’s messengers in forcing him to leave.  The same individuals who want a pastor to meet biblical qualifications before he’s called use crass political games to get rid of him.

And when a pastor is forced to leave a church, there are usually people who do their best to destroy his reputation.

This is an excerpt from a book I’m writing about what happened to me – and what happens to my fellow pastors – when a group in the church decides you need to leave for good:

When I first became a pastor in my late twenties, I was shocked at how many pastors in our district were forced to leave their ministries because they were opposed by a handful of antagonists.  As a rookie pastor, I met on a monthly basis with our district minister and other area pastors for lunch, and whenever a pastor was forced to resign, I wanted to know why it happened and how he was faring, especially since some of those pastors were my friends.  The dominant impression I received at those ministerial gatherings was that those ministers were forced to resign their positions because the pastor did something wrong and the lay people – usually the church board – reluctantly handed out the treatment he deserved.

For example, I once heard about a pastor in our district who told his congregation in frustration that they “didn’t give a damn” about a certain issue, but because this pastor used the word “damn” in a public meeting (not a church service), the person who relayed this news to me believed that the pastor had disqualified himself from office.  In other words, if a Baptist pastor can’t control his tongue in public, then he shouldn’t be a pastor at all.  But I wanted to know why this pastor used such strong language in public.  Was this the first time he had ever done that?  What might have caused him to use such language?  When I first came into the district, this pastor took a special interest in me.  One Sunday morning, he called me at home just to pray with me over the phone.  He seemed to be a good man, and if he became so incensed that he used strong language inside the four walls of his church, then maybe he had a good reason.  Maybe a few less than spiritual individuals in the church pushed him over the edge.  But in district circles, we rarely heard about unhealthy congregations.  Instead, the implication was that if a man was forced out of the pastorate, you could trace his departure to something he did or said.  In essence, he was a loser.

So early in my ministerial career, I learned how the district (and by implication our denomination) viewed pastors who experienced forced termination.  In general, the pastor became the scapegoat and was blamed for whatever conflict occurred.  Upon hearing the news that another colleague had bitten the dust, I would call that pastor and let him know that I cared for him.  I would also ask him about the factors that conspired to force him to resign, and every man I called was transparent enough to tell me.  Then I’d ask this question: “How many other pastors from the district have called to express their concern for you?”  The answer was always, “No one has called me.  You’re the only one.”  As I recall, in my first several years as a pastor in our district, seven pastoral colleagues were forced to leave their churches, and every one told me I was the only one to call.  That information broke my heart.  I later did a study of pastors who had served inside our district and discovered that out of sixty pastors that had left their churches, fifty were no longer connected to the denomination.  I felt so strongly about this issue that I wrote an article for our denominational magazine entitled “Who Cares For Lost Shepherds?”

Why don’t pastors seem to demonstrate concern for their colleagues who experience forced termination?  Maybe pastors have enough on their plates inside their own congregations to reach out to their peers.  Maybe some pastors are better leaders or teachers or administrators than they are shepherds and wouldn’t know what to say to a colleague undergoing crisis.  Maybe some pastors just don’t want to become embroiled in another church’s issues.  It also might be true that a lot of pastors know very few of their colleagues.  But my guess is that many pastors don’t want to associate with their terminated brethren because they are stigmatized as losers.  In other words, if you’re a pastor and you’re forced out of your church, the perception is that you are either incompetent, guilty of immorality, or don’t know how to play church politics properly.  There is something wrong with you, not the church, and in rare cases, that’s true.  But it’s not always true.  Jesus wasn’t crucified because He was unhealthy but because the political and religious leaders of His day were spiritually dysfunctional.  Paul wasn’t chased out of European cities because something was wrong with him or his message but because his hearers were hostile toward the gospel.  It’s popular to say, “If the team isn’t winning, fire the coach,” but some pastors have led their churches to growth and yet are forced to leave anyway because the old-timers feel insignificant as the church expands – and they wish to feel powerful once again.  While there are always pastors who deserve termination, the great majority who are forced to leave their churches have not done anything worthy of banishment.  But whether or not a pastor deserves termination, the church board should always treat him with dignity and respect.

Years ago, I sat with a pastor friend at a restaurant.  My friend had been forced to leave his former church exactly one year beforehand.  His daughter had been falsely accused of something she hadn’t done and the pastor chose to resign to protect her.  (The truth came out sometime later.)  The “clergy killer” in his congregation was both a church board member as well as member of the trustee board in our district.  Guess whose story got out first?  One year later, my friend had no idea why he had been mistreated so badly.  What had he done wrong?  I gave him a book called Forced Termination by Brooks Faulkner, and after reading it, my friend told me that he now understood what had happened to him.  But how much did our district help him?  According to my friend, they didn’t help him at all.

Several months ago, I was having a meal with a pastor, and I asked him if he knew how an old pastor friend of mine was doing, and this pastor told me that my friend left his church “because he was having some problems.”  The implication was that my friend left because of problems he had, not problems that were lodged inside the church family.  The pastor who told me that my friend “had problems” probably figured I would never reach out to my friend and discover his side of the situation.  Pastoral reputations can be ruined with a few key phrases or awkward pauses.

In my opinion, we can handle these situations much, much better.

Read Full Post »

Charging Leaders with Wrongdoing

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination on May 2, 2011| 5 Comments »

I’ve been writing this blog about pastor-congregational conflict issues over the past five months.  Every day, I’m given the terms that people type into their search engines to find the blog, and the top two phrases have been “how to terminate a pastor” and “facing your accusers.”  Evidently there is a lot of confusion among Christians as to how to handle the correction and termination of a pastor.  (And pastors don’t help because they rarely teach on this issue.)  Take a moment to imagine how differently pastors would be treated if every church took Moses’ words in Deuteronomy 19:15-21 seriously:

“One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed.  A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.  If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse a man of a crime, the two men involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the Lord before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time.  The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against his brother, then do to him as he intended to do to his brother.  You must purge the evil from among you.  The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you.  Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.”

Please notice several things about this passage:

First, an accuser must be a witness.  An individual had to see someone committing a crime before they could report it to the authorities.  You were not allowed to say, “Well, I heard that Joshua stole a cow” or “some of my friends told me that Seth assaulted the high priest.”  If you reported what you heard from someone else, that might make you a prosecutor but not a witness.  There’s a big difference.  You had to witness the events firsthand for someone to be tried.  If you didn’t, you wouldn’t even be heard.  J. A. Thompson notes in his commentary on Deuteronomy that this section deals with “the false witness who has been a menace to society in every age and among many peoples.”

How differently matters are handled in our churches.

Can you imagine going to a meeting of the governing board or standing up in a public meeting and accusing your pastor of a litany of charges without ever having witnessed any of his offenses yourself?  And yet this is exactly what happens in many churches.  Rather than instantly believing (or disbelieving) the charges, someone should ask the accuser point blank, “Have you personally seen or heard the pastor commit any offenses?  If so, when and where?”  If not, the person has been disqualified as a witness and should be silent.  Then those who have seen the pastor say or do something wrong should come forward.  If nobody does, the charges – according to Scripture – should be dismissed.

One of the best features of American jurisprudence is that a plaintiff is able to face his or her accusers.  In other words, a witness cannot make charges against someone – resulting in their arrest – and then be able to hide out as the accused is tried and sentenced.  The accused must be able to face their accuser in court and have his or her attorney cross-examine them.  Many Christians believe that this legal principle comes straight from passages like this one.  It would be a shame if unbelievers obeyed biblical principles in a greater way than believers.

Second, one witness is not enough to establish guilt.  What does Scripture say?  There must be “two or three witnesses” to a crime, not just one, because one person could easily misrepresent an event.

When I was in high school, I was walking home from school one day with a friend when we both witnessed an accident between a motorcycle and a car.  The motorcyclist ran a stop sign, hit the car broadside, and then flew over the car, landing on the pavement.  (He was okay.)  While I told the police what I saw, my friend saw things a bit differently – and probably more accurately – because he planned to become a policeman (which he eventually did).  We both saw the same accident and yet came to several different conclusions.  Several witnesses are able to give a more complete version of events than a single witness could ever do – and this protects the accused from a personal vendetta by one person.

Both Jesus and Paul later quoted from this passage when they mentioned the necessity of having “two or three witnesses” establish the facts in a confrontation (Matthew 18:16; 1 Timothy 5:19) – and Paul’s words to Timothy deal specifically with Christian leaders.

Third, every charge against an individual must be investigated by an impartial body.  While I’m stating the obvious here, a witness cannot say, “I saw So-and-So commit such-and-such an offense” and be instantly believed.  Their charges must be tested.

The other night, I was watching a dramatic depiction of the trial of Sir Thomas More, who served as Chancellor under King Henry VIII of England.  Henry had More (a Roman Catholic) arrested for high treason and confined to The Tower of London.  More’s Protestant opponents (sad to say) continually accused him of denying the right of the king to be the head of the church in England.  While More successfully beat back the initial wave of charges, he was finally accused by Richard Rich (the king’s Solicitor General) for denying the king’s right to lead the church during a personal conversation.  Based on the testimony of one man, a jury required a mere fifteen minutes to pronounce More’s guilt and arrange for his execution.

Regardless of how you might feel about Henry VIII and Thomas More, isn’t there something inside of us that recoils when we hear that a private conversation with a single person could result in the death of a Christian leader?  By the same token, how can the wild accusations of one person result in the besmirching of a pastor’s reputation in our day?  And rather than just take one person’s word for it, shouldn’t an impartial body be appointed to check into the charges?  Isn’t this what Paul had in mind when he told the church in Corinth (in 1 Corinthians 6:1-8) that they should be able to handle their own affairs without involving the secular court system?

Finally, if the charges proved to be false, then the witnesses were to receive the exact punishment the accused would have received.  What Brown writes about societies applies even more stringently to Christian churches: “Any society is sick if people within it will lie deliberately in order to inflict harm on others.  The Lord is a God of truth; he does not deceive us by anything he says.  Therefore, the word of those who belong to the covenant community must also be reliable and trustworthy.”

Please note that the law of lex talionis (known as “an eye for an eye”) specified the limit of punishment (if Joseph harmed your eye, you could harm his eye but not his ear) rather than demanded punishment (if he harmed your eye, you had to harm his eye).

Several weeks ago, I had lunch with a veteran Christian leader who told me about his church’s policy when it comes to accusing staff members of wrongdoing.  Two women in the church claimed they had seen a staff member engaging in inappropriate behavior.  Their claims came to the attention of my friend and he did a thorough investigation of the matter.  While he concluded that the staff member did not use his best judgment, he exonerated him from any serious wrongdoing.  One of the women was dissatisfied with the decision and began to repeat her charges to others.  My friend then contacted her and told her that if she did not stop her accusations, then discipline would be exercised against her.  Her accusations ceased.

This step is missing in Christian churches today.  We have created a climate where people can make accusations with impunity – whether they’re true or not – because they know that nothing will happen to them.  These accusations are often passed around the church in the form of gossip and are believed before the accused leader even hears about them or can respond to them.  Because the leader is then perceived to be in the wrong, he or she is asked for their resignation.  What a travesty!

I recommend that Christians find ways to include the principles embedded in this Deuteronomy passage (not necessarily the penalties!) into church life so we can protect our Christian leaders from false and malicious charges.  As Moses said, “You must purge the evil from among you.”

But the truth is that this passage is a safeguard for everybody – including leaders.  Isn’t this the way you would want to be treated if you were accused of an offense?

What do you think about this passage and these principles?

Read Full Post »

Book Excerpt: Why Jesus Was Terminated

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination on April 20, 2011| Leave a Comment »

The following article is from Chapter 11 of the book I’m writing. The chapter parallels the way that Jesus’ enemies “terminated” Him with the way that pastors are often terminated today. Thanks for reading:

It is my contention that there are a host of similarities between the way that Jesus was cruelly terminated and the way that many pastors are unjustly treated in our day.  In fact, a case can be made that the steps leading to the crucifixion of Jesus are replicated on a regular basis in churches throughout the world.  While some parallels are inexact – for example, pastors lack Jesus’ perfect character and miracle-working power – the unoriginal devil uses the same template today to destroy spiritual leaders as He did in our Savior’s time.  Why change your methodology when it’s been working so well?

In re-reading The Gospels recently, I believe that the single verse that best describes Satan’s strategy in attacking a leader is Mark 14:27.  The night before His death, Jesus quoted from Zechariah 13:7 and told His disciples, “You will all fall away, for it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.’”  While the devil sometimes picks off a stray sheep or two – and even provokes some sheep to fight each other – he knows that the single best way to slaughter an entire flock is to eliminate their leader.  Without their shepherd, the sheep wander off toward cliffs, fail to find nourishing pastures, and become prey for wolves.

Let me share some parallels between the way that Jesus was mistreated twenty centuries ago and the way that many pastors are mistreated today.

First, the enemies of Jesus were threatened by Him.  Before Jesus came on the scene, the Pharisees and chief priests and elders were the unquestioned spiritual authorities in Israel as well as the undisputed arbiters of Jewish law.  But in one of the first of many clashes with Israel’s leaders, Jesus publicly challenged their authority inside a synagogue on the Sabbath in Capernaum.  Jesus met a man there with a shriveled hand.  Although healing on the Sabbath was considered to be work and a violation of the popular interpretation of the Law, Jesus turned His attention toward the Pharisees before addressing His patient.  Showing His awareness of their presence, Jesus asked them in Luke 6:9, “Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy it?”  The Pharisees chose to remain silent rather than engage Jesus in dialogue.  After looking them directly in the eyes, Jesus instantly restored the man’s hand to health.

Jesus committed a good deed that Sabbath day.  He cared much more for the spirit of the law than its letter.  While the Pharisees lived by their extra-biblical, legalistic codes, Jesus consistently behaved within the true meaning of God’s law.  In the Father’s eyes, Jesus only did good while in the Pharisees’ eyes, Jesus only did evil.  But who did Jesus work for: the Father or the Pharisees?  He served His Father alone.  Because He could have healed the man on any other day, Jesus’ attitude got Him into trouble with the religious authorities.  They began to worry that He might gradually come to displace them as leaders in Israel.

Jesus not only threatened the authority of the Jewish leaders by spurning their man-made laws, He also threatened their influence via a scathing public indictment (Matthew 23), castigating them for practices like hypocrisy, narcissism, vanity, majoring on minors, and being obsessed with their spiritual images.  And in Luke 13:17, after healing a woman with spinal issues on the Sabbath (once again in a synagogue), the synagogue ruler angrily told those in attendance, “There are six days for work.  So come and be healed on those days, not on the Sabbath.”  But Jesus did not back down, accusing His opponents of being “hypocrites” who lead their animals to water on the Sabbath while prohibiting supernatural deliverance for hurting people.  Luke concludes, “When he said this, all his opponents were humiliated, but the people were delighted with all the wonderful things he was doing” (Luke 13:17).

Most of all, according to John 11:48, Jesus threatened their very survival.  After Jesus raised Lazarus, the Sanhedrin concluded, “If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation,” referring either to Jerusalem itself or the temple.  In other words, if Jesus kept attracting a large following, He might put the Jewish leaders out of business altogether, rendering them irrelevant.  Due to their scarcity mentality, they couldn’t let that happen.  While John the Baptist nobly proclaimed, “He must become greater; I must become less” (John 3:30), their sentiment was, “We must become greater; He must become nonexistent.”

While Jesus and the Jewish leaders contended for the soul of their nation, many pastors and church leaders fight for control of a congregation.  There are people in every church who have been there for years – especially charter members – and who sense that their influence is being displaced as the pastor’s influence increases.  When that happens, it’s not uncommon for these people to band together and strike back.

Next, the enemies of Jesus plotted to destroy Him.  It is simply amazing to read how many times in the Gospels we are given insight into the real motives of the Jewish leaders toward Jesus.  While their decisions were made in the dark, they later fully came into the light.  For example, after Jesus healed the lame man at the Bethesda pool on the Sabbath, John tells us that “the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own father, making himself equal with God” (John 5:18).  John 7:1 tells us that Jesus purposely stayed away from Judea “because the Jews there were waiting to take his life.” The attitude of the leaders became so well known that some of the people in Jerusalem began to ask in John 7:25, “Isn’t this the man they are trying to kill?”  Jesus Himself told the Jewish leaders that He knew about their hostility toward Him in John 8:40 when He said, “As it is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God.”  After Jesus declared that “before Abraham was born, I am!” the Jewish leaders “picked up stones to stone him” but Jesus slipped away from the temple area (John 8:58-59).

Finally, after Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, we’re told about the Sanhedrin that “from that day on they plotted to take his life” (John 11:53). They were even so enraged at the miracle Jesus performed on Lazarus that “the chief priests made plans to kill Lazarus as well, for on account of him many of the Jews were going over to Jesus and putting their faith in him (John 12:10-11).”  During the last week of Jesus’ life, Luke tells us, “Every day he was teaching at the temple. But the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the leaders among the people were trying to kill him” (Luke 19:47).

The New Testament writers never tell us that anyone at this point was trying to kill Peter, or James, or Thomas – just Jesus.  In the same way, no one in a local church bands together to eliminate the small group director, or the children’s fourth grade teacher, or the office manager.  No, if they go after anyone, a group always goes after the pastor.

When I use the word “destroy,” I am not for a moment suggesting that the enemies of a pastor in church settings wish to kill him as they did Jesus.  While that sort of thing has happened – and I have some news stories in my files as evidence – it’s extremely rare.  It’s much more common for individuals and groups to try and harm a pastor’s reputation, remove him from office, or damage his career.  Rediger writes that “it is frightening, as well as embarrassing, to see how many religious leaders are willing to destroy careers, congregations, and missions in the name of theological cleansing, or whatever the source of their vexation.”  Greenfield ads, “In some cases, the commitment to do harm, to tear down, to destroy could be seen as just short of murder, because the evil actions are intended to kill the leader’s ministry, career, position in the church, and even his health.”

In my mind, it is often very simple to determine which side in a “religious war” represents the devil and which side represents the Lord. In a word, Satan majors in destruction (I Peter 5:8) while Jesus majors in redemption (Titus 2:13-14).

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »