Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Pastoral Termination’ Category

When Church Leaders Consult Only With Themselves

Posted in Church Coup Excerpts, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , , , on June 24, 2016| Leave a Comment »

Twenty-five years ago, I found myself in one of the most precarious positions I’ve ever faced as a pastor.

The church I served in Silicon Valley had been struggling, and I became convinced that we needed to start over: a new church, with a new name, in a new location, with a new ministry.

This vision meant that we had to sell our church property and find a new place to meet … almost simultaneously.

After receiving congregational approval, we sold the property outright to The Salvation Army (some people must drop more than coins into those Christmas kettles) and after looking at more than thirty buildings, our leaders found a temporary place to meet … but we needed a conditional use permit first.

When we went to the planning commission, they turned us down on a 4-2 vote.

We were stunned.

Now we had to appeal to the City Council … I had to lead the effort … and I had never done anything like that before.

I pulled out all the stops.  I called everyone and anyone who might be able to help.  I even called the city manager of a prominent city nearby and picked his brain on how to proceed.

Then it came time to prepare packets for Council members and contact them individually.

I met with the mayor in his office.

After our presentation to the Council, we won a unanimous 7-0 vote.  It was one of the great moments of my life!

The elders of that church and I had a lot to learn after our defeat before the planning commission … and after we did our homework, God blessed us with a favorable decision.

But when a church board is having trouble with their pastor … and if they’re thinking about forcing him to leave … the last thing many boards do is ask outsiders for counsel.

Why don’t boards ask for counsel?

*Some board members think, “We have to keep everything confidential.  We don’t want anyone to know what’s happening between us and the pastor.”  They may be concerned about their own reputations … that they won’t be perceived as competent managers or peaceful believers.

*Others boards think, “We don’t need any outside counsel.  Just look at the composition of this board: a CEO, an attorney, a salesman, two small business owners, a school principal, and an accountant.  We’re all professionals.  We know what to do with wayward employees.”

*Still others think, “I suppose we could contact an outside consultant, but we know more about our church and our pastor than that person ever will.”

*The pastor probably knows who could be contacted for counsel, but the board won’t be inclined to consult with his network.

*And because of the nature of the conflict, the board can’t ask the pastor for help … even though he might be able to help them more than anybody else.

There are several problems with this kind of thinking among board members:

*For starters, a church is not strictly a business.  While it shouldn’t be run like a bad business, the purpose of a church isn’t to make money or reward investors, but to transform people’s lives spiritually.  Just because board members have experience in the “real world” doesn’t mean they understand the unique dynamics inside a congregation.

*Many people in a church view their congregation more as a family than a business.  Their relationships … including their relationship with the pastor … are on their frontal lobes far more than the church’s budget or buildings.  Most people will view a board-pastor clash negatively … no matter how the board frames it … because it will disrupt that “family feeling.”

*Although pastoral terminations are an increasingly common occurrence in the Christian community, the great majority of churchgoers … including board members … have never experienced the aftermath of a termination before.  They may feel that they can control the narrative and keep everyone in the church united, but they are woefully unprepared for the unpredictable events that happen after the pastor leaves.

For example, I was once thinking about firing a staff member, so I consulted with an experienced pastor.  He told me, “Well, after you let this person go, you’ll have three tough months, and then things will revert to normal.”  But when a board dismisses a pastor, they might experience three tough years … or their church may never recover.

*Outside experts may not know much about “our church” and “our pastor,” but those who have studied even two or three terminations know infinitely more than those who have never experienced even one.

Those who contact me most often are pastors under fire … pastors who have just been terminated … and board members who are having trouble with their pastor – including those who may be thinking about forcing him to resign.

While asking questions about each situation, I am constantly amazed at how many church boards think they know what they’re doing even though they’re only consulting with themselves.

Allow me to share my experience from six-and-a-half years ago.

The conflict I experienced in my last church surfaced in October 2009.  At that time:

*I had been a pastor for 35 1/2 years … 10 1/2 years in that same church.

*I had a longtime interest and passion in church conflict and pastoral termination.

*I had watched three of the pastors I served under as a staff member suffer attacks.  One resigned under fire, while another was voted out of office.

*I had an extensive library on conflict and termination which I knew well … and that library grew significantly when I wrote my doctoral project.

*I had a Doctor of Ministry degree from Fuller Seminary with an emphasis on church conflict.

And yet, in the week following the surfacing of the conflict, I contacted 17 Christian leaders, asking for their counsel … including seminary professors, church consultants, megachurch pastors, and former board chairmen.

Why did I do that?

*I needed to know what was really going on.  I thought I knew, but I wasn’t completely sure.

*I was too close to the situation to see things objectively.  I needed the advice of people who could see both the conflict and my situation dispassionately.

*I needed to know what my next moves should be … and what I shouldn’t do or say.

*I also needed to know what might happen inside the congregation over the next few days.  For example, here’s what I wrote in my book Church Coup about a conversation I had with a church consultant who has since became a mentor:

“Wilson said that when the board met with the staff … that was a serious offense in our state.  If the board had acted in a similar fashion in a secular organization, the aggrieved person could have sued them for millions of dollars. Wilson also asked if I was pastor of the church founded by Norman, and when I confirmed that I was – and that the communication between us had become sparse – he wrote: ‘Does not surprise me on Norman – and I have a hunch that THEY have dialed him in!’ Wilson predicted that if the board resigned, thirty to fifty people would also leave with them, and those who were in touch with the Holy Spirit (especially those with the gift of showing mercy) would later tell me that they knew something was wrong but couldn’t put their finger on it.”

I then recounted another conversation:

“Later that morning, I had a conversation with someone (I’ll call him Richard) who runs a Christian consulting firm. Richard immediately asked me about the personal and vocational lives of the board members. He believed that what was happening in their private lives had a direct bearing on how they were handling church matters. Richard stated that many boards are struggling with three primary issues in our day: they experience fear because God is not big enough for them; they struggle with stewardship because they believe the church is ‘all about us’ and not a lost world; and they struggle with faith. Satan has figured out how to defeat us by using power as an aphrodisiac. Richard suggested that one way we could seek redress was through arbitration.”

Before a church board tries to force their pastor to quit … or fires him outright … they should consult with the following individuals:

*A labor attorney to make sure they’re “dotting their i’s” and “crossing their “t’s” legally.  This should also involve a thorough discussion of any relevant passages on pastor-church conflict in the bylaws.

*A biblical expert … maybe a seminary professor … who can tell them what Scripture does and doesn’t say about terminating a pastor.

*A church consultant who is well-versed in pastoral termination who can (a) help the board decide if the pastor needs to be corrected or fired, and (b) walk the board through how to take action so there is minimal harm done to the pastor, his family, and the congregation.

*Several experienced pastors who either know what it’s like to be under fire or who have undergone termination themselves.  Listening to such pastors will give the board increased sensitivity.

What about denominational executives, like a district minister?

Probably 90% of the time, they’ll side with the board instead of the pastor because (a) they just want the conflict to go away, (b) they don’t have a clue how to resolve matters, and (c) they just want to keep the money flowing from the church to district coffers.

What about contacting a former pastor from that church?

Most boards don’t know about the rivalries and jealousies between pastors from the same church.  For that reason, I don’t recommend this approach.

What about contacting a board member from a church that already terminated a pastor?

If the termination was just and handled thoughtfully … maybe.  But if the termination blew up in the board’s face … why go there?

How about contacting a Christian mediator?

If a board decides to go this route, they need to interview the mediator, and let the pastor interview him as well.  The board cannot force a mediator down the pastor’s throat … and vice versa.

What are the benefits of a board seeking outside counsel?

*The board learns better how pastors think.  For example, pastors are often thinking “outreach,” while board members are thinking “maintenance.”  How tragic to force out a pastor who is just trying to take Christ’s Great Commission seriously.

*The board expands their thinking from “let’s get rid of the pastor” to “we need to keep our church healthy during this process.”

*The board learns about the pitfalls and land mines involved in terminating a pastor.

*The board will hear differing approaches … giving them better options from which to choose.

*The board will learn how their own emotional reactions can blind them to reality.

*The board will learn the importance of giving the pastor a fair and just severance package if they choose termination.

Why don’t boards seek thorough and experienced counsel more often?

*Pride.  They don’t think they need any help.

*Consulting with outsiders takes time, and some board members are so anxious that they just want to get things over with.

*The board usually doesn’t have a budget for seeking outside help, but good counsel isn’t cheap.  Yet spending $5,000 to $10,000 now may save the church hundreds of thousands of dollars over the next few years.

*Many boards are too incompetent to know that they aren’t competent.

Where does God factor into all this?

I left this issue until last because, in my view, many boards that struggle with their pastor don’t consult with God and then do His will … they ask God to bless their decisions and then move full speed ahead.

And that’s why God doesn’t bless them when they move to remove their pastor.  They never asked God what they should do … they told God what they were going to do instead.

Personally, I think much of the time, the board wants to fire the pastor because they aren’t used to praying for him … they’re just used to complaining about him.

But if they really met and prayed for their pastor, do they expect that anything would change?

And if they don’t pray for him, what does that say about them?

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Pastors and Their Successors

Posted in Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Personal Stories, Please Comment!, tagged , , on June 9, 2016| 4 Comments »

“Jim, you have no idea how much you’ve been undermined.”

Those words came from a megachurch pastor who spoke with me via telephone just days after the official board at my last church tried to force my resignation.

This pastor – who had been in contact with one of my strongest church supporters – wanted me to know that the opposition to my ministry ran much deeper than anyone suspected.

Several months later, my wife and I met with this pastor for a three-hour lunch and we began to put together the final pieces of our nightmare.

A second Christian leader backed up everything the megachurch pastor told me, and a few years later, a third Christian leader informed me that the plot against me had been in motion for at least several years.

Who was the primary force behind my eventual ouster?

My predecessor.

In some ways, I was in denial about his part in my leaving because I didn’t want to believe it.

My predecessor and I had been friends for more than a decade.  We were part of a pastors’ group that met monthly for lunch for many years.  We had spoken in each other’s churches and shared meals in each other’s homes.

In the fall of 1998, my predecessor invited me to become his associate pastor with the idea that I might succeed him when he retired.

When I resisted his initial overtures, he suggested that I visit his church anyway.

Since I never sought to go there, I can only conclude that God called me there … a powerful truth that my opponents have always chosen to ignore.

My predecessor and I served together for eighteen months.  I thought our working and personal relationships went very well.

And after he retired, I became the church’s second senior pastor.

Before his retirement, my predecessor and I were walking past a field on the church property one day, and he told me, “That’s where you’re going to build the new worship center.”

I was surprised at how well the handoff went.  Because we worked well together for those eighteen months … and because my predecessor seemed to grant me his blessing … I received little flak during my first few years.  Call it an extended honeymoon.

Until the church grew to the point that we needed more room.  Then we made plans to design, fund, and construct that new worship center.

Even though every vote the church took on the worship center was unanimous … and the congregation had lots of input … two individuals in the inner circle did their best to sabotage the entire project.

And I had factual information they were in contact with my predecessor.

I don’t know why they opposed the new worship center.  The most likely reason is because they didn’t want to make a three-year financial commitment over and above their normal giving and that made them feel left out.

And they weren’t the only ones.  We lost about eight percent of our people during the fundraising stage because while most people were wildly enthusiastic about the project, not everyone wanted the church to expand … and not everyone liked our bringing in a professional fundraising team.

The building program came right at the time I was finishing coursework for my Doctor of Ministry program and preparing to write my doctoral dissertation/final project.

In many ways, it was the perfect time to sabotage my efforts.  I didn’t have the energy to deal with critics because I had to focus and stay on track.

Somewhere around this time, I began having trouble with several members of the church staff.

They either resisted or rebelled against my clear directives … and they were all friends with my predecessor.

Should I have ferreted out the truth?

I chose not to do so … but I kept the board chairman informed.

Another time, I spoke with a Christian leader who knew my predecessor quite well.  When I mentioned the staff sabotage to him, he gave me a three-word warning: “Watch your back.”

Later, someone in the church wrote a bizarre email to one of our staff members suggesting that I needed to hire my predecessor as associate pastor.  I immediately called this individual and spoke with him on the phone, but I began to suspect that my predecessor was telling people that I didn’t know what I was doing and that only he could fix whatever was wrong with the church … even though the great majority of the congregation seemed to think matters were going fine.

One day, about two years before the attack on my leadership surfaced, I went to lunch with my predecessor, and he told me that he had chosen the wrong person to succeed him … even though the church had done very well.

Why tell me that?

For starters, I suspected that when he chose me to follow him, he was hoping that I would consult with him about any issues that I had inside the church.  In this way, he could still have an influence on the ministry.

But I had been in church ministry for twenty-five years when I became pastor … I already had a network of Christian leaders to consult with … and I had a great church board (at the time) to assist me.

I also suspected that he wished to take at least partial credit for any of the good things that were happening in the church.

After all, if I did well … hadn’t he chosen me to be the pastor?

And if we built a worship center … wasn’t that originally his idea?

He may also have been upset that I didn’t invite him to be a frequent guest speaker, though the one time I did invite him, I later regretted it.

But in retrospect, I think he was sending me a veiled warning that he was coming after me.

Several years after I left that church, a well-known Christian leader confessed that my predecessor had told him that he was coming back to the church … at least a few years before the attacks began.

But, of course, I had to leave first.

Sixteen days after the attack upon me surfaced in 2009, I sat in someone’s home and heard the district minister confirm that my predecessor had advised the church board … which was doing all it could to get rid of me … even though I wasn’t guilty of any major offense.

And as I began to piece things together, I noticed that everyone who opposed me was connected to my predecessor.

Everyone.

And I wasn’t a bit surprised.

_______________

Now why bring this up?

The title of this article is not, “Pastors and Their Predecessors.”

It’s “Pastors and Their Successors.”

After I left my church in December 2009, I became a predecessor to the new pastor, who became my successor.

And I had to think carefully about how I was going to treat him:

*Would I undermine his ministry?

*Would I listen to the complaints of staff members?

*Would I encourage people to leave the church?

*Would I try and harm his reputation?

*Would I collaborate with the church board to get rid of him?

In other words, would I do to him what was done to me?

I laid out the blueprint for the way I would treat my successor during my final sermon at the church:

“Sometime soon, a search team will be assembled to find this church a new senior pastor. I don’t know how the team will be chosen, but working on a search team is painstaking work.  Team members will have to listen to and watch lots of sermons, do background and reference work, and put together and review questionnaires.  But eventually, God will bring you a new pastor.  He will do some things better than me and maybe some things worse than me, but most of all, he will be different than me.  Some of you will welcome that, while it might take others time to adjust.  But treat him as well as you did me and he will love you as we have loved you.

“When I leave, I encourage you not to call and complain about the interim pastor or the new senior pastor.  It is a violation of ministerial ethics for me even to listen to such complaints, and besides, what could I possibly do about them?  If you have a problem with any of your new leaders, speak to them directly, but please don’t involve me.  And I won’t be able to return for a wedding or a funeral because you will have your own pastor, and he should be the one to conduct those services.”

I stand behind every word you’ve just read.

Based on this outline, let me share five principles as to how a pastor should treat his successor:

First, determine to know as little as possible about what’s happening at the church.

I know the current pastor’s first name.  In all honesty, I don’t remember his last name.

I don’t know what he looks like.  I never visit the church website.  I have never heard him preach.

The church’s name and location are the same, but beyond that, I’ve been told that I wouldn’t recognize the church if I visited … which I never will.

I won’t even visit the city where the church is located.

I served at the church from 1999-2009.  God blessed us wildly during that time.  Our work stands.

But after I left, God did not want me to influence the church in any way … and I haven’t.

Second, defend the pastor against any criticism that comes your way.

When the pastor first came to the church, some people wrote and told me gingerly that they were struggling with the way he did things.

I encouraged everyone to stay at the church and do their best to support him.

Sometimes I’d hear things and I’d ask myself, “What in the world is going on there?”

But if I weigh in with my opinion, and someone adopts my view and things go south, haven’t I undermined the ministry there?

And what right do I have to do that?

My wife and I may discuss the church on occasion, but what passes between us stays between us.

Third, stay out of the church’s inner circle.

I had a couple of friends in the church’s inner circle after I left, and I hope we’re still friends, but I haven’t used our friendship to criticize the pastor or to sabotage the ministry.

If the current church board called me and wanted to complain to me about their pastor … a scenario that would rightly never happen … I would tell them, “You’re talking to the wrong person.  Talk directly with your pastor first.  Consult with a conflict manager or a church interventionist next.  But I am the last person you should talk to about your pastor.  It’s unethical for me to be involved, and I won’t do it.”

Everybody already knows that’s how I feel, which is why nobody in the inner circle has ever solicited my counsel.

Fourth, keep a few friendships but try not to discuss the church.

I’ve kept friendships from nearly every church I’ve ever served.  That’s normal.

If a friend left the church where we served together, I’m comfortable sharing what I think about something as long as I sense that the discussion stays between us.

If a friend is still attending that church … and more than 90% of my friends from the last church have moved on … then I don’t want to discuss their ministry at all.

I don’t even want to hear anything about the church from current churchgoers.

Those old emotions – good or bad – can return in a heartbeat, and I just don’t have time for them anymore.

Finally, realize that the way you treat your successor is the way you will ultimately be treated.

Where do we find that in Scripture?

This is a valid application of Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:1-2: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.  For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”

If I’m harsh on my successor, then some people will be harsh with me.

If I’m gracious toward my successor, I can expect the same treatment.

_______________

I once met a pastor who retired from ministry and then stayed in the same church as a parishioner.

Eight years later, he was consumed with frustration at his successor.

In fact, he made an appointment with his current pastor and really gave it to him … and was proud of how he handled things.

Why didn’t he just leave and find another church?

I have no idea … but he should have left.

The single best verse in Scripture concerning pastors and their successors is found in John 3:30.

John the Baptist says about Jesus: “He must increase, but I must decrease.”

John wasn’t just saying in a pietistic tone, “There should be more of Jesus and less of me in my life.”

No, he was saying, “It’s time for Jesus’ ministry to increase … and it’s time for my ministry to decrease.”

Every pastor who leaves a church should utter the same words about his successor:

“He must increase … I must decrease.”

And based on my experience, they should say those words every day.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Showdown at the Denominational Convention

Posted in Church Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , , on June 2, 2016| 4 Comments »

This past weekend, while doing some work around the house, I was plagued by some ministry memories I thought I had long forgotten.

But the more I tried to push them down, the more they flooded my soul, and the only way I know to be rid of them is to write them down and share them.

So here goes …

Nearly 30 years ago, I pastored a church in Santa Clara, California … the heart of Silicon Valley, south of the San Francisco Bay.

Early in 1988, my all-time worst antagonist … a man I’ll call Bob … had returned to the church after a year’s absence.  He ended up leading a rebellion against me for two primary reasons: he and his wife didn’t like our change in worship music (which the board unanimously supported) and some of the seniors griped to Bob that I didn’t care about them (if you knew them, you’d understand).

About twenty percent of the congregation ended up following Bob out of our church.

Rather than attend existing churches in the area, those refugees formed their own congregation in a school about a mile from our property … and used our church as their sole mission field.

A pastor who had left his church due to moral failure ended up doing a lot of guest speaking at that new church.

Even though their attendance was meager, Bob contacted the district minister with the stated goal of having his new church admitted both into the district and the denomination.

When I found out about Bob’s intent, I told the district minister, “If you recognize that renegade church, we will pull our church out of the district.”

And I meant it.

It just so happened that the denomination’s annual meetings were being held at the new Santa Clara Convention Center that June … just a few miles from our church … and my wife Kim had volunteered to lead the early childhood program.

I chose to serve with my wife and to help with her program for the upcoming annual meetings.

The festivities opened on a Wednesday night, and the facilities were spectacular.  The early childhood program was located on the second floor, and that’s where I stayed that first night.

But someone quickly brought me some bad news.

Bob was in the lobby of the convention center handing out literature to pastors and delegates inviting them to his new church!

This was a complete breach of protocol.  It just wasn’t done.  The meetings were all about churches as a whole, not any one church in particular.  Nobody went to the annual meetings and publicized their church at the expense of others.

Those who brought me this news also told me that Bob was not only publicizing his church, but taking verbal shots at me … the pastor of the only denominational church in Santa Clara … while I was serving God in a room upstairs.

Later that day, I found our district minister and asked him what he was going to do about Bob’s breach of protocol.

His reply?

“What can I do?  I don’t have the authority to do anything.”

As far as I was concerned, that was the wrong answer.

I spoke with several of my pastoral colleagues, and they were appalled that Bob was passing out literature about his church … and that the district leadership was allowing it to happen.

Finally, a long-time pastor scooped up all of Bob’s literature (he wasn’t in the lobby at the time) … threw it out … came to me … and slapped his hands together as if to say, “That will take care of that.”

I don’t know how Bob reacted when he discovered that his literature had disappeared.  Maybe he blamed me … maybe not.

But that incident is a microcosm of how denominations treat pastors when they’re assaulted by conflict:

First, many denominational leaders secretly hope that certain pastors and churches fail.

Bob was a formidable opponent.  He wanted to turn our church back to the 1940s and 1950s.

I couldn’t reason with him, and neither could anyone on our board.  He was a bully, and he was going to attack me until I resigned.

Several months before, my district minister had even recommended that I quit because of Bob’s attacks.

But I didn’t leave.  I stayed … forcing Bob and his minions to depart instead.

I couldn’t figure out why my district minister wasn’t more supportive … until a pastoral colleague clued me into what was really happening.

My friend told me that district leaders wanted both me and our church to fail so they could take over the property … sell it … and use much of the proceeds to plant new churches.

Most denominational churches insert a clause into their governing documents that states that if the church dissolves, the property reverts to the denomination.

Although our church property sat on less than two acres, land in Silicon Valley at that time sold for one million dollars per acre.

What better way to secure a windfall than to force me out and take over the church?

If you’re skeptical that denominational officials do things like this, let me assure you … they do.

And in my case, I’m positive that’s what was happening.

Second, many denominational leaders claim they lack the ecclesiastical authority to resolve conflicts involving pastors.

This is precisely what my district minister told me: “I don’t have the authority to take any action toward Bob.”

Fine … maybe the DM didn’t have any official authority to deal with him.

Many denominational executives claim that they can’t interfere in the life of a congregation because churches are autonomous … that is, they govern themselves without any outside interference.

But let me tell you … when a district minister wants to interfere in a church situation and get rid of a pastor … he will.

My district minister at that time went back to his previous church, advised the board on how to get rid of their current pastor, and was present when the board demanded the pastor’s resignation.

Not only was it a total breach of ethics, he was also violating that church’s autonomy by interfering … and his influence led to a lawsuit.

In my case, I wanted someone to exercise moral and spiritual authority.

After all, what good is ecclesiastical authority if it doesn’t translate into moral and spiritual decisions?

Thank God, several of my fellow pastors did take action against Bob’s sabotage efforts … and I was grateful for their courage.

But if you’re looking for principled action, look away from the district office … because denominations are far more political than they are spiritual.

Finally, many denominational leaders are more interested in building their denomination than advancing Christ’s kingdom. 

This was certainly true in our district.

I went to Talbot Seminary (now School of Theology), a non-denominational school.  While there, I gravitated toward books written by British scholars like John Stott, J. I. Packer, Michael Green, F. F. Bruce, and D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones.

Those guys were my heroes.

I tried to think broadly, read widely, and view Christ’s kingdom internationally.

But when I started becoming involved with my church’s denomination, I was appalled at how narrow their thinking was.

For example, I served for several years on the district’s education committee.  One day, I asked the chairman if I could invite Pastor Chuck Smith from Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa to speak to the pastors in our district.  (I knew a pastor on that committee who was saved at one of Calvary’s concerts.)

At the time, Calvary Chapel may have been the largest church in the United States, and certainly was among the most influential churches anywhere in the world.

One of my best friends worked at Calvary with Pastor Chuck and I thought it would be great to have someone from outside the denomination talk about leadership.

My friend asked Chuck if he would speak for us, and Chuck said yes, so I went back to the chairman of the committee to deliver the news.

The chairman asked a district official if Chuck could come and speak.  The official said that Chuck couldn’t come because there were plenty of denominational personnel who could speak to the leaders without going outside our own group.

Pretty lame excuse, if you ask me.

That same district official later criticized me for going to Talbot even though choosing a denomination wasn’t even on my radar when I selected a seminary to attend.

A lot of pastors at this point might say, “Okay, this group may identify its denomination with the kingdom of God, and they’re obviously mistaken, but I’ll suck it up, play the game, schmooze the right people, and maybe move up the ladder someday.”

But I can’t do that.

My wife and I have been watching the TV show Blue Bloods on Netflix.  If you haven’t seen it, Tom Selleck plays Frank Reagan, the police commissioner of New York City.  (And if you aren’t aware of this, Reagan’s family openly talks about their Catholic faith and often says grace before eating … a rarity on television.)

When faced with a dilemma, Reagan always wants to do the right thing.  He always chooses principles over politics.  He hates phoniness … meaningless social events… and speaks his mind at all times.

That’s me … and that’s why I resonate with Frank Reagan so well.

But I was never comfortable in my denomination.  I was the wrong ethnicity … went to the wrong seminary … thought outside the box … and could not turn a blind ear to wrongdoing.

Many years ago, that district was holding a meeting one Saturday at my best friend’s church.  I dutifully put on my suit (this was the early 1990s), got in my car, and drove down the expressway toward the church.

About a mile down the road, I thought to myself, “I hate these meetings.  I don’t want to go … so why am I going?”

I turned around … went home … and never went to another one again.

My wife applauded me.  She said, “You always come back from those meetings depressed.”

She was right … and I hate being depressed.

Fast forward 15 years.

In our last church, out of 400 adults, only seven people cared about our church’s affiliation with that denomination.  Only seven.

One night, at a board meeting, a board member asked me what it would take to leave the denomination.

I told him that I didn’t want that to happen on my watch.

My wife later told me, “You made a mistake.  You should have taken the church out.”

She repeated that same sentiment to me this past weekend.

But I didn’t want to do it.  I thought I could just ignore them indefinitely.

When major conflict surfaced in my church in 2009, I discovered that my former district minister – who never once contacted me personally over a five-year period – was integrally involved in getting rid of me … even though he liked to claim, “I can’t interfere in local church conflicts.”

My wife was right … I should have led the church out of the denomination years before.

If I had, maybe I’d still be a pastor today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Accountable Pastors, Unaccountable Boards

Posted in Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , on May 26, 2016| Leave a Comment »

A pastor friend recently send me his thoughts after an article I wrote on pastor-board conflict:

“I understand that the pastor has to have some level of accountability and I agree that this needs to be in place however; where is the level of accountability for the board??!!!  Why does the board get such freedom to govern as they see fit, and the pastor bend at their beckoning call?  When I first came into ministry 14 years ago, I was an idealist and wanted to touch lives, help as many people as I could, and set the world on fire for Jesus.  I still have fire for Jesus, but my flame for what happens behind the scenes in churches has grown very dim.  What I have discovered in my pastoral career is pastors who go into a pastorate full of desire and passion, many times must go through a board to get permission to do things in ministry.  The pastor may be the public figure, but the board runs the church with little to no accountability!!”

I’ve thought long and hard about this issue since my friend sent me his comments.  Here are five thoughts on this issue:

First, every church leader needs to be accountable to someone outside his/her group.

This means that:

*a ministry team leader should be accountable to a pastor … a staff member … or a board member.

*a staff member should be accountable to a higher-ranking staffer or the lead pastor.

*the pastor should report to someone … presumably the official board.  (If you want a miniscule church or a church split, make the pastor directly accountable to the congregation.)

*the board should account to another person/group as well, possibly depending upon who selected the board members.

When Paul laid out the qualifications for overseers/elders in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9, he meant for Timothy and Titus to select those leaders.

In our day, that’s probably the equivalent of the lead pastor choosing the board members, which seems awkward because then he’s choosing his own supervisors!

As pastor, I always had veto power over board candidates, and used it often, though I probably let a few slip through the cracks that I shouldn’t have.

But churches ruled by congregational government usually vote on or verify the board members in an annual election.  It’s almost always a rubber stamp because I’ve never heard of any board candidate being voted down.  Most people simply don’t know enough about the leaders who are nominated to reject them … a flaw in our systems.

Second, this “accountability system” doesn’t work in actual practice for official boards.

I served in eight churches over a 36-year period in churches that espoused congregational government.

*The pastor was always accountable to the official board.

In my case, I submitted a written report to the board at every monthly meeting for years and years.  I knew that I was accountable to the board for all that I said and did.  If a board member had an issue with me, they knew they could speak with me directly or ask me a question in the presence of the other board members.  Because I kept the board current on my decisions and activities, I never had major problems with any boards until my last year in church ministry.

*The staff were always accountable to the lead pastor or the associate.

When I had just one or two staff members, they were always accountable directly to me as pastor.  When I had as many as ten staff members, most were still accountable directly to me, although I later asked several staffers to report to the associate pastor … a mistake on my part.

*The board was accountable to the congregation on paper … but rarely if ever reported anything to the church body as a whole … which gradually makes them feel as if they’re accountable to no one but themselves.

Third, the lack of board accountability is likely a major reason why so many pastors are forced out of office in our congregations today.

Think about this: who should the official board in a church account to?

Possible answers:

*Some might say, “The board is directly accountable to God Himself.”

But then why can’t the pastor be directly accountable to God as well?  As Pastor Chuck Smith from Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa used to ask pastors, “Who do you work for … the Lord or the board?”

But knowing human nature, most Christian leaders would say, “Since pastors occasionally go off track, they require immediate human accountability as well as ultimate divine accountability.”

If pastors require some level of human accountability, shouldn’t board members as well?

*Some might say, “Individual board members should be accountable to each other or to the board as a whole.”

But then why can’t staff members be accountable to each other rather than the pastor?  And why can’t the youth pastor account to other staff members rather than the lead pastor?

This might work at first, but over time … if board members are only accountable to themselves … they’ll go off the rails … no matter how “spiritual” they are.

All too many do.

*Some might say, “The official board should account to the congregation as a whole.”

And I agree.

And yet … this is either done rarely or poorly in churches with congregational government.

Why is this the case?

In most of my ministries, I as pastor became the official spokesperson for the board in public.  So when the board made a decision behind closed doors, I either volunteered or was assigned the duty of sharing that decision with our church family.

Sometimes I’d do that during the announcements on Sunday morning … or through an all-church email or letter … or through a handout in the Sunday bulletin.

Much of the time, I was more articulate than the chairman in public … and I had authority and credibility than most board members lacked.

But by always reporting board decisions to the church as a whole, I made a huge mistake … one that most pastors make:

My actions did not communicate to the congregation that the official board was accountable to the church as a whole.

Let’s say that the board decided that all greeters and ushers had to wear yellow shirts every Sunday, and that they wanted me as pastor to announce that decision during the next worship service.

Even if I said, “If you have any questions or comments about this decision, please contact one of our board members,” many people would be more likely to approach me because I’m the one who made the announcement.

It’s like I had an unspoken pact with the board: “You decide … I’ll announce.”

But in my mind, that seemingly insignificant pattern sends a strong message: the church board is not obligated to report their decisions to the congregation.

And that’s the problem, isn’t it?

Fourth, the presumption is that since there is only one lead pastor along with multiple board members, there’s a check-and-balance system already built into board proceedings.

But I would strongly dispute this argument because without their pastor, church boards sometimes make horrendous decisions.

Ten years ago, I took a sabbatical for six weeks, and spent an entire month in Europe.

While I was gone, something unexpected happened at church, and two staff members went to the church board with a proposal that I would not have approved.

I wasn’t around to consult, so the board made a decision … the wrong one, in my view … and when I returned home, I had to try and undo the damage that was created … but my intervention-after-the-fact ultimately made things worse … even though I handled the situation as well as possible.

I’m not saying that church boards can’t make good decisions without their pastor, but they will always make better decisions with him than without him.

But when the board tries to make decisions about their pastor in secret … and without his wisdom and experience … their decisions may be based on business experience or raw emotion (think hatred or revenge) rather than Scripture or the church’s governing documents.

For that reason … and I’m just guessing here … I’d put it this way:

*When the pastor and board make decisions together, they have a 90% success rate.

*When the board makes decisions without their pastor, they have less than a 50% success rate.

Add to that last statement a couple of spiritually immature members … a degree of high anxiety … pressure from influential or wealthy churchgoers … and the feeling of, “If we get rid of the pastor, we’re in charge of the church now!” … and you can see how many church boards can slip into “termination thinking” without knowing the pitfalls ahead.

Finally, there are three possible solutions to the issue of board accountability:

*The board needs to make every decision in conjunction with their pastor.

Not the associate pastor … not a former pastor … not another church’s pastor … but their own pastor.

But if their pastor is guilty of a major offense, then it’s appropriate for them to meet without the pastor and consult outside Christian leaders – at least five, in my view – so the board doesn’t cherry pick someone they know will agree with them.

There is safety in multiple counselors.

*The board is accountable to a Conflict Resolution Group (call them the CRG) for the way they choose to handle conflict … especially anything involving the lead pastor.

I’ve made the case for this in articles over the past few weeks, but the CRG should serve as a watchdog concerning the process that the board uses whenever they engage in conflict management with the pastor, staff, or congregation.

*The board needs to report as many decisions as possible to the congregation as a whole.

In many churches, this is done on an annual basis through a verbal or written report, but this simply isn’t adequate.

If the pastor has to account to the board at every meeting – usually monthly – then why does the board only have to account to the congregation once a year?  Doesn’t that disparity lend itself to abuse?

If board members don’t interact with churchgoers regularly, they will be woefully out of touch, and in effect, minimize their chances of making God-blessed decisions.

Instead, the board should publish edited copies of their agenda before a meeting … and their minutes (edited) after a meeting … to anyone and everyone who wants a copy.  (Some boards post this information on a bulletin board, but I think it’s better nowadays to send the information via email to those who request it.)

Board members also need to publish their email addresses and let people know that they will read and respond to churchgoer concerns promptly.

The very act of being accountable on a monthly basis will keep board members on their ecclesiastical toes … help take stress off the pastor … and make for a more harmonious and productive church.

And if the board ever has to dismiss the pastor, they will already have a delivery system in place for reporting to the congregation.

There is nothing worse than a board never reporting to the congregation for a year or more … and then trying to establish accountability when they announce that the pastor has left the church.

This is one reason why all hell breaks loose after a pastor leaves: the board doesn’t have a track record of credibility with the congregation.

And what many, many boards do … sad to say … is to lie about the pastor … and destroy his reputation … as a way of covering up how badly they handled the conflict.

I’d love for what I’ve written to be the beginning of an honest conversation with my readers.

What works and doesn’t work for you in what I’ve written?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

When Church Leaders Give Little

Posted in Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , on May 19, 2016| Leave a Comment »

Pastor Ken had just discovered something that he didn’t want to know: most of the members of Joy Church’s governing board were giving little or nothing to the ministry.

And that information not only broke Ken’s heart … it made him angry.

It all started one July day when Amy, the church’s office manager, was supposed to mail out the giving records of every person in the church for the first six months of the year.  The records were supposed to be in the mail by Friday so that churchgoers would have them in their possession by the end of the month.

But it was now Thursday, and Amy called Pastor Ken to say that she was out sick with a fever and probably wouldn’t be in on Friday, either.  Wanting to run an efficient church, Ken thought for a moment and asked his good friend Steve, a trusted staff member, if he would step in and put the giving statements in the mail by late that afternoon.

Ken could have dropped everything and mailed the statements himself, but two things stopped him: first, he needed to devote the rest of the day to preparing his sermon for Sunday, and second, he had always promised himself – and others – that he would never know who gave how much to the church.

During the course of that Thursday, Ken poked his head into the office several times and asked Steve how things were going.  Each time, Steve responded, “Pastor, folding the statements and putting them into envelopes is going fine, but sometimes I can’t help but notice how much people are giving to the ministry here, and it’s extremely disheartening.  Many of the leaders, who have great jobs, are giving next to nothing, while some with little income seem to be giving much more generously.”

Although he didn’t want to go there, Steve’s statement piqued Ken’s curiosity.

Years before, in another church, Ken wanted to know about the giving patterns of the church’s regular attendees, so he asked the financial secretary to make a list for him.  Down the first column, Ken asked that each giving unit in the church be assigned a number so he wouldn’t know their names.  Then he asked for 12 more columns: one for each month of the year, accompanied by how much money each unit gave every month.

Ken still shudders when he recalls the giving patterns in that church family.   He noticed that many families gave nothing during January – presumably because they were paying off their credit cards after Christmas – and that others gave virtually nothing during June, July, and August – most likely because they were financing their summer vacations with at least some of their regular giving.

When Ken received that information, he remembered a story a pastor friend had told him years before.  Ken had been asked to be a guest speaker at a church, and before he went, his pastor friend told him, “You’re visiting a church where the pastor discovered that 35 members were giving a total of $50.00 per week to that ministry!  The pastor exposed those non-givers and they were all voted out of membership.”

While Ken thought that approach was going too far, he thought to himself, “This is why I’ve never wanted to know how much money people give to the ministry.  I’m human, and I’m afraid it would impact the way I view them.”

Ken tried to put his disappointment aside that Saturday, and he preached his heart out the following day, although many people were gone on vacation.

But after the second service, as Ken was preparing to go home, the financial secretary walked up to him, handed him a sealed envelope, and told him, “You need to see this.”

Ken waited until he got in his car before he opened the envelope.  To his surprise, he had been handed the giving records of every board member and staff member for the first half of the year … and what he saw tore him up inside.

On the one hand, the staff members were giving very generously.  In fact, when Ken got home, he did the math, and the staff were outgiving the board by a three-to-one ratio.

But of the nine board members, six were giving virtually nothing to the church.  Out of those six, three had each given a total of $150 for those first six months … almost as if their donations had been coordinated … and one was giving just $20 per week.  Three others were giving regularly … one generously … but Ken was obsessed with those six non-givers.

The next day was Monday, and Ken took an early and expanded lunch.  He needed time to think.  Now that he knew how little the board members were giving, what did it all mean?

Ken came to four conclusions:

First, the non-givers were not spiritual individuals. 

Didn’t Paul tell Timothy in 1 Timothy 3:3 that an overseer should not be “a lover of money?”  Didn’t Peter write in 1 Peter 5:2 that a church elder/leader should not be “greedy for money?”

Ken knew there was a direct correlation between spirituality and giving … that those who give to God are putting Him first, and must trust Him to take care of their needs … and that those who don’t give are often confessing that money means more to them than God.  Didn’t Jesus say we can’t serve two masters?

Ken believed strongly that spiritual leaders … including pastors, staff, and official board members … need to be examples rather than exceptions.

This was true for church attendance … serving in ministries … and giving financially.

Once or twice every year, Ken preached on biblical giving, and when he did, he told his congregation that he and his wife had tithed for years, and if anyone wanted proof, they could come up to him after the service and he would show them his checkbook.

Ken assumed that when he did that, the staff and board members could stand right there with him and do the same thing … but now he knew that most of the board members couldn’t … not because they didn’t make enough money, but because they weren’t spiritual enough.

And yet, by virtue of their position on the board, everyone assumed they were.

Second, the non-givers were not behind the church’s mission or Ken’s ministry.

In his mind, Ken wasn’t giving to keep the doors of his church open.  He was giving to a mission, not an institution.

But by the same token, those non-giving board members were silently saying, “We do not stand behind our mission or our pastor.”

Ken remembered one email he received from the person who volunteered to head up the refreshment ministry.  This person told Ken that a board member had approached her the previous Sunday and said, “The budget for refreshments is gone for the year, so there’s no more money for food between services.”

This information startled Ken because the board had never made such a decision … and because he knew the person serving refreshments was funding the ministry entirely from her own pocket.

To Ken, that refreshment ministry was vital, because guests would stay after the service … enjoy a treat … talk with Ken or other staff members … and be invited to return.  Much of the church’s outreach was facilitated by those conversations around the refreshment tables.

Ken believed that money was just a tool to fulfill the church’s mission, but he was now discovering that for most board members, money assumed a far greater importance.

Third, those stingy board members were impacting the giving of others … directly or indirectly.

Ken and his wife had determined early in their ministry that they would tithe ten percent of their income … on the gross, not the net … because they wanted God to bless the gross, not just the net.  And although they had gone through many hard times, the Lord had been faithful, so they never stopped giving.

Ken and his wife were giving around 12% of their income … well over a thousand dollars … on a monthly basis.  He assumed that the nine board members were right there with him … but now he knew that most of them weren’t.

The church was going through a hard time financially, and Ken wondered why.  But now he knew that if all the board members gave generously, the shortfall would be wiped out in no time.

Years before, Ken had learned that “like produces like” … that the lifestyle patterns of church leaders eventually rub off on much of the congregation.

So even though the non-giving board members assumed that no one knew what they gave to the ministry, their stingy stances were bound to impact the congregation through their attitudes, conversations and decisions.

Finally, Ken now understood why the board wanted to cut back on spending rather than expand the income base.

Ken’s bent was to “grow the ministry.”  He believed that when the church was trusting God and taking risks, people would be attracted to the church, and they would eventually become givers.

For most of that year, the board’s bent was to “cut the budget.”  They didn’t even consider growing more givers.  They just wanted to keep trimming the spending.

Ken knew that the non-givers … who outnumbered the givers two to one … would always vote to cut back spending because they didn’t want to increase their giving to the church.

If they were all tithing, that would have been one thing … but only one-third of them were even in the ballpark.  In fact, what Ken was giving to the ministry amounted to more than what any seven members combined were giving.

So most of the board members wanted to shrink spending … and cut the budget … so they could maintain their own meager giving patterns.

During that time, Ken endured long board meetings where the board’s mindset was, “Don’t spend money … don’t try anything new … don’t take risks.”

Ken couldn’t live like that.  He knew that mindset would send the church into maintenance mode, and the church would begin a death spiral.

While sitting at a budget planning meeting several months later, Ken listened to various board members and their gloomy financial scenarios, and it began to dawn on him.

The board was no longer following his leadership.

Ken also wondered if some or all of the non-givers weren’t contributing so they could squeeze him out as pastor by claiming that his ministry wasn’t producing enough income.

Suddenly, Ken realized that the information he had providentially acquired was not only a sign that the board wasn’t behind the mission, but that his ministry at Joy Church was in jeopardy.

And Ken was right.  The following month, the board covertly initiated a plan to push out their pastor … and let the biggest non-giver become their leader.

How do you interpret what happened to Pastor Ken?

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Strengthening Your Church’s Immune System, Part 2

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , on May 11, 2016| 1 Comment »

How much do you like to play chess?

One summer, between eighth and ninth grades, I played 97 games of chess with an older friend.  As I recall, I won 49, he won 45, and there were three stalemates.

Since he was in the high school chess club and knew all my tricks, I had to prepare myself for long games, which meant that I had to learn how to set up a defense to protect my key pieces, especially the King and Queen.

In the same way, a church needs to learn how to protect their pastor(s) from attack, and to prepare a long-term defense plan.

In my last article, I mentioned five ways that church leaders can protect their church from the inevitability of internal conflicts.  (You can access that article by clicking on the green link above and to the left of the title.)

Let me share the last five ways with you:

HOW CAN YOU STRENGTHEN THE IMMUNE SYSTEM OF YOUR CHURCH?

Sixth, create a special document that specifies how to handle conflicts with the pastor (Matt. 18:15-17; 1 Tim. 5:19-21).

Most churches lack this document.  If your church decides to create a Conflict Resolution Group, this could be among their first assignments.

It should be biblically-based, conform to labor law, be consistent with the church’s governing documents, and aim to treat the pastor fairly and justly.

If an individual, a leader, or a group in the church makes accusations against a pastor, the governing board should determine the severity of the charges:

*Forgive citations: these are petty, personal issues people have with the pastor (Prov. 19:11; Matt. 23:23-24).  The board should say, “This is such a silly charge that you either need to forgive the pastor, pray for him, or let this go.  We won’t pursue this any more.”  The great majority of accusations against a pastor fall into this “citation” category.

*Confront misdemeanors: this is where the pastor hurt or offended someone personally or where he committed a minor offense while carrying out his ministry (Luke 17:3-4).  The proper way to deal with a minor offense is to speak with the pastor directly about it.

*Investigate felonies: this involves serious charges against the pastor, especially involving heresy, sexual immorality, or criminal behavior (Deut. 19:15-21).

If the pastor is accused of a felony, the board should do an investigation and (a) gather evidence; (b) meet with witnesses; and (c) decide if the charges are legitimate or illegitimate.

If they are illegitimate, the accusers should ask the pastor for forgiveness or leave the church, and the board should insist on this.  If the pastor’s accusers don’t admit they’re wrong, they’ll just create more charges down the road.

If they appear to be legitimate, the board should set up a meeting between the accusers and the pastor.  The pastor must be allowed to face his accusers.

Once this meeting is held, the board must decide the future of the pastor and his accusers in the congregation. Aim for restoration first (Gal. 6:1), removal last.

Seventh, remind leaders that conflict is likely to break out at certain predictable times:

Much of the time in church life, the pastor and staff know that conflict will surface at specific times.  For example:

*When the pastor/leaders are initiating change.  This is because church leaders have taken a long time to study the changes but they haven’t allowed enough time for people to share feedback and adjust to the changes themselves.

*Easter/Christmas seasons.  This is primarily because everyone wants their church to look good on the major Christian holidays and this causes people to become highly anxious.  It’s also because people bring their own personal stress over the holiday to church.

*Budget time.  This is because the annual church budget determines a church’s values and priorities (“Oh no, the youth ministry budget got slashed while the pastor’s slush fund was doubled”) and because people become anxious about the church’s ability to reach their targeted income.

*When changing the worship service.  Despite the fact that the New Testament never mentions even one Sunday morning worship service … and therefore, churches are free in the Lord to plan their own … some people will react negatively and emotionally to any change that they and their friends do not like.

*The addition of a new generation.  How many churches have made specific plans to reach Millennials?  What is your church doing to reach them?  Just think about the changes you’d have to make … and envision the conflict those changes would provoke.

*The addition or removal of staff.  “Why did we hire him?  I don’t like the guy.”  “Why did they let Pastor Brian go?  He was always very nice to me.”  Those statements alone speak volumes as to how churchgoers view staff members.  While I loved adding new staff, I hated letting anybody go because most of the fallout would be directed at me as pastor.

*When the church is shrinking.  This is because people don’t want to invest their time, energy, and money in a sinking ship … and because some will pin the blame for decline on one person: the lead pastor.

*When the church is growing.  This may sound surprising, but many pastors are ousted because they were too successful.  Many churchgoers … especially long-time leaders … would rather be large fish in a small pond than smaller fish in a larger pond.  And when they discover that some of their power is to be shared or taken away by new people, they often rebel.

Eight, practice openness about official church matters while maintaining confidentiality concerning the issues in people’s lives (1 Cor. 1:10-17; 3:1-9; 6:12-19).

During a major conflict, church leaders usually stay tight-lipped and say little or nothing to churchgoers about what’s happening.

But I believe that leaders should share as much as they can, not as little as possible, because as the saying goes, you are as sick as your secrets.

*Your church should have at least one congregational/business meeting annually.  The purpose of this meeting is for the church to vote on new board members and next year’s budget.

*Your congregation should also schedule periodic informational meetings (like a town hall meeting) where the pastor and church leaders can provide updates and receive feedback without the pressure of any voting.  Two meetings a year sounds reasonable.

*The pastor, staff, and board should be transparent with church members about everything that involves the church as an institution: attendance, weekly giving, the budget, and policies. Membership has its privileges.

*Everyone in the church should know how to contact the key leaders.  Their pictures should be on a wall someplace, and their email addresses should be published.

*The church board should report to the congregation in some fashion as often as the lead pastor has to report to the board.  You can’t have an accountable pastor and an unaccountable board.  It’s a scenario for disaster.

I learned this adage for church leaders from Dr. Archibald Hart: “We don’t have secrets, we do keep confidences.”

Ninth, practice periodic “conflict drills.”

My wife and I run a preschool in our home, and once a month, we have to do a fire drill.  (In fact, we just did one within the past hour!)  When the alarm sounds, the children must exit through the front door … even if they have one shoe on and one shoe off … and walk to the fire hydrant along the rim of our cul-de-sac as a meeting place.

In the same way, a pastor and a governing board should run one or two “conflict drills” every year … unannounced … so both parties can evaluate how they handle conflict.

Here’s an example:

*A board member hears that several church leaders are openly complaining about the pastor.

*The board member contacts the complainer and says: “If you are upset about policy matters, please speak with anyone who made the policy (usually board members). If you are upset with the pastor personally, please speak with him directly, pray for him, or let it go.  Otherwise, we’re not going to entertain your complaints.”

*The board determines the severity of the complaint (citation, misdemeanor, felony) and acts accordingly.

*Consult with the Conflict Resolution Group and make sure that the ten principles and the governing documents are followed.

*The pastor must be allowed to face his accusers.

*The pastor/board contacts (a) a church consultant; (b) a conflict manager; (c) a Christian mediator; (d) a denominational executive for counsel.

*The board makes a decision and announces it to the appropriate parties.

Create your own steps if you’d prefer, but I believe that periodic conflict drills can be a lifesaver for a congregation.

Tenth, implement these five biblical principles for preventing church conflict:

*Talk directly to those you’re upset with rather than telling others about them (Prov. 11:13; 16:28; 18:8; 20:19; 1 Tim. 3:11; 5:13; James 4:11-12; 3 John 9-10).

*Share your frustrations with the appropriate spiritual leader rather than complaining indiscriminately (Num. 14:1-4; Luke 15:1-2; Phil. 2:14; Jude 16).

*Refuse to allow people to drag you into a dispute between two parties (called “triangulation”) (Luke12:13-14; 22:1-6).

*Deal with offenses as they arise rather than collecting them and dumping them on someone (called “gunnysacking”) all at once (Matt. 18:15; 1 Cor. 13:5; Eph. 4:26-27).

*Report those who attack and conspire against church leaders (Rom. 16:17; Titus 3:10-11).

Since implementing any or all of these ten immune system strengtheners is a lot of work, a pastor would be well-served to implement one or two of them every year.

If the pastor doesn’t initiate ideas like these, when a major conflict surfaces – especially if the pastor is attacked – the law of the jungle is likely to take effect.

Depending upon the level of emotion involved, people may choose sides … define enemies … ignore Scripture … and do anything and everything to remove their pastor from office.

In the process, the church will be destroyed for the foreseeable future, and can only survive intact if there’s a resurrection years later.  Not pretty.

Which of my suggestions resonate with you?

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Strengthening Your Church’s Immune System, Part 1

Posted in Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with Church Staff, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , on May 5, 2016| Leave a Comment »

I recently conducted a workshop at the Christian Leadership Training Association Convention in Pasadena, California, on the topic, “Strengthening Your Church’s Immune System.”

DSCN1903

The goal of my workshop was to present ten practical ideas designed to prevent most conflicts in Christian churches.

A severe conflict can damage a church, its leaders, and its people for years.  The trauma of a major conflict wreaks havoc with personal relationships, church budgets, pastoral careers, and spiritual lives.

So long before a church experiences serious conflict, the pastor and church leaders should discern, model, teach, and implement healthy, biblical behaviors for resolving differences.

And the best way to manage and resolve conflicts in churches is to prevent them before they escalate.

For a church to grow today, a pastor must initiate change … which involves taking risks … which provokes anxiety in some people … which leads to complaining … which usually focuses on the pastor … which can lead to antagonism, plots, secret meetings, accusations, demands, threats, church splits, forced resignations, and ultimately, a decimated congregation.

I believe that pastors must implement these strategies over time to protect their churches form internal attacks – as well as the pastoral position – or a major conflict can wipe out a congregation for years.

HOW CAN YOU STRENGTHEN THE IMMUNE SYSTEM OF YOUR CHURCH?

First, identify and communicate why your church exists and where it is going.

Many of the conflicts I experienced in my first ten years of pastoral ministry were related to our church’s direction … or lack thereof.  I had a mental picture of where I wanted those churches to go but I didn’t articulate it clearly and concisely, and consequently, major conflict resulted on two occasions.

Your mission is your church’s overarching purpose, the reason you exist.

Your vision is your church’s preferred future by a certain date; the direction you’re going.

Let me share four thoughts about mission and vision – and I have done what I’m suggesting:

*Utilize a bottom-up approach.  Let the people of your congregation have input into the creation of your mission and vision statements.  Avoid using a top-down approach where the pastor rams through his ideas without congregational buy-in.

Start by asking your congregation four open-ended questions on a handout, such as:

  1. What do you like about our church?
  2. What are our strengths as a congregation?
  3. Where can we improve?
  4. What should our church look like in five years?

Reserve 10-15 minutes during a worship service to do this.  Let people write whatever they want.  Ask them to turn in their surveys anonymously.

Then choose a mission/vision team to compile the responses.  Ask the team to meet, maybe on a Saturday morning.  Share the responses.  Look for patterns.  Create draft statements.

Let the pastor refine the language.  Send the statements back to the mission/vision team for further input.  When the process is complete, the board should officially approve the statements.

*Create compelling statements.  Make them shorter rather than longer.  The trend today is to have mission statements that are ten words or less so they can be remembered.

“Loving Jesus and others” is boring and vague.  “To transform our families and communities for Jesus” is exciting and unifying.  Make them simple but somewhat edgy.

*Announce the statements to the church in final form. Post them everywhere: your lobby, website, bulletin, classrooms.  The pastor must refer to them often … at least once a month.

*Every consequent decision will flow from your mission/vision statements which may relieve as many as 90% of your church’s “problems.”  Those who don’t like the direction – because they wanted to turn your church into Lakewood West or Saddleback North – will be forced to get with the program or leave the church.

Yes, some churches grow without those statements, and some churches that have mission/vision statements never go anywhere.  But people want to know, “What’s the plan?”  Growth is intentional, not accidental.  Without a clear direction, your church will drift.

Second, choose only leaders (pastor/staff/board) who follow and embody Scripture (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9).

It’s well-known in evangelical circles that church leaders should be biblically-qualified according to Paul’s lists in the Pastoral Epistles.  But selecting leaders of high character doesn’t prevent a church from experiencing a horrific conflict.  I know all too well.

*It is crucial that every leader embrace the church’s mission and vision statements.  My failure to nail this down was a primary factor in why major conflict surfaced in my last ministry.  I assumed that board members were with me without ever asking them directly.  Board members can smile when their pastor is present and stab him in the back when he’s absent.

*It is essential that prospective leaders are interviewed (maybe by the pastor and board chairman) and that after they take office, receive training (at least quarterly) and undergo periodic evaluations.  (Either every major leader should be evaluated or nobody should be evaluated.)

*The pastor should check with the financial secretary and make sure that any prospective board members are regular, generous givers to the ministry.  The pastor can do this by asking the person who knows the givers and their amounts, “Just let me know if this person is a stingy giver … an average giver … or a generous giver.”  Believe me, you don’t want any stingy givers on your board because they will tend to shoot down budget increases and special projects because they won’t want to give themselves.  You only want regular givers handling church finances.

*It is better to have nobody than the wrong person in leadership.  Why?  Because it can take a long time to get rid of the wrong person … and there is a price to be paid for doing that.

*It is better to have just a few qualified leaders than any non-qualified leaders.  If the church’s governing documents state that you need to have a minimum of seven board members, but you can only find four that are qualified, just go with four.  If you don’t, the other three “fill-ins” will kill you.

Third, ask your leaders to study and summarize the biblical principles for conflict resolution.

I believe that the lead pastor in a church must take the initiative to prevent major conflicts from surfacing.  One way to do that is to hold regular meetings involving every key leader in your church: staff members, board members, ministry team/committee leaders, small group leaders … and to broaden the ownership base by making the group larger rather than smaller.

The meetings can be held monthly or quarterly … maybe after the last service on Sunday morning, which means you’ll have to provide lunch … but it’s essential that they be held.

This article I wrote several weeks ago describes the process of formulating these principles:

Preventing a Major Conflict in Your Church

The aim of such a process is to create a one-page document stating Ten Principles for Resolving Conflict at _________ Church that should be posted in many rooms all over the church.  (Just try and envision the rooms where conflict surfaces, like the church office, the associate pastor’s office, the board room, the kitchen … you get the idea.)

Fourth, create a Conflict Resolution Group inside your church of at least three strong, wise, and healthy individuals.

The reason I advocate a CRG is because when a pastor is attacked, there are usually some board members and/or staff members who are involved in trying to oust the pastor.

And when this happens, they almost always use shortcuts to expedite his departure.

They ignore Scripture … the church’s governing documents … labor law … and common decency because they have their eye on one goal: the pastor’s speedy exit … and they are anxious until “the deed is done.”

*The CRG’s job is to make sure biblical principles and processes are followed whenever a conflict surfaces, not to determine an outcome.  They make sure that the pastor is treated justly and fairly at all times.  They watch over the entire congregation, but engage in special surveillance over the board and staff.

*CRG members should be voted on by the congregation, making them accountable to the whole church.  If the board appoints the CRG, it can just disband the group should the board plan to take action to force out the pastor.  But if the CRG reports to the congregation, the board and staff may think twice about railroading the pastor unfairly.

*Terms should be for 1-3 years.  Consider especially former board members … retired pastors … and people who work in human resources.

*Make provision for them to receive training, such as that offered by Peacemaker Ministries in Colorado Springs.  Their website is http://peacemaker.net

Realize that Peacemaker University at its lower levels centers upon how to resolve conflicts between two individuals.  I have taken their course on coaching people to resolve conflicts.

*The penalty for violating the CRG’s directives is church discipline and possible expulsion.  For example, there might be a statement in the church’s governing documents that if the CRG rules that the board didn’t use the approved process for dealing with the pastor, the board could be suspended or must resign en masse.  The CRG cannot function effectively unless they can recommend discipline to the congregation.

Fifth, update your church’s governing documents (constitution/bylaws) every five years.

As churches change, their governing documents should keep pace.  While I believe that church constitutions and bylaws should be slaves, not masters, whenever a conflict breaks out, the leaders and congregation must abide by the latest version.

*Insure that your governing documents align with your ten principles for resolving conflict. (Covered under the third step above.)

*Make sure you specify the pathway to remove the pastor from office and to remove troublesome board members and staff members as well.

*If a major conflict ever breaks out, some people will become so reactive that they will resort to “the law of the jungle” to win.  If your governing documents are clear, they may think twice.

*If your church is ever sued, and a judge takes the case, the judge will decide for the party that most closely followed the governing documents.

I know this seems like a lot of work, but it can be implemented over time.

In fact, let me go further: if a pastor plans on making changes in his congregation, he should implement as many of these strategies as possible first.

The best time to prepare for war is during a time of peace.

I’ll share the remaining five ways to strengthen your church’s immune system next time.

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Five Hidden Realities of Pastoral Termination

Posted in Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , on April 28, 2016| 12 Comments »

This is my 500th blog article, and for the past few months, I’ve been thinking and praying about how I should mark this milestone.

After much reflection, I’ve decided to distill some of the things I’ve learned about pastoral termination that I haven’t written about before.

After earning a doctorate in church conflict … after writing a book called Church Coup … after providing counsel for scores of pastors and board members … and after writing all those blogs …  let me share with you five hidden realities surrounding pastoral termination today:

First, evangelical Christian churches rarely treat a pastor under fire justly.

When a faction inside a congregation attacks their pastor, they don’t consider treating him fairly … they just want him to meet their demands or resign.

When a staff member sabotages his pastor – personally or professionally – he’s not concerned about justice … he just wants to avoid doing what the pastor wants.

When a governing board prematurely forces their pastor to resign, they will avoid Scripture … ignore their governing documents … and later declare that everything they did was justified.

The standard seems to be “how we feel about the pastor” or “let’s make sure the pastor gets what he deserves” rather than anything related to Scripture or even love.

When a pastor is under fire inside his own church, all the rules tend to get tossed aside.

There should be a rulebook for treating a pastor under attack fairly … but most of the time, there isn’t.

I’ve written nearly 100 pages of such a rulebook, but haven’t been able to finish it.  If you think it’s important, please pray that the Lord will help me to get it done.

Ironically, mainline churches – which tend to be theologically liberal – treat their pastors much more fairly than evangelical churches … which claim to believe and practice divine truth.

By the way, I shouldn’t have to say this, but the goal of discipline/correction in the New Testament isn’t revenge, but restoration (Matthew 18:15-16; Galatians 6:1).  My guess it that at least 80% of the time, the restoration of a “wayward” pastor isn’t even considered by the governing board.

They just want him gone … and will use any weapon in their arsenal to accomplish their goal.

We can do better than this … much better.

Second, pastors who have been attacked in the past have a limited pain threshold.

A friend of mine called me several weeks ago and asked if I would be interested in becoming an interim pastor at a church not far from my home.

I didn’t have to think about it or even pray about it … my answer was a swift “No.”

I know some older pastors who have suffered through an unjust termination, and they love ministry so much that they are open to an interim position.

But I’m not … and maybe it goes back to something I learned from Jay Carty.

Jay Carty played basketball for the Los Angeles Lakers during the 1968-1969 season.  Lakers’ announcer Chick Hearn once nicknamed Carty “Golden Wheels” because he was so slow on the court.

Carty became a popular Christian speaker.  I once sat next to him at a pastors’ meeting (I told him I still had his autograph from that 68-69 season) and he told me this story:

He said that if you put a fly in a jar, the fly will try to fly out by hitting the lid of the jar once.  The fly will try again a second time, but after that, the fly will give up because it doesn’t want to go experience any more pain.

I’m unsure whether that’s how flies really act, but when it comes to church ministry, there’s definitely some truth there.

Back in the mid-1980s, I survived two separate attempts to get rid of me as pastor in the same church.  Both times, my antagonists left instead of me, but I was bruised and bloodied emotionally for months.

Somehow, God enabled me to lead the rebirth of that congregation (I contributed a chapter to Gary McIntosh’s book Make Room For the Boom … or Bust detailing what happened) but it about killed me.  A nationally-known church consultant told me, “It’s a wonder you’re still standing.”

Even though I was exhausted, a pastor friend told me, “I think you have one more church left in you.”

So I became the pastor of a congregation that seemed healthy.  Attendance and giving nearly doubled during my tenure … we built a new worship center … and we became the largest Protestant church in our city … but church leaders eventually turned on me, and even though I chose to resign, some people were pushing me toward the door … hard.

Even when you’re successful as a pastor, there’s a limit as to how much pain you can take before you reluctantly admit, “I can’t do this anymore.”

Three attacks and you’re out.

Third, the Christian community observes a “winner take all” mentality when it comes to pastoral termination.

When a pastor presides over a growing congregation, he will make enemies … on the staff, on the board, among key leaders … and if they pool their complaints, the pastor’s tenure may end swiftly and harshly.

I’m thinking of a megachurch pastor … one of the best Bible teachers I’ve ever heard … who was forced to resign because he tried to make changes to the worship service.  He received approvals through all the proper channels except he didn’t consult the people with old money … who no longer held official positions … and they made his life a living hell until he quit.

In the Christian community, pastors like that gifted megachurch minister are labeled “losers” if they’re forced out even when they have done nothing wrong.

I have a pastor friend who reads this blog who told me that for years, whenever he heard about a pastor who experienced an involuntary exit, my friend would think to himself, “What a loser.”

After it happened to him, he found himself singing a different tune.

However, the pastor who is pushed out of a church is a “loser” in one respect: he loses most of his church friends … his reputation … his income … his position … his house (sometimes) … his career (often) … and occasionally, even his wife … and all those losses together brand him in many people’s eyes as someone to be shunned and abandoned.

Yet it doesn’t matter if the pastor’s antagonists harassed him … lied about him … or misrepresented him … if he’s forced out, he’s the loser … and by default, those who successfully removed him are crowned the winners.

And in the words of the pop group Abba, “The Winner Takes it All.”

In the Christian world, people don’t care about the details of a pastor’s ouster … they only care about outcomes.

There’s only one problem with this shallow thinking:

By this reckoning, Jesus was a loser, too … as were His apostles.

Even though I was pushed out of my last ministry, I have never viewed myself as a “loser,” but I know that some do, and there’s nothing I can do about it.

Except to say that the values of the evangelical community are often more tied to worldly success than biblical faithfulness.

Fourth, those who force out an innocent pastor should be exposed and asked to repent.

Here’s something I will never understand:

If a pastor starts bullying and manipulating people in his church, shouldn’t he be confronted and asked to repent?

Of course … and if he refuses to repent, he’s subject to being removed from office.

By the same token, if a group in a church … even if they’re the governing board … start bullying and manipulating the pastor behind-the-scenes, shouldn’t they be confronted and asked to repent as well?

Yes, they should … but if they’re successful in getting rid of their pastor, nobody will ever ask them to repent.

The governing board won’t.  The staff won’t.  The congregation won’t.  The district won’t.

Even if they know the facts, no single party will approach the pastor’s detractors because the pastor lost and his opponents won.

And in the evangelical world, that’s the end of the matter.  (Remember, according to 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, we’re not supposed to sue one another.)

In fact, if a church is denominational, the district minister will often spin the pastor’s departure and make him look bad … and make those who pushed out the pastor look good … even if the latter group acted wickedly.

I’ve seen this scenario played out scores of times over the years.

This kind of cover up … slander … and lying has nothing to do with biblical righteousness … and everything to do with crass politics.

District ministers in evangelical denominations (many of which are congregational in nature) like to say, “Oh, we can’t intervene in disputes in a local church.  We respect the autonomy of the local church.”

But that bromide is a lie.

Because district ministers do interfere in the lives of local churches (almost always behind closed doors) … and I can tell you story after story where that’s exactly what happened … including my own case.

I have learned over time that 90% of all district ministers handle church conflicts in a political way … not a spiritual way … because they aren’t interested in truth or righteousness … they’re interested in keeping donations flowing from the church to the district office to pay their salary.

And if they side with the pastor … or even hint he’s right and the board is wrong … he’s afraid the church will cut off those funds.

So he either remains silent or aligns himself with the church board … and nobody is asked to even consider their part in their pastor’s departure.

Because after the pastor is gone, the whole conflict can be blamed on him.

Finally, pastors get into trouble when they forget they are persons first, pastors second.

Nine months before I left my last ministry position, I was struggling with whether I could be a pastor anymore.

Instead of being a pastor, I longed to be just a person.

I didn’t want to be Pastor Jim … just Jim.

I would come home from a day at the church office … park my car in the garage … rush inside to eat dinner … and rush back to church for a meeting.

But I didn’t want to go to the meeting … I just wanted to stay home.

I began avoiding tasks I didn’t want to do … and avoiding people I didn’t want to see … and trying to figure out what was wrong with me.

Part of me wanted to tell the church board how I was feeling.  I knew I needed some time away to recover, but when I looked at the composition of the board, I decided I couldn’t risk telling them anything.

That particular group would not have understood.

I reasoned, “If I tell them how I am feeling … because they don’t seem to care for me as a person … they will probably fire me outright or force me to quit.”

And I couldn’t take the chance.

So I decided to tough it out and hope that I’d improve over time … and at times, I behaved uncharacteristically.

People like it when their pastor’s behavior is predictable.  When the pastor becomes unpredictable, some will clamor for him to leave.

I finally went to see a Christian counselor, who diagnosed me with a severe case of burnout … and said I was headed for a breakdown.

Thank God, I didn’t break down … not even when the conflict surfaced two months later … but I came awfully close.

I don’t blame the church board for my condition because I never told them about it … but I do blame them for not saying to me, “Hey, Jim, you don’t seem like yourself.  Are you okay?  Is something wrong?  Can we pray for you?”

There is no doubt that my burnout was the result of being overcommitted to my ministry.  I cared too much … and maybe that was my undoing, but I needed somebody to say, “Hey, it’s okay to back off … we’ll help carry the load.”

I wore the “pastor” hat too often … and longed to be just “Jim” … a normal, anonymous person … instead.

I finally got my wish.

_______________

This is my 500th blog article.  I started writing … with trepidation … in December 2010.

I wasn’t sure if anyone would find … much less read … anything that I wrote.  And because my son warned me that I would attract critics, I braced myself for mean-spirited comments that never came.

Some blog articles have done very well.  Some died the day I wrote them.  In the early days, I wrote three in five days.  Now I only have time for one per week.

From the beginning, my primary passion has been the relationship between pastors and their antagonists in a local church … especially those who pursue the pastor’s termination.

If you’re a subscriber, or an occasional reader, thank you so much for reading what I write.

I try to tell the truth with grace.

When you think about it, let me know if what I write is helpful.

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Preventing a Major Conflict in Your Church

Posted in Change and Conflict in Church, Church Conflict, Church Health and Conflict, Conflict with the Pastor, Current Church Issues, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , on April 21, 2016| 1 Comment »

Several years ago, I preached a sermon on the topic “Resolving Conflict Biblically” at a church several communities away.

When I was done speaking, a woman in her mid-80s – who had attended a prominent California church for most of her life – told me, “I have never heard a sermon on the subject of conflict in my entire life.”

Now maybe she was ill or away on the Sundays that her pastor spoke about conflict, or maybe all his sermons fused together in her mind.

But I happen to know that her former pastor – one of America’s best-known Bible teachers – experienced a major conflict in his church before he eventually resigned.

The best churches experience major conflicts.  In fact, I still agree with this adage that I heard years ago: “Small churches have small problems, while big churches have big problems.”

Regardless of your church’s size, it’s almost certain that your congregation will experience a severe conflict within the next ten years … and about a 40 percent chance that you’ll suffer through a major conflict within the next five … unless your church is ready when that conflict strikes.

But sadly, most churches aren’t ready for a major conflict.

Maybe they’re in denial, thinking, “We’re such a nice group of Christians that nothing horrendous could happen here.”

Or they’re thinking, “Our constitution and bylaws specify what to do if conflict breaks out, so we’re adequately prepared.”

Or they’re thinking, “Our leaders are such godly individuals, they will handle any conflict expertly” … not realizing that church leaders are often the source of major conflicts.

There isn’t a lot written on how to prevent major conflicts in church life.

That’s why I’m doing a workshop for Christian leaders next week called “Strengthening Your Church’s Immune System.”  I’ll be talking about ten ways that a church’s leaders can prepare for and prevent major conflict from even happening in their congregation.

Let me share with you one of the ten steps I’ll be presenting next week … and it takes a bit of work.

I believe that the lead pastor in a church must take the initiative to prevent major conflicts from surfacing.  He should allow people to share feedback and even disagree about matters without, at the same time, letting them start a bloodbath.

One way to do that is to hold regular meetings involving every key leader in your church: staff members, board members, ministry team/committee leaders, small group leaders … and to find reasons to make the group larger rather than smaller.

So if feasible, I’d invite their spouses as well.

The meetings can be held monthly or quarterly … maybe after the last service on Sunday morning, which means you’ll have to provide lunch … but it’s essential that they be held.

During one of those meetings, here’s what I would do if I were the pastor:

First, I would prepare a 3-4 page document for each person listing every New Testament reference – word for word – on church conflict. 

Maybe throw in some verses from Proverbs on the tongue as well.

Don’t ask people to look the verses up in their Bibles.  It takes too long … people have different versions … and you want all the relevant verses gathered in one place.

So the pastor should do the work for them.  Write out Matthew 18:15-17 … 1 Corinthians 6:1-8 … Titus 3:10-11 … 3 John 9-10 … in chronological order.

Second, I would ask the leaders to divide into groups without their spouses. 

The fewer people in each group, the more each person will have to interact with Scripture themselves … and that’s what you want.  Aim for five people per group.

I would have at least as many groups as there are pages.  For example, if you hand out five pages of verses, make sure you have at least five groups.

If you have 50 leaders present, then make ten groups with five individuals in each group.

Third, I would ask each group to appoint a leader … and for group leaders to ask for volunteers to read the verses.

My last few years as a pastor, I always asked for people to volunteer as readers.  Some people can’t read very well, and others become anxious when asked to do something in a group.  You want people to feel comfortable going through this exercise.

Fourth, after the verses have been read, ask each group to summarize the verses on their page in five principles. 

This should take 15-20 minutes per group.

Then starting with page 1, ask each leader to appoint a spokesperson to present their five principles to the entire group.

Fifth, the pastor should ask someone ahead of time to record each principle word for word on newsprint and hang each sheet on the wall. 

This isn’t busy work … it’s documentation.  In fact, the pastor should store the newsprint somewhere safe in case someone ever challenges the wording of the principles.

Sixth, after all the reports, the pastor should ask the entire group questions like:

*Can we summarize the teaching of Scripture concerning conflict resolution in one sentence?

*Which verses that you studied stand out to you?

*How well do you personally carry out these principles in your own life?

*Why do we have such a hard time dealing with conflict?

*How realistically can we follow the teaching in these verses in 2016?

*How well does our church follow Scripture when it comes to conflict resolution?

Seventh, after that discussion, the pastor should do two things:

*Ask someone to collect all the newsprint sheets and give them to the pastor directly.  The pastor should consider reproducing everything written down word for word on the church website.  This not only shows the leaders that their words are taken seriously, this also shows the congregation that the church takes Scripture seriously when it comes to conflict.

*Then reserve time on the agenda of the next board meeting – or call a special Saturday board meeting – and ask the governing board as well as members of the church staff to summarize the biblical teaching on conflict resolution in ten principles.

(The board and staff should do this because they are ultimately the guardians of both the congregation and the pastor … and because they are sometimes the sources of potential trouble themselves.)

When that’s complete … maybe at the next board meeting … three more things need to happen:

Eighth, the pastor makes sure that those ten principles for resolving conflict are posted in key places all over the church.

This includes the rooms where staff meetings, board meetings, finance team meetings and other key meetings are held.

Ninth, the pastor then schedules a brief series – maybe two sermons – on those ten principles, letting the congregation know, “This is how we handle conflict around here.”

And every year – possibly before the annual meeting – the pastor should preach another brief series on biblical conflict resolution.  Call it internal insurance.

Finally, the pastor schedules time every six months to review the principles with the staff, the board, and the key leaders. 

This doesn’t have to take long, but it has to be done.

Some people might say, “But Jim, if a severe conflict does break out, some people will become so emotional that they will ignore those principles, so aren’t these principles really worthless?”

No, they aren’t worthless.  God gave those principles to us, and He never gives His people anything that isn’t of value!

But even if some people become irrational during conflict, there are others in the congregation who will view matters in a more biblical and rational fashion, and you want the more logical people to deal with the more emotional ones.

Let me give you an example of how these principles can help once they’re posted:

Imagine that you’re in the church library after a Sunday service, and a woman saddles up to you and says, “Listen, a few of us are meeting for lunch today to discuss the latest changes that the pastor is trying to impose on our church.  If you want to join us, we’re meeting at Olive Garden at 1:00 pm.”

Instead of answering her directly, you take her by the hand, waltz her over to the north wall, show her the list of ten principles for resolving conflict biblically, and say to her, “Look at principle number seven.  It says, “If you are upset about a policy, please speak directly with any member of the church board.  [They set policy along with the pastor.]  And if you are upset with the pastor personally, please speak directly with him.”

You then ask this person, “Are you upset with a policy?  Then you need to speak directly with a board member … maybe the one you know the best.  But if you’re upset with the pastor personally, you need to speak with him directly.  Which is it?”

If the person says, “I’m upset with the policy,” then ask the person, “Which board member will you speak with about this issue?”

If the person says, “I’m upset with the pastor,” then ask them, “When will you be speaking with the pastor about this issue?”

If the person says, “Forget it.  I thought you were a friend, but you aren’t,” I’d say to them, “These ten principles summarize how we handle conflict around here.  If you don’t comply, I will report you to the pastor and the church board and tell them what you’re planning to do.  It’s your call.”

The beauty of this approach is that these principles:

*are based on Scripture.

*have been devised by all the key leaders in the church.

*have been ratified by the governing board and staff.

*have been presented to the church through the pulpit.

*have been posted all over the church facility.

*can then be enforced by all of God’s people.

If you follow this plan, I can’t guarantee that you’ll never experience a major conflict in your church.

After all, when some people are intent on committing murder, they can be hard to stop.

But I can guarantee that if you do this, the plotters will know that they’re violating Scripture and the culture of their church … and that will take all the fun out of plots against the pastor … secret meetings … and playing politics.

If you can manage major conflict in your church, that might allow your church to do what Jesus called it to do:

Fulfill His Great Commission in your community.

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Removing a Pastor Wisely

Posted in Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Forgiveness and Reconciliation among Christians, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, tagged , , , , on April 15, 2016| 2 Comments »

A friend sent me an article yesterday about a well-known megachurch pastor (although he’s not someone I’m familiar with) who was removed from office by the governing board of his church for “ongoing sinful behavior” over “the past few years.”

Here’s the article:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2016/april/darrin-patrick-removed-acts-29-megachurch-journey.html

When I read the article, I was impressed by the way the board handled the situation.

In my experience, whenever a pastor is terminated or forced to resign, the board often handles matters poorly.  The board identifies the pastor as their enemy, exaggerates any charges against him, and either fires him outright or forces him to quit.

But the board mentioned in this article, in my view, seemed to do everything in a biblical and healthy manner.

Let me highlight five things that this board did right:

First, the board spoke with their pastor directly about their concerns.

Don’t all boards do this?

No, they don’t.

Too many times, church boards never tell their pastor what they’re seeing or hearing in his life or ministry that bothers them.  They remain silent, hold a secret meeting without the pastor present, detail all his faults, conclude he has to go, and assign someone to tell him he’s fired … or agree to tell him together at the next board meeting.

Individual board members might tell their spouses how they feel about their pastor … or they might tell certain friends in the church … but they never approach their pastor personally.

But thankfully, this board shared their concerns directly with their pastor from the very beginning, so that when he left, he didn’t feel that the board conspired behind his back or fired him via ambush.

One pastor told me he was fired in an email … without any kind of warning.  Another pastor was fired via certified letter.  Other pastors I know have been told they’re fired right after a Sunday service … again, without ever being told that anything was wrong.

Such tactics speak volumes about the lack of maturity on the board.

Second, the board told the pastor that their goal was his restoration. 

Much of the time, this is the key … but missing … element whenever a church board tries to correct their pastor’s behavior.

Think of Jesus’ words in Matthew 18:15:

“If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you.  If he listens to you, you have won your brother over.”

According to Jesus, what is the goal when a fellow believer sins against you?

The overarching goal is to win your brother over … to get him to listen to your concerns, repent of his wrongdoing, and change his behavior.

The goal is not to remove the pastor from office or from the fellowship.  That’s the last step in the process (verse 17), not the first step.

I’ve discovered that when a board begins with the end result … “We need to remove our pastor from office right away” … they will wreak havoc on their pastor, his family, the congregation, and even on the board members themselves.

Because all too often, the board really wants to punish the pastor … and engages in what is really a vendetta.

But when the board begins with a process … “We are going to take our time, work the steps, encourage our pastor’s growth, but monitor his behavior” … there may be some fallout, but God will honor such a board’s motive.

Pastors not only have faults they know about … they also have blind spots.  The best men do … even those pastors whose sermons you revere or whose books have blessed your life.  (And that includes John MacArthur.)

If a pastor believes that he will be treated fairly and graciously by the governing board, he’ll be much more open to admitting his faults and trying to work on them.

But if a pastor believes that the board’s attitude is “one mistake and I’m out,” he’ll become resistant to correction … and too many boards operate like this.

And they’re usually the unspiritual ones.

Third, the board was specific about the behaviors they wanted the pastor to change.

In their letter to the congregation, the board mentioned “historical patterns of sin” and “pastoral misconduct.”  They even named the exact behaviors that concerned them.

And, may I add, they gave the pastor plenty of time to change … a few years.

The pastor didn’t have to guess which behaviors the board didn’t like.

He knew.

In addition, the board let the congregation know that the pastor wasn’t guilty of adultery or financial impropriety.

Whenever a pastor is fired, but the governing board is silent about the grounds for dismissal, people automatically assume that the pastor committed adultery or engaged in fiscal shenanigans.

So even though it may not feel like a blessing, it’s wise for a board to say, “We’re dismissing the pastor because he did this and this and this … but we want you to know that he didn’t do this and this.”

The board did such an effective job that the pastor released a statement admitting that the board was right … he was still plagued by certain sins … and that their deliberations were “miraculous and beyond gracious.”

I wish that every dismissed pastor could say that they were treated that justly.

Fourth, the board kept the process as open as possible.

The board not only involved the pastor in the corrective process, but after the pastor agreed to resign, they also told the congregation why the pastor left and encouraged people to send them feedback, including both questions and comments.

They also put their names and email addresses on the contact page so people could easily converse with them.

This is a far cry from most of the situations that I hear about.

I once heard about a church board that announced that their pastor had been dismissed, and then warned the congregation, “You are not to contact the pastor at all.”

If I was told not to contact the pastor, that’s the very next thing I’d do.

You say, “But Jim, wouldn’t your action be divisive?”

My reply: “Unity should always be based upon truth, and trying to find out the truth isn’t by itself divisive.”

You might counter with, “But if you contacted the pastor after the board told you not to, isn’t that being rebellious against God’s leaders?”

Maybe, but what if they’re trying to cover up their own mistakes?  What if they’re more guilty than the pastor?  How can anyone know unless they do contact the pastor?

I’ve noticed that the more hush-hush the board is about their pastor’s dismissal, the more they’re trying to protect themselves … and the more likely it is that they intend to slander the pastor’s reputation to eliminate any future influence in the congregation.

Finally, the board made sure that the pastor and his family were cared for.

The board did this in two primary ways:

*They gave the pastor a severance package.

*They encouraged the congregation to send encouraging notes to him and his family.

I’m embarrassed to say that there are many church boards that plan to fire their pastor, and at the same time, do all they can to make sure that they don’t offer the pastor any kind of severance.

I’m thinking of one pastor in particular who was forced to resign and was denied severance even though he had no savings, Social Security, or retirement income to fall back on.

Boards offer excuses like:

“We don’t have the money to offer the pastor anything.”

“We have the money but let’s earmark it for other projects.”

“The pastor has behaved so badly that he doesn’t deserve any severance.”

“The pastor’s wife works so we’re off the hook and don’t have to give him anything.”

“Let’s let the church vote on any severance package … and arrange matters so they vote no.”

But as I’ve said many times, the board should offer the pastor severance more than 95% of the time because:

*the pastor’s family needs financial assistance even if the pastor has been a rascal.

*it can take a pastor a year or longer for the pastor to find another ministry.

*a severance package minimizes the chance the pastor will start a new church in the community … and use his recently-former church as his mission field.

*it’s the right thing to do.

I also love the idea that the board encouraged the congregation to write positive notes to the pastor and his family.

This practice can provide healing for the pastor, who is tempted to think, “I must be a horrible person for not being able to keep my pastor-job.”

This practice can also be therapeutic for the congregation because they’ll be forced to see all the good the pastor did during his time at the church … and not just the bad.

Whenever a governing board has to correct a pastor’s conduct, it’s very stressful for everyone concerned … and it’s tempting for board members to say, “Let’s just end the anxiety and fire the guy.”

But when a board operates biblically, their actions might even cause their pastor to agree with their conclusions.

How do you feel about the way this board handled their pastor’s dismissal?

I’d love to hear from you.

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »