Feeds:
Posts
Comments

“Something is seriously wrong with me.”

In my second pastorate, I used to tell myself that over and over again.

The reason was painful: my church wasn’t growing … it was shrinking.

I had been a youth pastor in three churches.  All three youth groups had grown both numerically and spiritually.

But then I became the pastor of a small church in Silicon Valley.

And it didn’t grow … but I couldn’t figure out why … so I blamed myself.

I would tell myself, “I must be the problem.  I have the training and giftedness to lead this church, but I don’t have the personality they want or need.”

For example, I wasn’t comfortable:

*using the telephone.  I’d do it because I had to, but I always felt like I was interrupting the person I was calling, and I couldn’t read their facial expressions.  I’d much rather speak with people face-to-face.

*visiting people in their homes.  Even if I called ahead for an appointment, it felt like I was invading their space.  I didn’t know what to talk about … didn’t know how far to pry into their lives … and couldn’t wait to leave.  I always felt awkward in those settings.

*contacting people who had been absent from church.  This required as much courage for me as calling a girl for a first date.  If I called someone who had been missing, they’d invariably tell me, “Oh, we’re visiting other churches right now,” and I ‘d take it personally.  So why contact them at all?

*going out to eat with others after church on Sundays.  In my first ten years as a pastor, I usually taught Sunday School and then preached a sermon, and I lacked the energy to go to a restaurant and be social, but my wife … an extrovert … would invariably say, “But I want to go!”  So I’d go for her sake … and feel like a relational failure afterward.

*confronting people.  Especially men who were much older than me.  When I watched the original Hawaii Five-O on TV,  Steve McGarrett would go to the home of a big-time crook, knock on his door, and warn him forcefully to close down his criminal activities.  McGarrett had no fear when he confronted people.  I wanted to be a Christian Steve McGarrett!  But I’d do anything to avoid a confrontation instead.

*making small talk during a meal at someone’s home.  I could not say, “Oh, that’s a lovely platter, where did you get that?”  I wouldn’t even notice the platter.  I could not say, “Oh, this casserole is incredible!  May I have the recipe?”  I hate casseroles!  If the conversation drifted toward an issue of the day, I’d come alive, but otherwise, I hated small talk.

*having a lot of friends.  When I was a pastor, some people tried to get close to me, but if we didn’t have enough in common, I usually resisted their overtures … but felt guilty in the process.  And when I did make a friend inside the church, they’d usually move away.

*being the focus of attention.  I shy away from the limelight.  I have no desire to be famous or well-known.  I didn’t even want my picture on church advertising.  Being a team player who is effective is enough for me.

In my first ten years of ministry, I defined myself by who I wasn’t.  I wasn’t Chuck Swindoll … I wasn’t an outgoing person … I wasn’t a visionary leader … I wasn’t the pastor of a growing church … and I was never who the district leaders wanted me to be.

My seminary taught me Greek and theology, but offered no insights into who God made me to be … or how to find out.

My mid-to-late thirties was a painful time because, in a very real sense, I wasn’t comfortable being the person God created.

I tried to be who my district leaders wanted me to be … who my church board wanted me to be … and who my wife wanted me to be.

But I was emotionally and vocationally lost … and I didn’t know how to pull out of it.

And then I ran into an insightful secular book called Please Understand Me by Keirsey and Bates.

The book (which I gave to my daughter so I can’t quote it accurately) said something like this:

“You are different from other people.  That is a good thing.  Don’t try to change to be what others want you to be.  Don’t try to be who you’d like to be.  You’ll just be frustrated.  Just accept who you already are and life will fall into place.”

I almost cried.  For some reason, I didn’t think being myself … in ministry … was good enough.

When I took the Myers-Briggs Temperament Sorter, I discovered that I am an ISTJ.  (George Washington and Queen Elizabeth were both ISTJs.  When I watched The Crown on Netflix, I could usually predict which decisions the queen would make because I understood her.)

The first letter in ISTJ is “I,” which stands for “introverted.”

But I didn’t want to be an introvert … especially among my pastoral peers.  The extroverts set the agendas and steered the conversations when pastors congregated.  The introverts just listened … and outwardly nodded their heads.

I preferred to be an extrovert, because they seemed to have the corner on success in the Christian world.

My wife is an ENFP … the exact opposite of me.  (“E” stands for extrovert.)  She is outgoing and fun.  She makes people feel special.  She is dynamic and caring and a brilliant organizer of people.  She makes things happen.  She has charisma.

And most people adore her.

So I’d rather be an ENFP … or an ESTJ … or anything other than a boring ISTJ.

But try as I might, I could not become an extrovert.  It was too much work!

Because there are three times more extroverts in this world than introverts, we’re in the minority … and often misunderstood … which is why extroverts are always trying to turn introverts into extroverts.

But I came to realize … and to accept … that God made me an introvert … and an ISTJ.

1 Corinthians 12:18 refers primarily to spiritual gifts, but I believe it can also apply to temperament:

But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be.

The day I accepted that fact, my life and ministry turned around.

Rather than fight who I was, I went with the flow.

According to Keirsey and Bates, an extrovert is someone who gains energy by being with other people, while an introvert is someone who gains energy by being alone.

That latter phrase describes me perfectly.  I can be a “professional extrovert” for a few hours, but after that, I long to be by myself.

After I learned that it was okay to be an introvert, I compensated by making some adjustments:

*I’m not good on the phone?  Okay … I’ll talk to as many people as I can on Sundays … use email when I can’t get a face-to-face … and call only when necessary.  If I talk to you on the phone, that’s special.

*I’m not good at visitation?  If I have to do it, I’ll take along my extroverted wife.  Otherwise, I’ll recruit extroverts to visit the shut-ins and only visit the hard cases.  (Rick Warren is fond of saying, “Yes, I visit people in the hospital, but you don’t want to be that sick.”)

*I’m not good at contacting absentees?  I’ll see if I can find an outgoing and caring lay person or staff member to do this … and found it was a task my wife did without fear … and she usually enticed people to return.

*I’m not good at going out to eat on Sundays?  Most of the time, I’ll just go out with my wife … and only say “yes” when I’m feeling good or really like the people involved.

*I’m not good at confronting people?  I’ll only confront those I must … and deal with issues as they arise instead of letting them stack up.

*I’m not good at making small talk?  I’ll just bide my time around the table and enter the conversation when I feel comfortable.

*I’m not good at having many friends?  While I have 258 friends on Facebook … and God knows I don’t want or need anymore … my wife has over 700.  Night after night, she writes notes of encouragement to her Facebook friends.  I don’t want to get that involved in people’s lives!  Like most introverts, having a few close friends is enough for me.

*I don’t want to be the focus of attention?  I’ll focus on our church’s mission and vision instead … and promote others as often as possible.

I have since learned that many sucessful pastors are introverts.  They tend to spend hours in study … looking for just the right quotes, stories, and applications.  And introverts tend to write well.  In fact, my favorite Christian authors are almost all introverts.

And I’ve noticed that while Christian leaders who are extroverts tend to be loved, leaders who are introverts tend to be respected.

And I can live with that.

So my encouragement to you is … don’t try and be someone else … and don’t try and be who others want you to be.

Discover who God made you to be.  Rest content in His marvelous creation.

And if you’re an introvert, find extroverts who can do ministry better than you can … then focus on what you do best.

When I finally stopped trying to be who others wanted me to be, I enjoyed years of God’s blessing.

Even though I’m an introvert.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Back in the 1990s, I read a little sidebar in Leadership Journal written by Bill Hybels, senior pastor of Willow Creek Community Church near Chicago.  I recounted this story often over the ensuing years.

Hybels wrote that he briefly visited the church campus for a rehearsal one week night.  The next morning, he received a note in his box from a church groundskeeper.  The note said, “Bill, when you visited last night, you parked in an area that’s off limits to everyone.  Just wanted you to know.”

Instead of lashing out at him, Hybels commended his corrector and told his Leadership audience, “I need to be an example, not an exception.”

And for decades, Pastor Bill from Willow has been an example of Christian leadership … until the recent revelations that may indicate inappropriate conduct on his part toward at least seven women.

There’s much we don’t know about what happened between Hybels and the women who have gone public with their concerns.  Maybe more revelations will surface in the coming days.  And I must confess … it’s difficult to analyze this situation from a distance.  But many people I know have been talking about it … with strong reactions on all sides … and I’ve learned a lot by listening to their observations.

I have no inside or additional information … just my own perspective about this situation.

Willow Creek June 14-15, 2005 006(I’m adding a few photos I took from Willow in 2005 to break up this article.)

Let me pose and attempt to answer four questions about the Willow “train wreck”:

First, what do you think about the accounts of impropriety from various women?

At first, like many people, I didn’t want to believe the charges against Hybels.  We don’t have any video of Hybels’ individual encounters with these women, so they initially fall into a “he said, she said” category.  But when seven women share their stories, and patterns emerge from their narratives, the similarities are most likely true.

*The accounts told by various women go back as far as the mid-1980s through at least 2011, so Hybels can’t claim they all happened when he was younger (and didn’t know the boundaries) nor when he was older (and his judgment was worn down).  The accounts spread over nearly three decades seem to indicate a pattern of behavior.

*The accounts are too detailed and concrete to be dismissed as a conspiracy.  What dismays many of us is that the allegations don’t sound like the Hybels that thousands of us respected.  I have a friend whose wife was in Hybels’ youth group and she says he never would have acted like these women claim he did.  Did something change over the years?

*I can’t wrap my head around why Hybels liked to tell select women how attractive or sexy they were, but Willow’s leaders have had a track record of focusing on the outward appearance of their public leaders.

Twenty-five years ago this month, someone who used to attend Willow hired one of Hybels’ former top leaders to serve as a consultant for our new church.  One of the consultant’s recommendations was to keep those who weren’t “in shape” off the stage, especially if they were singing or acting in a drama.  When I unwisely tried to implement this “Willow value,” a good couple immediately left the church, and I alienated one of the elders as well as some others … and I’ve regretted it ever since.

Maureen Girkins, former publisher from Zondervan, says Hybels told her that “she’d be more successful if she tried to be sexier.”  A Christian leader might think that, but to say it aloud?

*Several women mentioned that Hybels told them how unhappy he was at home.  Many of us in ministry know that the pathway to an affair starts with both the pastor and another woman sharing their marital unhappiness with each other.  It’s dangerous territory.  Why did Hybels, of all people, take that risk?

I attended the first International Conference at Willow in June 1994.  Hybels met with a group of pastors one afternoon and told us that he was in counseling for some “junk” from his past and that he and his wife were in counseling as well.  He was very transparent about his problems even though he and Lynne had written their marriage book Fit to be Tied the previous year.

I think it’s safe to say that this ministry couple had ongoing struggles in their relationship, although that’s not uncommon.

*As Christianity Today noted, “Hybels pressured women into spending time alone with him.”  This sounds like more than mentoring.  He comes off as a man who needed a friend, someone who could understand him.  I’m not trying to minimize his actions … just trying to figure out what he was after.  Was he looking for a listening ear or a wifely upgrade?

*Was anyone else disturbed by several accounts of staffers telling various women that they were “Hybels’ type?”  When a Christian leader gets married, shouldn’t his wife be “his type” from that moment on?  If this detail is true, it sounds like something that would happen in middle school, not in one of the nation’s largest churches.

Hybels wrote books with the following titles, among many others: Christians in a Sex-Crazed Culture; Honest to God?; Descending Into Greatness; and Character: Who You Are When No One’s Looking.  Right now, those titles look a bit ironic.

Willow Creek June 14-15, 2005 007

Second, if these accounts sound plausible, why did Hybels vehemently deny them all?

I can only guess.

Bill Hybels is the most transparent and vulnerable pastor that I’ve ever heard.  At the large-group gathering of pastors at the 1994 Conference, someone asked Hybels how he could be so transparent.  His answer?  He said something like, “It takes too much energy to hide things.”  While I enjoyed the creativity of Willow’s services … their core value of “people matter to God” … and the excellence with which they did everything … I was most impressed with the leadership’s authenticity, which sprang from their senior pastor.

So if Hybels was guilty of any of the infractions presented by these women, I would have expected him to confess, “I did say that … I didn’t do that … I may have done that.”

But that’s not what he did.  Instead, he initially issued a blanket denial, both to his congregation (including an online video) and to the Chicago Tribune, where he said:

“I want to speak to all the people around the country that have been misled … for the past four years and tell them in my voice, in as strong a voice as you’ll allow me to tell it, that the charges against me are false. There still to this day is not evidence of misconduct on my part.”

Why the initial denials?

*Is is possible there is a “megachurch morality?”  Let me share what happened to me eight years ago.

Seven months after I left my last ministry, I was still pretty raw emotionally.  A friend set up a meeting between me and a megachurch pastor.  We spent an hour in his office together.

At one point, the pastor told me a story … which I have since forgotten … but he then told me, “If you share this story with anybody else, and it gets back to me, I will deny it.”

I didn’t forget that statement.

That’s not the kind of thing a pastor with integrity would say.  He was telling me, “If what I’ve just shared resurfaces, I will tell a lie.”  It just rolled off his tongue like it was no big deal.

Is it possible that some megachurch pastors have a “I will protect my reputation and that of my church” at all costs mentality … even if it means lying?  Is this how they stay in power?

I admit this question is based on one incident … but it makes me wonder.

One of my mentors … a man I respect as much as anyone … recently told me that the entitled and privileged in the evangelical world constitute “one sicko sick system.”  I lack his knowledge of what happens on the inside of a very large church, so I’m unsure what to think.

*Is it possible that Willow had a “buddy culture?”  Jodi Walle was John Ortberg’s executive assistant at Willow for seven years.  She writes in this piece on her website (www.jodiwalle.com), “There was probably a naïve ‘buddy’ culture that didn’t place enough emphasis on male vs female.  It shows that Bill was possibly more relaxed and felt too comfortable with women …”

Yes, some of the accusations might have occurred in the context of a “buddy” culture, and Walle wrote her piece before the April 21 revelations from Christianity Today.  But Zondervan publisher Maureen Girkins certainly wasn’t part of that culture.

But the women must have been equally relaxed with Hybels to run with him alone or to visit his hotel room when summoned.  Yes, he held a degree of power over some of them, but didn’t they think twice about such arrangements?  What was wrong with saying, “I’m not comfortable doing this or being here?”

*If Hybels had admitted publicly to any kind of wrongdoing, how would his confession(s) have been received?

Let’s go back to when Hybels’ accusers first went public.  If Hybels had said at that time, “Look, I didn’t use my best judgment in these situations, and I want to apologize to these women personally, and if necessary, in the presence of the elders.”

What would have happened?

I don’t know.  My hope is that upon hearing Hybels’ confession, each woman would have forgiven him completely, and that would have settled the matter.

But what if Hybels and/or the elders feared that if he admitted any wrongdoing … no matter how small … there would have been calls for his termination or resignation?

If Hybels had admitted some degree of culpability … and it somehow became public … he had no way of knowing what the aftermath of his admission might be.  What if someone refused to forgive him and sought revenge instead?

It’s easy to say, “Well, he shouldn’t think about the consequences.  He should just admit his sin and take his lumps like a man.”

But Hybels wasn’t the pastor of an average church, but the leader of one of America’s most influential churches … one that’s become a movement … with an association of churches … and one that trains thousands of leaders.

In a very real way, Hybels was Willow to tens of thousands of people … but if Hybels went down, Willow and all its ministries would be negatively affected … possibly for years.

None of us can say how those admissions would have been used.  Hybels had to have his eye on his succession plan and planned retirement, and knew that in the present cultural climate, even a private admission on his part about a sensitive issue could go public and put Willow and its Association in jeopardy.

I am not saying that Hybels chose to lie.  And I am not saying that he was even conscious that he had done anything wrong.  (It’s easy to rationalize a host of misbehaviors if you’ve been operating under a “buddy culture.”)

But he and the elders had to know that in this particular area … misconduct toward women … it doesn’t take much for people to coalesce against a common opponent … and for the target of their wrath to become toast.

We all watched the dissolution of Mars Hill Church several years ago.  A church of 14,000 people and its satellite campuses vanished into nothingness seemingly overnight.

Willow may be constructed on a more robust foundation, but in today’s climate … especially with the viciousness of social media … anything is possible.

To Hybels’ credit, he finally made the following statements to his church on the night of his resignation:

“… I realize now that in certain settings and circumstances in the past I communicated things that were perceived in ways I did not intend, at times making people feel uncomfortable.  I was blind to this dynamic for far too long.  For that I’m very sorry.”

He continued:

“… I too often placed myself in situations that would have been far wiser to avoid.  I was, at times, naive about the dynamics those situations created.  I’m sorry for the lack of wisdom on my part.  I commit to never putting myself in similar situations in the future.”

This is a good start.  As the elders listen to the stories of other women, and as Hybels goes through a time of reflection, let’s pray that this conflict can be eventually resolved.

Willow Creek June 14-15, 2005 017

Third, how should Christians view the organized effort to damage Hybels?

More than eight years ago, a small, vocal group inside the church I served wanted to force me out as pastor.  They didn’t have anything on me, so they went after my wife … who was on the staff … instead.  (These events are recounted in my book Church Coup.)

From the moment the accusations against my wife surfaced, I knew that I would end up leaving.

I brought in a church consultant who did some interviews and attended two congregational meetings.  As a former pastor, he knew instinctively what the opposition was trying to accomplish, and spelled it out in his report.  He contained the damage and helped me negotiate an exit package.

But most of my supporters didn’t think matters were all that serious.  Some were trying to figure out how I could stay while addressing the concerns of the opposition.

But my opponents weren’t in a negotiating mood.  They had organized a plan to push me OUT … and the signs were all there.

I don’t know how much opposition Hybels had from within Willow, or whether anybody currently on the staff or elders wanted his scalp.

But I know the signs, and I don’t believe the group effort involving John Ortberg was just after repent/prevent … trying to get Hybels to repent so they could prevent others from being hurt.

In my view, they wanted to damage his reputation as well.

I have a pastor friend who believes that it takes a megachurch pastor like John Ortberg to confront a megachurch pastor like Bill Hybels.  And because I don’t understand “megachurch morality,” my friend may be right.

My friend also believes that Ortberg had nothing to gain by becoming involved in this situation, although I surmised some possibilities in my article from March 28.

But I’m looking for a biblical precedent here, and having a hard time seeing it.  As apostles, Paul and John took on troublemakers inside churches by name, even though they weren’t present in those churches … but does Hybels fit that category?  And has Ortberg been given the authority of an apostle in today’s Christian community?

Something just doesn’t feel right to me about this.

Several thoughts:

*Division inside a congregation begins when churchgoers pool their grievances against a common opponent … usually the pastor.  I throw my two complaints into the mix … you toss in your four … and pretty soon, we have a list of twenty-four grievances against the pastor … and our twenty-four look twelve times worse than my original two.

Now the pastor is a bad guy who has to go because he committed twenty-four offenses!

In the process, I allow myself to be triangled … to take responsibility for your pain … rather than encouraging you to work things out between you and your offender.

It’s far, far better … and much more biblical … for God’s people to implement Matthew 18:15-17 before they do anything else:

#Go to the pastor privately and directly (Jesus doesn’t exclude Christian leaders from His words) and try and get him to repent.

#If he won’t listen, take one or two more with you and try again.

#If he still won’t listen, tell the entire congregation.  (At this point, the official church board would probably become involved, and try and speak with the pastor themselves.  If he wouldn’t repent, then they could call a meeting of the church.)

Were these steps followed by each of the initial four women?  I’m not saying they weren’t, but it bothers me in any church that people can latch onto a group that opposes a pastor before they’ve tried speaking with him themselves.  It’s all too easy for a person with one grievance to carry the grievances of others … and it expands the sense of injustice … although it does make people feel powerful.

In my case, no one ever implemented Matthew 18 and came to me directly.  The first time I heard any charges were in a public church meeting … but Jesus doesn’t begin by saying, “If your brother sins against you … tell it to the church.”

More than eight years later, I still feel horribly violated by those public charges … and by that power tactic.  So I can understand how angry Hybels felt when someone started calling pastors and Christian leaders and accusing him of impropriety.

But is it possible that either Hybels or the elders … or both … made it difficult for the women to come forward and share their stories?

*In the Christian community, a pastor’s attackers are rarely confronted or disciplined.  In my last ministry, even though their tactics were not loving or godly, my detractors were not corrected or warned by anyone official.  Humanly speaking, they got away with it.  In fact, some were later rewarded and given places of leadership.

Sadly, over the years, I’ve learned that the last place an accused pastor can find “justice” is inside a local church.

In Deuteronomy 19:15-21, if a witness in ancient Israel accused someone of a crime, and the accused was later exonerated, the false witness was to be given the same punishment as the person he/she accused.  But this rarely happens in the Christian community today.  Those who slander leaders are almost never dealt with.  A pastor who is publicly accused of wrongdoing is assumed to be guilty without any kind of a trial.  Thank God the report of Hybels having a ten-year affair was quickly rebutted by Willow’s elders or Hybels could have been forced out by a lie four years ago.

*Why did Hybels’ accusers need John Ortberg’s assistance to confront Hybels?

Both the secular and evangelical presses have melded the offended women and the Ortbergs (and the Mellados) together.

I’d like to separate them out for a moment.

I can understand how the initial four women felt wronged as they heard each other’s stories.  And I can understand how one or two of them might choose to represent their friends and approach Willow’s elders with their concerns.

But why bring in Hybels’ former colleague John Ortberg?  (I just noticed on Amazon that they co-wrote a book together.)  Or did he volunteer to help them?  And it seems all the more odd because neither Hybels nor the elders seemed to respond to Ortberg’s overtures very favorably … especially when he and his group issued their infamous five demands.  (Why did they think the elders would agree to them?  Or were they just posturing?)

The women may have been naive about how these things work, but Ortberg assuredly knew what would happen once the women’s claims against Hybels went public.  He knows how the game is played.

Jodi Walle, Ortberg’s executive assistant I mentioned earlier, wrote an open letter to him on her website.  She asked him:

“How is it that now you are the one to give women a voice?  We have a voice.  It’s our job to use it.  To be current and to go to someone if they have harmed us.  You have nothing to say about any of it.  If anything, you are part of the problem.”

But she could have added, “I know what you are doing, John.  You are pushing hard so that Bill resigns.”

There’s an untold story as to Ortberg’s motives that we may never know … and yes, I’ve read his explanation online.

But Jodi Walle’s open letter to Ortberg paints a different picture of him than some might imagine.  Yet so far, to my knowledge, nobody has addressed Walle’s revelations publicly.

Read it yourself at www.jodiwalle.com

I find the silence very telling.

Hybels alleges … and I have no reason to doubt him … that someone was calling pastors and Christian leaders about him over the past few years, but that kind of whispering campaign … and it was a campaign … was designed to ruin Hybels’ reputation.

And contacting the Chicago Tribune about the allegations was the coup de grace.  Who thought that was a good idea?

But guess what?  The tactic worked.  It usually does … and Ortberg, as an experienced pastor, had to know that.

Paul Simon once wrote and sang a song called, “Sure Don’t Feel Like Love.”

And contacting Christian leaders privately and going to a secular newspaper “sure don’t feel like love” either.

*There are two main ways of getting rid of a pastor when he has not done something clearly impeachable:

First, you gather together multiple charges.

In Hybels’ case, there has been one primary charge: his improper behavior toward women.  There haven’t been accusations (to my knowledge) of mishandling church funds, for example, but there have been various allegations of sexual impropriety.

Second, you gather together multiple accusers … like in the Bill Cosby case.  

And that’s what happened with Hybels as well.

But the better way … and the biblical way … is for each individual to deal with issues as they arise.

However … two women claimed they did confront Hybels about his behavior.  One was Julia Wilkins from the gym (mentioned in the latest Christianity Today article), and the other was Vonda Dyer (who wrote her own story online).  It took great courage for those women to go to Hybels … in his office … and confront him … but in neither case did the women report anything resembling an apology.

Having been a pastor for thirty-six years, I know how difficult it is for people inside a church to confront their pastor about wrongdoing.  I could probably count on two hands the number of people that came to me personally over the years, so they stand out in my mind … and I’m probably a gentler person than Hybels.

When he denied any wrongdoing, it’s hard for me to believe that Hybels couldn’t recall those confrontations … especially since both women could have escalated matters by approaching Willow’s elders instead.

Conflicts in churches could be avoided and resolved if people would just address matters as they occur … and that’s certainly what Jesus taught in Matthew 5:23-26, and what Paul taught in Ephesians 4:26-27.

The Bible doesn’t give us a specific statute of limitations on confronting those who may have harmed us, but to go back twenty years to complain about a comment the pastor made seems vengeful to me.

There are two surefire ways to destroy a relationship: make a long list of someone’s offenses and recite it back to them … and mention offenses they may have committed that go back many years.

This is the way the world works.  This isn’t supposed to be the way the church works.

I just wonder who is influencing whom.

Willow Creek Conference June 12-15, 2006 172

Finally, how should people handle their complaints against a pastor?

This is my own shorthand formula:

First, overlook citations.  Pastors are human.  They make mistakes.  They wear down.  They get silly sometimes.  They aren’t always at their best.  Not every “offense” is serious.

My wife leaves her shoes all over the house.  Sometimes I trip on them.  I’ve asked her for years to put them away, but her habits haven’t changed.

To get along, I’ve chosen to overlook the shoes.  It’s not that important.  And she’s chosen to overlook some poor habits of mine.

I’m not prepared to say how many of the accusations against Hybels fall into the citation category, but I can think of a few that caused me to say, “Oh, brother.  That’s just piling on.”

They should have been overlooked rather than tossed into the mix.

Second, confront misdemeanors.  When a pastor has hurt someone … and he may not be aware of that fact … the person offended needs to speak with him privately.  Isn’t that what Matthew 18:15 teaches?  The burden is on the one sinned against to initiate reconciliation.

Most offenses that a pastor commits are misdemeanors in nature.  The only way to restore matters is for the offended person to take the initiative and lovingly approach the offender.

I’ve had people confront me about things I’ve said or did that hurt them, and when I did wrong, I apologized and asked for their forgiveness.

But I’ve also had people confront me about things that I didn’t do or say, and I wouldn’t apologize just to make the matter go away.

Many years ago, on Easter Sunday, the church I was serving had just finished the first service.  The worship team met to evaluate that service and make adjustments for the second service.  Out of nowhere, a male vocalist (who had a handicap) accused me of saying something cruel about him.  To his credit, he confronted me right away, but I didn’t say what he thought he heard, nor would I ever have said it.

Yet he demanded that I apologize to him.  But should I have apologized to him if I didn’t say what he thought I did?

Pastors are accused of offenses all the time … a few to their face, most behind their back.  It’s why Paul wrote 1 Timothy 5:19-21.  My guess is that most of the offenses that a pastor is accused of fall into the misdemeanor category … but relatively few people will ever confront the pastor to make things right.

Instead, they sometimes elevate clear misdemeanors to personal felonies.

Third, investigate felonies.  Many years ago, a woman approached me with information about a member of our church staff.  To put it mildly, he was not the person he claimed to be.

I spent two days at home making phone calls and doing research to find out if her allegations were true … and they were.  Then I shared my written documentation with the church board and we created a plan to confront him with two of the allegations.

They were both serious enough to result in termination.

According to Deuteronomy 19:15-21, when a person was accused of a crime in Israel, the judges commissioned and carried out an investigation, then issued their findings.

Sometimes pastors are accused of serious matters, and the official church board has to investigate the charges.

There are three primary areas that should cause church leaders to investigate a pastor’s conduct: heresy, sexual immorality, and criminal behavior.

Sexual abuse, sexual assault, and sexual intercourse outside marriage all constitute felonies that usually result in the immediate dismissal of a pastor.  By this standard, no one has yet accused Hybels of any ministry felonies.

But … and this is the challenging part … they may feel like felonies to the women involved.  Otherwise, why go public with their accusations?

The elders at Willow launched an internal investigation and then hired an outside investigator to examine the initial charges against Hybels.  One might say that both investigations chose to overlook citations nor cite any felonies.

But it seems obvious now that Hybels committed at least some misdemeanors.  They shouldn’t have been overlooked.

But I believe the moment Hybels’ accusers went public, his ministry at Willow was finished.  That’s the era in which we now live.

_______________

Bill Hybels has a secure place in the history of the Christian church.  He has done enormous good for the kingdom of God, even though many people have questioned or disagreed with his methodologies.

I’d like to recount a well-known verse of Scripture … one that many of us learned as a child:

Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.  Ephesians 4:32

I pray for Bill and Lynne Hybels and wish them well in the future.  And I pray that if Hybels sinned against any of the women who have come forward, that he would admit his wrongdoing and ask for their forgiveness.

And I also pray that the evangelical community, Willow Creek, and Hybels’ accusers can someday forgive him as well.

May this situation cause all of us to examine our own hearts and reexamine the way we deal with those who wrong us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I grew up in Anaheim, California, just two miles from the original Disneyland park.

My family lived so close to Disneyland that during the summer, we’d open our curtains and watch the fireworks from our living room.

The older I got, the more I went to the Magic Kingdom.  One night, a friend and I went there for a private party, and it rained so hard nearly everyone went home early.  For several hours, we went on any ride we wanted without a line.

But three years ago … the last time I went … it was so crowded … and expensive … that I wasn’t sure I wanted to return for a long time.

Besides, I had gone on every ride multiple times over the years.

But I have a “happy place” that I have returned to repeatedly … and I tell people it’s better than ten Disneylands … because there’s always something I haven’t seen.

That place is London, England.

If you haven’t been to London, but you’d like to go someday, please keep reading and pay special attention to my planning tips at the end.

My wife and I have had the privilege of traveling throughout Europe.  We’ve walked the streets of Amsterdam …

Paris …

Prague …

Rome …

and Venice, to name just a few cities.

But I love London the best … so much so that I’ve visited there ten times … and just returned from a seven-day London adventure with my daughter Sarah.

I’ve also been there with my wife Kim … our son … two mission teams … and by myself … and London excites me every time I go.

As a California native, I’ve walked the streets of San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego many times … but I’m far more comfortable in London than anywhere in the US.

Let me share with you five things that make London special for me:

First, the city has incredible variety.

Want entertainment?  London offers world-class plays.  The tickets are less expensive and easier to obtain than those on Broadway.  I’ve seen Mary Poppins, Les Miserables, Beautiful, and Mousetrap (twice), among others.

Want history?  You can tour the rooms where Sir Winston Churchill managed World War 2 …

visit a house where author Charles Dickens wrote three of his novels …

see the famed Rosetta Stone in the British Museum …

visit the house where Handel wrote The Messiah

and visit the dreaded Tower of London.

Want shopping?  I’m not a shopper (I brought home souvenirs totaling $40 in US currency from our recent trip) but London offers Harrods …

Bond and Oxford Streets …

  

Selfridges …

Covent Garden …

Regent Street …

and an incredible number of unique and fashionable stores.

London has something for everyone … including you!

Second, the city is a walker’s paradise.

My daughter Sarah brought her Fitbit along.  On Easter Sunday, we walked fifteen miles together after church.  Overall, we both walked around eighty miles in one week.

Although London is covered with surveillance cameras, there’s a feeling of freedom rather than oppression on the streets.

There are beautiful parks everywhere:

Green Park, adjacent to Buckingham Palace …

St. James Park, across from the palace …

Regent’s Park …

and, of course, King Henry VIII’s hunting grounds … Hyde Park.

It’s also fun to walk the bridges across The Thames.

There are signs and maps everywhere to keep you on track … and everything is in English.

Walking is the best way to see the city because every time you turn a corner, there’s another discovery to be made.

I’ve been watching the British-made Poirot TV shows recently, and stumbled upon this monument in Covent Garden to their author …

and happened upon this monument to Charles Dickens on another site where he lived …

and discovered some Roman ruins after visiting the Museum of London …

and found a sign commemorating a building that was lost during the Great Fire of 1666 …

and found the entrance to the Sky Garden, a building where the public can view London from the top of a huge tower … for free!

If you love Sherlock Holmes (as I do), you can visit his pub near Trafalgar Square …

or the Sherlock Holmes Museum at 221B Baker Street …

or the giant statue of Holmes on Euston Road.

If you love the Beatles, you can visit the zebra crossing at Abbey Road (and it’s always hilarious watching the interplay between vehicles and pedestrians) …

or see 3 Savile Row, the site of their final rooftop concert …

or visit Sir Paul’s house (discreetly) …

or see the Asher house where Paul lived in the mid-1960s (writing “Yesterday” upstairs and “I Want to Hold Your Hand” with John Lennon in the basement) …

or see Sir Paul’s offices in Soho Square …

or visit the Beatles Store (the line is for the Sherlock Holmes Museum next door).

My daughter Sarah finally talked me into accompanying her on a Jack the Ripper Tour which starts above the Tower.  It was eerie yet fascinating.

You can also explore World War 2 sites … or locate and walk through famous churches … or see some Harry Potter sites (like the 9 3/4 platform at King’s Cross Station) … or find discarded Tube stations … or explore Sir Winston Churchill’s haunts.

The list seems endless!

This is why walking through London is my favorite activity in the world.

Third, the city allows for day trips to many famous sites.

This time, my daughter and I took a day trip to two places: Canterbury Cathedral, where Thomas a Becket was killed before the altar (last photo) …

and Dover Castle, which Hitler refused to bomb because he wanted it for himself.  It’s probably the best castle I’ve seen in Europe … complete with underground tunnels and all kinds of staircases and passageways.

You can also visit places like Cambridge …

Oxford …

 

Greenwich …

Windsor Castle …

Stonehenge …

DSCN3476

Bath …

 

Chartwell (Churchill’s home in Kent) …

and the quaint old villages of the Cotswolds.

   

You can take the train from one of London’s stations to most of the above sites.  My wife and I took an Evan Evans bus tour to Bath and Stonehenge last year and loved it!

Fourth, the city features what may be Europe’s greatest number of world class sites.

The British museums are all free (donation requested) so you can enter and exit them at will.

I’ve entered most of the art museums … the National Gallery, the National Portrait Gallery (my favorite), Tate Britain, and Tate Modern … but I never stay long.

I love the British Library, where the Treasures Room has a copy of the Magna Carta … ancient Bibles … and original manuscripts from famous composers and authors …

Trip to London May 15-21, 2009 2 599Trip to London May 15-21, 2009 2 601

the British Museum, which is always crowded but enlightening …

the London Eye, which is expensive but worth it …

Buckingham Palace (which is only open to the public in August and September) …

DSCN6919DSCN0721DSCN0703

King Henry VIII’s Hampton Court Palace …

and, again, the Tower of London.

The city also has some of the greatest churches anywhere, including:

St. Paul’s Cathedral (my favorite church building in the world; the interior is breathtaking) …

Westminster Abbey (Charles Darwin is buried below the entrance; you can step on the grave of King James I inside) …

the Metropolitan Tabernacle, where Charles Spurgeon preached …

All Souls Church, where John Stott pastored for years; we celebrated Easter there this year …

Westminster Chapel, where Martyn Lloyd-Jones preached …

 

and Holy Trinity Brompton, home of the Alpha Course.

Possibly the most thrilling thing I’ve done in London was climbing to the Stone and Golden Galleries at the top of St. Paul’s Cathedral.  I had a terrible cold and little energy but still managed to reach the top … a more exciting event than anything I’ve done at Disneyland.

Trip to London Oct. 6-13, 2008 089

Finally, the city can be enjoyed at a reasonable cost.

London can be expensive, but there are many ways to minimize the costs.

If you’ve never been to London, and you’d like to go, you don’t need to go on a tour or spend a fortune on expensive hotels.

Let me share with you seven tips that can make your first trip to London doable:

*Buy Rick Steves’ book London 2018, preferably as an e-book.  That way, you can click directly on his attraction/hotel links.

 

 

Go to Rick Steves’ website as well.  Watch his videos on London.  Master his tips and you’ll master London.  The sooner you do this, the sooner you’ll start making plans!

*Set a date when you want to go.  Don’t let money make the decision.  Say, “We’re going to London in October 2019.”  Talk and act as if you’re going, and things will fall into place.  Have an adventure!

*It’s cheaper to travel in the spring or fall.  Plane fares can double in the summer.  I’ve traveled over spring break the past three years and secured excellent fares.

Research until you discover a reasonable plane fare.  Aim to fly nonstop.  Find an online service that tracks fares to find the cheapest one.  Wait until you’re ready to buy … and when that fare returns, pounce on it.

I once found a fare from San Francisco to London for $548, but I wasn’t ready to buy.  I waited for weeks, and the fare kept increasing.  Two weeks before my trip, that lower fare returned one night, and I grabbed it.

This last trip, I bought my ticket from Los Angeles to London just before Christmas for less than $650 … and had my choice of seats.

I’ve flown Virgin Atlantic across the pond twice, but I prefer to fly United because they don’t charge for as many extras.

If you buy directly from an airline’s website, you can earn frequent flier miles.  And make sure to buy the insurance … it’s not that much, and definitely worth it.

If you’re an anxious flyer, most trips I’ve taken across the Atlantic have been non-events.  Other than takeoffs and landings, I’ve had flights where the seat belt sign only came on once or twice the entire flight.  From Los Angeles, the whole flight is just short of ten hours … a little longer coming back.

If you book early, you can choose where you’ll sit.  It’s better to book an aisle seat than a window seat on a long flight.  (You have better access to the lavatory.)

*Book your hotel from the US as soon as you set dates.  Consult TripAdvisor and sites like Travelocity (which lets you cancel for free up until a week before your trip.)  You can get cheaper rates if you purchase a non-refundable room, but it removes your flexibility.

The more spacious your room … and the closer to London’s center … the more it will cost.  Figure that unless you’re ill or exhausted, you’ll spend little time in your room.

When I go with my wife, she wants more space.  Last year, we stayed at the Ibis Hotel at Earl’s Court.  We were “off the map,” but it worked out great, except we had to hunt for food all the time.

When I went with my daughter two weeks ago, we secured rooms at a small hotel behind Victoria Station.  The rooms were cozy, but they had everything we needed … for about $100 a night.  (Yes, there was a bed and a TV, but I couldn’t get them into the photo!)

*Eat cheaply.  Some places offer breakfast with the price of your room.  Then you can eat a deli-style/fast food lunch and enjoy a heartier dinner.

This last trip, I ate at Burger King, McDonald’s, KFC, and Pizza Hut to save money … just for a week!  (Five Guys has moved into London as well.)

Victoria Station is full of places to eat, especially upstairs.  If you stay nearby, you’ll have access to all kinds of food at reasonable prices.

*Fly into Heathrow Airport if you can.  The cheapest way to travel into London is on the Underground, also called The Tube.  Go to Heathrow’s Visitor’s Centre and buy an Oyster card for Zones 1 and 2 for the duration of your stay.  You’ll save money on daily tube cards and have access to the entire Underground system.  It’s fun … safe … and efficient … unless the Tube workers on a particular line are on strike.

 

*London always feels safe to me.  While I’ve been disheartened by several attacks inside the city over the past few years, I don’t give it much thought.  I try and return to my hotel by early evening most nights so I can get organized and get a good night’s sleep for the next day.

There’s so much I haven’t talked about: visiting Parliament (the House of Commons or the House of Lords); climbing The Monument; seeing the Imperial War Museum; touring Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre; perusing the Victoria and Albert Museum (the largest decorative arts museum in the world); visiting Leicester Square and Trafalgar Square … and on and on.

Like I say, London is better than ten Disneylands.

Why don’t you make plans to see it yourself?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Several days ago, a friend sent me a link to a story concerning Pastor Bill Hybels from Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Illinois.

Right now, it may be the biggest story in the Christian community.

For many years, Willow Creek was the largest church in the United States, and is now sixth-largest.

If you haven’t yet read the story, here’s a link to the Christianity Today website:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2018/march/bill-hybels-misconduct-willow-creek-john-nancy-ortberg.html

The story also hit the pages of the Chicago Tribune:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-willow-creek-pastor-20171220-story.html

In a nutshell, the story states that Hybels – one of the most influential Christian leaders of his generation – has been accused by several women of “a pattern of sexual harassment and misconduct.”

To my knowledge, no one claims today that Hybels engaged in sexual intercourse with them.  Several years ago, one woman confided in a top Willow Creek leader that Hybels had a “prolonged consensual affair” with her lasting more than a decade, but she has since written a full retraction, confessing that she “wanted to tear [Bill] and Willow down and get it out of my system.”

But several other women have accused Hybels of “suggestive comments, extended hugs, an unwanted kiss, and invitations to hotel rooms.”

Charges first surfaced in April 2014, and Hybels has undergone two separate investigations since that time: an initial investigation by the elders of his church, and a second investigation by Jeffrey Fowler, an outside, independent investigator.

Hybels is due to retire in six months, and has already named a successor as lead pastor and another person as teaching pastor.

I have read everything I could about this story, including the Christianity Today story above, the Chicago Tribune story, and the written and video statements from Pam Orr, the elder chair at Willow, and Hybels himself.  You can find them here:

https://www.willowcreek.org/en/willow-creek-response-to-local-media

I’ve also read comments from the above stories, as well as many comments on Facebook and Twitter.

For many years, I was an advocate of Willow Creek’s approach to church ministry:

*I attended four conferences at the church between 1990 and 2006.

*I pastored a seeker-driven church in Silicon Valley for many years.  During my tenure there, our church sent twenty-two leaders to Willow Creek for training.

*My last three churches were all members of the Willow Creek Association.

*Although I met Bill Hybels once, he would not remember me.

However … I’ve never been enamored with everything Willow does, and have sometimes found myself perplexed or even upset about some of their policies.

But Willow Creek has always been known for its authenticity and transparency, and it’s the single trait I most admire about the church.

I believe that both Hybels and Willow’s elders have handled this situation in as transparent a fashion as possible.  In both investigations, Hybels was asked to turn over his personal technology devices (which were forensically examined), his emails (many of which were automatically deleted from Willow’s server), personal financial records, personal church records, his calendar, and travel records.

How many pastors could survive such scrutiny?

Some pastors would have resigned before any investigation started so their life wouldn’t be exposed.  Still other pastors might have confessed their wrongdoing before an investigation demonstrated their guilt.

But Hybels endured two thorough investigations, and according to Willow’s elders, did not lead or influence either one.

And let me say … as someone who was once investigated for several days … each day feels like a month.

Jeffrey Fowler, the outside investigator, told the Chicago Tribune: “After looking at thousands of documents, after interviewing 29 people, and doing as much as I possibly could, I concluded that there was no basis for believing that Pastor Hybels had engaged in a pattern and practice of misconduct, and to the extent any specific incident had been raised with me, I concluded that his actions in those instances were not inappropriate.”

But this has not satisfied some of Willow’s former staff members.

The names that keep being mentioned are John and Nancy Ortberg and Jim and Leanne Mellado.  Assuming they are the two couples mentioned in the discussions about Hybels, I’ll just call them The Group.

But John Ortberg is the most prominent leader of the “opposition.”

John Ortberg was a teaching pastor at Willow for many years.  He is presently the lead pastor of Menlo Park Presbyterian Church in the San Francisco Bay Area.  I’ve heard Ortberg speak at a church he pastored in Diamond Bar, California nearly thirty years ago and again at Willow in 1994.  I also had lunch with Ortberg’s predecessor fifteen years ago, so I have some familiarity with his ministry.

When the woman mentioned above claimed that she had an affair with Hybels, the Willow Creek Association Board voted not to conduct an investigation.  Nancy Ortberg and several other Christian leaders resigned from the board in protest … which was their right.

But once they resigned … in my view … they forfeited their right to have any further input into the Hybels situation.

The Ortbergs were no longer Willow employees nor church members.  They may have kept some personal ties, but they officially severed ties with the church.  And as a founding staff member from Willow once taught me, “The way you leave is the way you’ll be remembered.”

When the elders decided to investigate Hybels internally, The Group evidently relinquished control of the situation.

But then Hybels was exonerated, not once, but twice.

But The Group did not agree with the process used … and presumably not the conclusions reached.

In fact, according to Bill Hybels:

“Unfortunately, it has become clear that when the woman retracted her story, the group of former staff members who brought the original allegation then began to reach out to women who are or who have been a part of Willow, asking if any of them have ever had an uncomfortable interaction with me. Without mentioning the woman’s full retraction, they told women that I had an inappropriate relationship that Willow’s Elders had covered up, and they invited the women to share any negative experiences of their own.”

They have now escalated their attacks against Willow’s elders and Hybels himself, to the point that Hybels is convinced they are colluding to destroy his reputation.  Hybels told the Chicago Tribune:

“This has been a calculated and continual attack on our elders and on me for four long years. It’s time that gets identified.  I want to speak to all the people around the country that have been misled … for the past four years and tell them in my voice, in as strong a voice as you’ll allow me to tell it, that the charges against me are false.  There still to this day is not evidence of misconduct on my part.”

Hybels then told his congregation: “The lies you read about in the Tribune article are the tools this group is using to try to keep me from ending my tenure here at Willow with my reputation intact.  Many of these alleged incidents purportedly took place more than [20] years ago. The fact that they have been dredged up now and assembled in a calculated way demonstrates the determination of this group to do as much damage as they possibly can.”

I’m trying to get my head around why a leader like John Ortberg … who was Hybels’ ministry colleague and friend … would do something like this.

The following questions are based purely on speculation:

*Did he and Bill fall out personally when they were both at Willow?  Hybels evidently is not an easy man to work for.

*Did Ortberg secretly hope that he would be named Hybels’ successor?

*Does he view himself as the leader of a rival movement to Willow Creek?

*Has he become a public supporter of the #MeToo Movement, especially inside Christian churches?

*Does he know something from his time at Willow about the way the board protects Hybels regardless of any mistakes he’s made?

*Does Ortberg believe he is the best person possible to represent some of Hybels’ accusers?

*Does he really want Hybels to be exposed so he can repent and be restored?

I don’t know the answers to those questions, and Ortberg may not know the answers, either.  He was recently quoted as saying, “This information came to us in a way that was unlooked for, unwanted, and it put us in a terrible situation.”

But a more likely possibility is that when Ortberg took his initial public stand against the elders and Hybels himself, he has tried ever since to show that he’s right and the leaders at Willow are wrong.

In other words, this conflict has degraded into winners and losers.

And if Hybels is declared innocent of all charges, that makes The Group look foolish, if not bad … causing some people to wonder if they’re guilty of fostering division and slander.

At this point, I’d like to share my own story briefly.

Like Hybels, I am now nearing the age of retirement.  I dreamed of retiring while still a pastor.

But in December 2009, I resigned from my pastoral tenure of 10 1/2 years at a Bay Area church because I was lied right out of the church.

I wrote a book called Church Coup if you’re interested in my story.  And I spent a lot of time in the book detailing the steps that lead a pastor to resign under duress.

My predecessor was involved in the coup.  After going into retirement for nine years, he wanted to return to the church … but first had to push me out.

He worked with the board, the associate pastor, and others to get rid of me … and their plot worked.

After I left, a nine-person team investigated the charges against me and concluded that there was no evidence of wrongdoing.

Another pastor succeeded me.  I have never spoken with him nor met him.

But I could never, ever do anything to undermine that pastor.

Why not?

*When I left the church, I left it for good.  I have never returned for any kind of service or event … and I have no plans to do so.

*The church chose its own board members without my input.  They govern the church.  I have no say in what goes on there, and it would be unethical if I did.

*If the church mistreated someone … and many of my friends eventually left in tears or in anger … I might be able to advise them on what to do, but I would never think to advise the board … nor would they want my input.

Let me state this clearly:

It is unethical for a pastor or staff member to interfere with the governance of any church they once served.

God did not appoint John Ortberg to be the elder chair or one of the elders at Willow Creek Community Church.

God appointed him to serve as pastor of a church in the Bay Area instead.  That’s where his authority lies.

He may have some moral or spiritual authority in the wider Christian community, but he has zero authority where he is not welcome.

And his ideas and counsel are not wanted by Willow’s elders.

The most breathtaking part of this entire story are the demands that The Group made to the elders at Willow.  This is from the WC website:

“The two couples made specific demands outlining how they wanted the investigation to unfold and the control that they wanted to have—demands that our Elders deemed unreasonable and unbiblical. These demands included the following:

  • These couples (non–Willow members) would approve the choice of the investigator.
  • The investigation would run the full course of Bill’s adulthood (from 18 years old and ongoing).
  • These couples would be able to choose the witnesses who were interviewed, and all people interviewed would have full indemnification.
  • The investigation reports would all be public regardless of the outcome.
  • These couples would insist that there be a public admission of anything that they (not the investigator or the Elders) deemed inappropriate.”

When my wife reviewed the story the other night, she asked me this question: “Who do the Ortbergs think they are?”

Hybels has been thoroughly investigated twice.  He has been exonerated both times.  Why would Willow’s elders then turn over an investigation to people who seem to want Hybels’ scalp?

The elders of Willow have spoken unanimously.  And they have shared their conclusion as to what’s really going on:

“This small group of former staff members has articulated outright to several people that they believe Bill does not deserve to finish his ministry tenure at Willow well, despite the thorough and conscientious investigative process that has cleared his name. It has become clear to us that they have decided to spread this sentiment through rumors and now through the media. They aggressively shopped the story to multiple media outlets. These actions fail to live up to biblical standards, and they have caused much pain for many people. We have deep sadness over the broken relationships with people we have respected and people we love. We are grieved for Bill and his family. After 42 years of faithfully pastoring you and me, our congregation, and after his family giving sacrificially, this has been painful beyond words for them.”

I’m sure there are people who do not like or agree with their verdict, but it’s time to accept it and for everyone to go home and focus on their own ministries.

From my vantage point … and I could be reading matters wrong … it looks like The Group … which includes Ortberg … is doing everything they can to get Hybels fired.

Let Bill Hybels serve out his last six months in peace.

If Hybels has been lying, the Lord will deal with him … either in this life, or the next life.

If the elders engaged in a cover-up, let God deal with them as well.

God is the Ultimate Judge.  He will right any wrongs.

In fact, God only uses imperfect people, including pastors, elders, staff members, and investigators.

And the longer this controversy goes on, the wider and deeper the breach will become in the body of Christ.

As Paul asked the Corinthians:

Why not rather be wronged?  Why not rather be cheated?  Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.  I Corinthians 6:7-8

For the sake of the gospel and the advancement of Christ’s church … please, let it go.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When I was a pastor, a friend once approached me at a planning meeting and informed me, “Jill (who wasn’t a team member) is mad at you.”

My initial response was not, “Why is she mad at me?”

It was, “How many people has she told?”

Looking away, my friend used both fingers to count, and then replied, “Ten.”

At that point, I asked, “What did I do to upset her?”

My friend replied, “You didn’t say hi to her one Sunday.”

How was I supposed to respond to such a complaint?

I know some pastors who would have said, “Thank you, friend, for bringing this situation to my attention.  I will contact Jill as soon as possible and try and straighten this whole thing out.”

But I had learned a different … and far healthier … way to handle matters.

If Jill was upset with me, the onus was on her to contact me.  Isn’t that what Jesus teaches in Matthew 18:15?

“If your brother sins against you, go and reprove him in private.  If he listens to you, you have won your brother.”

My response?

“Please tell Jill that if she’s really upset with me, she needs to tell me personally.  Otherwise, I will assume this isn’t an issue she really cares about.”

Jill never did contact me about that issue.

One of the characteristics of an unhealthy family is that family members fail to speak directly with the spouse or parent or child or sibling they’re upset with.

Instead, they share their feelings with other family members, but never with the object of their discontent.

A common scenario is that Brother Bill tells his Mother Mary that he’s upset with Sister Susie, but Bill never tells Susie directly.

And in many families, as soon as Bill leaves the house, Mary tells Susie what Bill told her.

But that kind of behavior doesn’t just happen in families … it also happens in churches … especially during major conflicts.

Nearly eight-and-a-half years ago, I called a meeting of our entire congregation to announce the resignations of the official church board as well as the associate pastor.

I didn’t want to make those announcements, but somebody had to do it, and as senior pastor, I was the logical choice.

Because the board members and associate pastor had resigned, their viewpoints and opinions should not have carried much, if any, weight with the congregation.

By resigning, they had forfeited their right to speak.  As church conflict expert Speed Leas observes:

“It is understandable that someone who is hurt, not helped, or bored by what is going on in a congregation may choose to leave it.  Indeed, it is understandable that one might choose to leave as a protest, hoping to influence the future policy or staffing.  However, it is not appropriate that once having abandoned the responsibility of running and paying for a church’s ministry, one should have equal weight in telling those who are maintaining it how to run it.  The right to confront an organization’s leadership comes with being responsible for its future.  Therefore, it is important to consider members’ current commitment when they advise what should be done in the future or complain about what has happened in the past.”

But there was someone in the church who had spoken with individuals from the former board as well as the ex-associate.

In my book Church Coup, I called him George.

George decided to stand up in the meeting and speak for the board members and the associate pastor.

In fact, he recited a litany of charges against me, charges he claimed came directly from the mouths of those seven former leaders.

But George’s behavior raised all kinds of problems:

Did the board members give George permission to speak for them?  How would the church know?

Did the associate give George permission to speak for him as well?

How accurately was George conveying their “charges?”  He wasn’t reading a letter from any of them but was rattling accusations off the top of his head.

If people needed evidence or clarification, how well could George represent those leaders?

There’s a word for George’s actions.  He was engaging in hearsay.

No one could verify the validity of George’s charges because he was speaking for people who were absent.

What if the board members or associate had lied to George?

What if George had misinterpreted what they were telling him?

And what if I wanted to respond to those charges?  How could George continue to speak for them?

And was George aware that this was the first time I had ever heard most of those complaints?

Speed Leas comments:

“It is difficult to be in contact with partners who have left the scene.  Sometimes people just drop out; they stop attending or participating in any church functions.  But other times they stay at home and participate by telephone.  Other people then come to the meetings bearing the grievances of dissatisfied persons who are not present to convey their views accurately and responsibly.  This kind of behavior is difficult and annoying to deal with.  Anonymous or relayed communications stay at the point where they began. . . . One bishop I know insists that the participants at conflict meetings only speak for themselves.  He strongly encourages them to make ‘I think,’ or ‘I believe,’ or ‘I know’ statements rather than remarks such as ‘Some people have said’ or ‘A lot of people are upset’ or ‘I am speaking for those who have spoken to me and are afraid to speak out.'”

The more anxious families become, the more they slide into dysfunction.

And the more stressed church families become, the more dysfunctionality becomes the norm.

When a conflict is about something unrelated to the pastor, he can present biblical ground rules for communication and encourage all parties to practice them.

But when the pastor becomes the target of a conflict, he cannot publicly advise the church on how to handle matters.

For a church to survive a public assault on their pastor, the congregation needs one or more godly, sensible individuals to stand up assertively to define what healthy and unhealthy behavior looks like.

Is there anyone like that in your church right now?

Let me encourage you.

If you’re upset with another brother or sister in Christ … even if they’re a leader … you have five options:

*Let it go.

*Tell the Lord alone.

*End the relationship.

*Leave the church.

*Speak with the person directly.

It’s okay to consult with a wise believer provided they can be trusted … but even after such a consultation, you’re still left with only five choices.

And if you’re asked to represent others in public, gently defer … or you’ll be caught in a triangle between two parties.

In Luke 12:13, someone came to Jesus and asked Him, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.”

Jesus responded, “Okay.  Just give me your address and I’ll go speak with him right now.”

No, Jesus didn’t do that!

Instead, He asked this question:

“Man, who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you?”

Even Jesus stayed out of family squabbles and relational triangles.

If the Son of God was unwilling to speak for others, we should follow His example.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fifty years ago, Richard Nixon was once again running to become President of the United States.

And his campaign had planned a rally at the Anaheim Convention Center, across the street from Disneyland, one summer evening.

My friend Steve was going to be singing in a large youth choir, and he invited me to tag along … even though I didn’t know any of the songs.

When Steve and I first entered the Convention Center, we saw a woman that looked like Nixon’s wife Pat.  We followed her for maybe ten minutes before we found out it wasn’t her.

The choir was positioned directly above the stage where Nixon would be speaking.  After we sang our songs … which I had to learn quickly … Nixon spoke.

I can’t recall anything he said.

Two other remembrances from that evening:

*Steve and I ran into Burt Ward, who played Robin on the TV show “Batman,” and we both got his autograph.  I have never seen someone write so fast in my life.

*Nixon had a catchy campaign song.  The chorus went like this:

Nixon’s the one

Nixon’s the one

Nixon’s the one

For me

Ten year later, I was standing outside Anaheim (now Angel) Stadium after a game between the Milwaukee Brewers and the California Angels.

The lights were turned off behind Gate 1 where various ballplayers sometimes came out after the game.  I was waiting to get the autographs of any player I could.

I remember getting the autograph of Brewer’s player Paul Molitor on his rookie card.  He went on to become a member of the Baseball Hall of Fame.

And then former President Richard Nixon emerged from Gate One.

Nixon lived in nearby San Clemente, and he often visited the ballpark as a guest of Angels’ owner Gene Autry.

As I recall, he had two secret servicemen around him.

Three of us walked up to the ex-President and politely asked him for his signature.  Nixon signed for all of us and was very compliant.

Richard Nixon Signature 001

The Nixon Library, located in Yorba Linda, California, is probably fifty miles from my home.  While I’ve only been there once, I’m on their mailing list, and receive invitations constantly for book signings, lectures, and special events.

Trip to Buena Park - Nixon Library Nov. 17-20, 2011 059

President Nixon did far more good for his country than he’ll ever receive credit for, but most people will only remember him for Watergate.

But as former President Clinton once said:

Trip to Buena Park - Nixon Library Nov. 17-20, 2011 025

_______________

Back in 1966, actor Ronald Reagan ran for Governor of my home state of California.  He was elected for a four-year term.

Four years later, Reagan ran for re-election, and made many campaign stops.

One stop was at Loara High School in Anaheim … the school I attended.  (Famous Loara grads include three singers: Jeff and Tim Buckley and Gwen Stefani.)  Loara had won the AAA football championship two years before and had an award-winning band, so maybe that’s why the campaign stopped there.

Trip to Anaheim April 13-18, 2009 036

After school one day, Reagan’s campaign bus drove onto the athletic field where many of us played.

The governor emerged and a few of us quickly went up to him and asked him for his signature.

(Unless a public figure is doing a meet and greet somewhere, the only way to get someone’s autograph is to walk up to them assertively and ask them for it.)

Reagan whipped out his own felt pen from his suit pocket and signed several items … left-handed … including a 3×5 index card for me and another for my friend Steve.

Ronald Reagan Signature 001

I should have stayed for whatever event was planned that day, but I was so excited to get Reagan’s autograph that I went straight home.

Fourteen years later, Reagan was running for a second term as President, and he came to DeAnza College in Cupertino, California … near the current Apple Headquarters … and held a rally in their stadium.

I took my kids along and hoisted my son Ryan on my shoulders so he could see the President when he was speaking.

We waved at the motorcade after the event, and I never saw President Reagan again.  (Note the slogan on the Reagan poster below!)

Trip to Anaheim April 13-18, 2009 514

However, my brother John lived in San Bernardino for many years, and he lived across the street from a Secret Service agent who told John that Reagan and his wife Nancy were flying into March Air Force Base in Riverside.  Even though Reagan was no longer President, the agent asked John if he wanted to meet Reagan.

When the former President and his wife got off the plane, John and his wife Joy were the only two people there to greet them.  Reagan greeted them both by name and John had video taken of the event.

The Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California, is really cool.  There’s a US government helicopter on display at the Nixon Library.

Trip to Buena Park - Nixon Library Nov. 17-20, 2011 080

The Reagan Library has Air Force One … which you can tour!

Trip to Anaheim April 13-18, 2009 541

_______________

There was a leader in my last church who was a lobbyist for a major corporation.  He often flew to Washington DC during the week for important meetings.

Knowing my interest in politics, my friend asked me if I wanted to attend Bush’s first public speech after 9/11 in Sacramento, California.

I said yes.

When George W. Bush was re-elected President in 2004, my friend asked me if I wanted to attend Bush’s Inauguration.

I said yes.

We stayed at a 5-star hotel … it was 16 degrees outside and snowing the day before the event … but going to the inauguration was a lot of fun.

Washington Pictures 2 Jan. 19-21 011

Washington Pictures 2 Jan. 19-21 055

Another time, Bush 45 was going to be speaking to a group of business people at a hotel near the San Francisco Airport, and my friend invited me to go along.

As I recall, it was a $2000 a plate luncheon.

I remember seeing … and hearing … the protesters across the frontage road … going through security … being forced to wear a suit … and being given very little edible food for lunch.

Comedian Dennis Miller warmed up the crowd and introduced 45, and when he was almost done speaking, my friend leaned over and said to me, “When he’s done speaking, go up and shake his hand.”

So I did.  There was a rope around the perimeter of the podium, but Bush came up to the rope afterward.  When he shook my hand, I blanked out, and said, “Thank you.”  He did a double take and then kept shaking hands.

“Thank you?”  That was the best I could say?

_______________

In November 2012, Mitt Romney was running for President against incumbent Barack Obama.

Romney’s last rally was in Manchester, New Hampshire … ten minutes down the hill from the apartment my wife and I were renting at the time.  (I was serving a church in New Hampshire as interim pastor.)

My wife was in California, and I had nothing else to do, so I drove downtown and walked to the Verizon Arena where Romney would eventually be speaking.

Mitt Romney Rally Manchester Nov. 5, 2012 023

It was cold outside … 30 degrees … but the place was packed.

I met a guy in line, and we hung out together, taking photos of each other while standing about thirty feet from Romney.

Kid Rock sang a few songs … I didn’t know any of them, but they were LOUD … and some other politicians showed up and spoke.

Romney and his wife finally emerged around 11:30 pm.  As rallies went, it was well-planned and exciting.

fff 010

Mitt Romney Rally Manchester Nov. 5, 2012 095

Romney lost New Hampshire anyway.

_______________

I’ve had brief encounters with three presidents … one before he took office, one while in office, and one after he left office.

I’ll always remember those brief encounters … and someday, tell my grandchildren about them.

However, the Gospels are full of brief encounters that various men and women, boys and girls had with Someone far greater.

And people not only remembered those encounters … those encounters changed their lives.

Thankfully, a few of those meetings were recorded for us in the pages of the New Testament.

I’d rather have an encounter with Jesus than anyone else.

As Billy Graham’s vocalist George Beverly Shea wrote and sang:

I’d rather have Jesus than silver or gold

I’d rather be His than have riches untold

I’d rather have Jesus than houses or lands

I’d rather be led by His nail-pierced hand

Than to be the king of a vast domain

Or be held in sin’s dread sway

I’d rather have Jesus than anything

This world affords today

And that includes ANY President you can name.

 

 

The late 1960s band Buffalo Springfield (featuring Stephen Stills, Neil Young, and present-day Calvary Chapel pastor Richie Furay) didn’t last very long, but they had one big hit song to their name: “For What It’s Worth.”

Describing an encounter with police on the Sunset Strip in Los Angeles, the final verse says:

Paranoia strikes deep

Into your life it will creep

It starts when you’re always afraid

Step out of line, the man come, and take you away

Those words encapsulate not only how it feels to be caught in a mass protest, but also how it feels to be the pastor of a church in the 21st century.

It is possible for a pastor to love the Lord and his congregation and yet feel emotionally insecure and even petrified at times.

Or as a famous Christian leader once said in an interview, “I’m always running scared.”

As I reflect on my 36 years of church ministry, I can identify at least six occasions when I felt a degree of pastoral paranoia:

First, when somebody came up to me and said, “Pastor, I need to make an appointment to talk to you about something.”

People would usually say that before or after a Sunday service, and my first reaction would be, “Did I say or do something to offend them?”

I’d ruminate over our relationship and see if I could guess why they were coming to see me.

*Were they angry with something I said in a sermon?

*Were they upset with a leadership decision I’d made?

*Were they ticked off at a staff member?

*Were they upset with the way the church was managing funds?

There were times when I tried so hard to guess their concerns that I couldn’t sleep.

But more than 90% of the time, I’d guess wrong.  As Tom Petty sang, “Most things I worry about, never happen anyway.”

They usually wanted to talk to me about their spouse, or their kids, or their boss, or a friend … and they didn’t have anything negative to say to me.

But on a few occasions, someone did come in with guns blazing … and those times … however rare … stayed with me for years.

And they tended to impact every subsequent occasion when someone told me, “Pastor, I need to talk to you …”

Second, when I didn’t hear any encouraging words after a sermon.

Preaching is a funny thing.

Sometimes I’d prepare what I thought was a great message, and hardly anybody would comment on it afterward.

Other times, I’d come to the pulpit feeling dry and uninspired, and I’d receive many uplifting comments afterwards.

In my last church, I spoke to 300+ adults every Sunday.  If just two people said something positive about a message, I felt that I had done my job.

But if nobody said a word, I’d feel like a failure … and would start to wonder, “Am I losing it?”

When I first started preaching, I stood at the door and greeted everyone after the service was done.  I came to hate that time because (a) some people would avoid me altogether, (b) some people would say perfunctory things (“good message, pastor”), and (c) I couldn’t take much time to listen or pray with people.

So after a while, I stopped engaging in the “glorifying the worm” ceremony (in the words of Joe Aldrich) and just stood at the front where I had time to listen to people or pray with them after the service.

Since traffic was flowing out of the worship center … not toward the front … it was natural that I wouldn’t hear most people’s thoughts after a message.

But based on a lack of information, I sometimes wondered, “Could my preaching days be over?”

Third, when someone falsely accused me of wrongdoing.

In baseball, it’s still true that “three strikes and you’re out.”

But in church ministry, it’s increasingly true that just one strike can cause the termination of your position … and your career.

Someone once accused me of doing something that I did not do.

I did something … someone became angry … and then they attached a label to my behavior that completely misrepresented my actions.

The church board became involved, and although they didn’t declare me guilty, it felt like I had a cloud over me for years.

Because if somebody wanted to hurt me, all they had to say was, “Did you know that Jim was guilty of _______________?”

And if I was one of the last ones to hear the accusation … as can happen with pastors … my ministry … and possibly my career … could have been over.

Pastors are aware that people talk about them all the time.

When you’re first in ministry, it bothers you a great deal.  But the longer you’re in ministry, the more you expect to be discussed … and even dissected.

But when you’re slandered … and every pastor is lied about to some degree … the official board needs to use a fair and just process to evaluate those accusations … or they might choose to take the easy road instead.

The easy road involves telling the pastor, “We’re sorry, but even though you may be innocent of the charges going around the church, so many believe them by this time that we don’t see how you can stay and pastor this congregation.”

The knowledge that just one devastating false allegation can end a pastor’s ministry forever is enough to make even the most godly man shake in his boots.

And that possibility can make any pastor paranoid.

Fourth, when an influential Christian leader came to hear me preach.

During my first pastorate, an older pastor and his wife visited our Sunday service one morning.

After the sermon, the pastor’s wife shook my hand at the door and said, “Good diction.”

Good diction?  That was the best she could say?

Around the same time, our district minister … a popular preacher in his own right … visited our church and heard me preach on repentance.

He praised my message up and down … and later told me, “You’re the best preacher in Northern California.”

The truth was somewhere in between.  I was a better preacher than “good diction” but definitely not “the best preacher” for miles around!

As a pastor, if an influential Christian leader was visiting my church the following Sunday, I preferred not to know about it ahead of time.

Because if I did, I was liable to over-prepare my sermon and not be myself.  A pastor does his best preaching when he’s relaxed in the Lord.

The office manager at one of my churches had a father who was a seminary professor.

One Easter, he came to visit, and came up to me after the service and said, “Great message!”

The more “good dictions” a pastor gets, the more paranoid he becomes in the pulpit.

But the more “great messages” he gets, the less paranoid he becomes.

But as every pastor knows, you’re only as good as your last sermon.

Fifth, when I was making a controversial statement in a sermon.

The trend back in the 1980s and 1990s was for a pastor to write out a manuscript of his sermon.

The manuscript demonstrated preparation … and required exact wording.

The trend today is for a pastor to speak without notes, and although I can do that, I prefer to have structure when I speak … or I’m afraid I’ll just ramble on and on.

Over time, I learned that the more controversial the topic, the more precise … and even diplomatic … I had to be with my words … or I might needlessly offend the very people I was trying to instruct.

As my hearers can attest, I never shied away from anything controversial.  Just preaching the Bible is controversial enough!

But I often wondered, “Who might be offended by this sermon?”

During my final year, I gave a sermon celebrating sex inside marriage from 1 Corinthians 7:1-5.  I received a terrific response from some people, but some seniors were so upset with me that they promised to boycott the rest of the series on marriage.

The best pastors are bold when they preach, but when people protest against you for preaching the Word of God … that can make you paranoid.

Finally, when churchgoers told their previous pastor about me.

During my last pastorate, my predecessor visited our church one time, and while we were talking, I discovered that he knew all about the false accusation I mentioned earlier.

I tried to explain what happened from my vantage point, but I’m uncertain how much he believed me.

Then he told me, “So-and-so calls me all the time to complain about you.”

It wasn’t a surprise.  I figured that was the case.

So to what degree could I trust my predecessor and So-and-so after that?

There was a group of people in that church who were more loyal to my predecessor than to me.

Some held leadership positions when he was pastor, but for biblical reasons, I could not let them be leaders.

So they constantly called or emailed him, and when he came to town … which he did a few times a year … they would get together.

And, in many ways, those people were responsible for pushing me out as pastor.

An older man came up to me one time and said, “I drove up to see (your predecessor) recently.  We talked about you!”

What a stupid, insensitive comment that was.

And over time, such comments can make a pastor wonder if there’s a plot to get rid of him.

And in my case, there was … and my predecessor was heavily involved.

_______________

This article isn’t meant to be the last word on pastoral paranoia, but merely a starting point.

There are two extremes that pastors must avoid when it comes to paranoia:

If a pastor trusts everybody, his ministry could be over.

John writes about Jesus in John 2:24-25, “But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all men.  He did not need man’s testimony about man, for he knew what was in a man.”

Jesus did not arrive in public and loudly proclaim, “Hey, everybody, I’m the Messiah!”  No, He gradually revealed that information only to select individuals … and only as they were able to grasp it.

He reserved certain actions and words for The Twelve but not the multitudes.  There are things about a pastor his congregation never needs to know.

Share the wrong thing with the wrong person … and your ministry could be history.

But if a pastor stops trusting everyone, then his ministry will eventually die.

A pastor has to trust his inner circle.  If he can’t, his ministry won’t last very long.

Jesus trusted His inner circle … Peter, James, and John … to the point where only they observed Him feeling “sorrowful and troubled” … and only they heard Him say, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death.  Stay here and keep watch with me” (Matthew 26:37-38).

For whatever reason, Jesus didn’t want His other eight disciples to witness His emotional distress in Gethsemane.  He was willing to be transparent with only three.

During my last ministry, I trusted very few individuals with my innermost thoughts and feelings.

Several people proved trustworthy, and as far as I know, they have kept my confidences to this day.

But someone else did not.

I remember two extended conversations I had with a key leader.  I shared with him some struggles I was having, and later on, that information was used against me.

Since I shared that information only with him, I knew where the leak originated.

I’m reminded of the old joke about the three preachers who met and decided to confess their sins to each other.

The first preacher said, “I really struggle with alcohol.”

The second preacher admitted, “I really struggle with lust.”

The third preacher exclaimed, “I really struggle with gossip, and I can’t wait to tell others about you two!”

Since all too many of God’s people struggle with gossip, it’s best if pastors share their innermost thoughts and feelings with only a handful of trustworthy individuals … preferably from outside his congregation.

_______________

In my fifth year of pastoral ministry, I sank into a deep depression because the ministry was not going well.

My wife was greatly concerned for my well-being.  I was barely functioning.

She told me she was going to find me a Christian counselor.  I told her, “Just find the best-educated person you can.”

She finally found someone with two doctoral degrees.

I drove 35 minutes each way to see him twice a week for four months.

I never breathed a word about my counseling visits to anybody in the church other than my wife.

Christians have a way of panicking when they hear their pastor is hurting.  It’s unrealistic, but many churchgoers need a pastor who is always strong and even superhuman.

And when they hear the pastor isn’t doing well emotionally, they easily imagine the worst.

Years later, after I overcame that depression, I felt comfortable sharing my counseling experience both while preaching and in writing so I could help others to lessen the stigma of going for counseling.

While it was important that I become more emotionally healthy, neither the church board nor the congregation needed to know the process God used to help me become functional again.

That was between the Lord and my wife and me.

Let me ask this question of you:

What else causes pastoral paranoia?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

%d bloggers like this: