Pastor Jon was in trouble.
He had graduated from Yale as a young man, becoming valedictorian of his class, and later became a faculty member there. But he sensed that God wanted him to become a pastor rather than a professor.
So Jon was called to pastor the church that his grandfather had led for 57 years … a prestigious church of 600 members.
Several years later, Jon’s ministry gained great fame when 300 people were converted within 6 months. He later preached one of the most influential sermons of all time.
But although Jon was held in high esteem outside his church, his influence gradually began to wane among his own congregation.
For starters, Jon was paid by the local town council, and some people objected to the fine clothes and jewelry that his wife wore.
Since the townspeople paid his salary, they felt they had a right to know how Jon and his wife Sarah spent their money, so they requested an itemized family budget.
Sarah began having nightmares about “being driven from my home into the cold and snow” and “being chased from the town with the utmost contempt and malice.” She imagined that her enemies surrounded and tormented her, worrying “if our house and all our property in it should be burnt up.”
In addition, Jon had noticed that many of his converts seemed to be more emotional than devout about their Christian faith, so he began to stiffen the requirements for church membership.
He also insisted upon “closed communion,” believing that only believers who had given evidence of conversion should take it, eventually resulting in the suspension of the Lord’s Supper for many years.
Jon also believed that a church should be a theocracy (ruled by God through the minister) rather than a democracy (ruled by congregational decision-making).
While Jon could sense that some were rebelling against him, he was often locked away in his study. But his wife could feel what he couldn’t see.
He wrote a book to explain his views … but hardly anyone read it. People began to spread hearsay testimony against him, claiming that he wanted to “judge souls.”
After 23 years as pastor, Jon was finally voted out of office by a 10-9 vote. His ministerial career was over.
Because Pastor Jon was dismissed over a matter of conscience, the church had a hard time attracting pastoral candidates. Because Jon couldn’t sell his house, he stayed in town, and even did some guest preaching for the church that fired him.
Finally, Jon was asked to be a missionary and moved across the state. During that time, he wrote books … mainly on theology … works for which he is still known today.
Jon was asked to become the president of Princeton, and died a few months later at the age of 54. Sarah died 6 months afterwards.
If you haven’t guessed already, Pastor Jon was one of the greatest philosophers, theologians, and preachers that America has ever produced: Jonathan Edwards.
He pastored a church in Northampton, Massachusetts, from 1727 to 1750 … and found himself right in the middle of the First and Second Great Awakenings.
Edwards’ case shows that given the right conditions, every pastor is susceptible to forced termination.
There is a general consensus among Christians that when a pastor is forced to resign, he must have done something to cause his dismissal.
But I know many pastors who have sterling character … are wonderful preachers … and caring pastors … who have been pushed out of a church.
In fact, the latest statistics say that 28% of all pastors have gone through at least one forced termination … and I know good men who have been through this experience two or three times.
Yes, a small percentage of pastors probably shouldn’t be in church ministry. And yes, there are some highly dysfunctional churches out there, most of them ruled by a single individual or family.
But many … if not most … pastoral terminations occur because of a “perfect storm.”
I once knew a pastor who had great success in two churches. When he was called to the third church, things did not go well, and he quickly latched onto another position. Was that last situation all his fault – or was it simply a combination of circumstances?
In my own case – which I’ve recorded in my book Church Coup – my departure occurred because of a variety of factors, including a national recession (which impacted giving), inexperienced and over-reactive leaders, an undermining predecessor, exaggerated charges, and my own exhaustion, which caused me to be reactive rather than proactive in handling conflict.
In the case of Jonathan Edwards, here was an authoritarian pastor, a town increasingly receptive to democratic ideals, three wealthy individuals who opposed Edwards, the unfortunate death of his best ally, and the long shadow of Edward’s grandfather Samuel Stoddard, who was still venerated by the people of Northampton … and some of whose practices Edwards tried in vain to change.
But that’s not the whole story.
According to William J. Petersen’s book 25 Surprising Marriages, the union of Jonathan and Sarah Edwards produced the following descendants: “13 college presidents, 65 professors, 100 lawyers, 30 judges, 66 physicians, and 8 holders of public office, including 3 senators, 3 governors, and a vice president of the United States.”
There’s an old saying that states that history is written by the conquerors. So I suppose that whenever a pastor undergoes forced termination, those who pushed him out think that their story is the final account.
But as the life of Jonathan Edwards demonstrates, even the greatest of men can be rejected by their contemporaries.
Just like Jesus.
Restoring Kingdom Builders 
Beating Back a Pastoral Termination
Posted in Conflict with Church Antagonists, Conflict with Church Board, Conflict with the Pastor, Pastoral Termination, Please Comment!, Uncategorized, tagged countering a church coup attempt, forced termination of pastor, pastoral termination on November 17, 2017| Leave a Comment »
Pastor Joel could barely breathe.
The pastor of Good News Church for six years, Joel had just received a phone call from Tim, the board chairman. Tim informed Joel that a group in the church had just held a secret meeting intended to force Joel out of his position as pastor.
So many questions whizzed through Joel’s mind, among them:
*Who was in the group?
*What were they upset about?
*Why didn’t anyone share their concerns with Joel himself?
*How long had they been meeting?
*How much did the staff and board know about them?
Joel instantly became disoriented and confused. He couldn’t think clearly. He began having an anxiety attack … maybe even a full-blown panic attack.
He had been targeted before in his previous two ministries.
In his first pastorate, a group of former lay leaders organized and tried to push him out. But the board backed Joel completely, and the malcontents all left.
In his next pastorate, two staff members and three board members conspired to get rid of Joel, but their plot also failed, and they all departed together.
So Joel had been attacked before, but even though he had survived both attempts, he prayed that he would never have to go through another one.
And now this.
While Joel knew a lot intellectually about how to handle such a coup attempt, he also knew that when he was threatened, his emotions tended to overwhelm his brain, and that he quickly went into “fight or flight” mode.
He needed divine support, so he paused to ask God for wisdom and strength.
He needed human support, so he asked himself, “Which leaders do I know are 100% behind me?”
He identified three: Tim, the board chairman; Ron, the outreach pastor; and Craig, a former board chairman.
Joel contacted each person and asked if they could meet that night at a restaurant four miles outside town. All three agreed.
When everyone arrived, Joel asked Tim to tell the others about his phone call. Then Joel … thinking a bit more clearly … asked the following questions which he had written on a napkin:
*Tim, who told you about the plot?
*Why do you think they told you?
*Who do we know that opposes my ministry?
*What are their charges?
*What do you think their strategy is?
*Which staff members or board members might be with them?
After some discussion, Joel told his three supporters, “Based on my experience and research, I want to share with you how we can beat back this opposition and preserve congregational unity … provided that no staff members or board members are in on the plot.”
Pastor Joel told the leaders:
First, realize that nearly every plot against an innocent pastor is fueled by hatred.
Joel shared:
“Clear away the smoke, and you’ll find an individual who has contempt for his pastor. This individual – sometimes in concert with his spouse – has made a unilateral decision: the pastor must go.”
Joel then stated:
“If we can discover ‘the hater,’ we will have a better idea of discerning what’s happening.”
Joel went on:
“The hater is almost always the ringleader of the opposition. The pastor hasn’t recognized his brilliance … hasn’t paid him sufficient attention … hasn’t taken his ideas for the church seriously … hasn’t let his buddies be in charge … and hasn’t kept the church the way it was when I came in 2011 … so I must leave.”
Joel then said:
“When the hater is identified, his name probably won’t be a surprise to any of us. But others may say, ‘He really loves this church. He’s a fine man. He is so misunderstood. He’s just uncomfortable with all the changes. Cut him some slack.'”
Joel then shared:
“But once a plot is uncovered, there are only three possible outcomes:
*The hater repents of his rebellious behavior.
*The hater leaves the church.
*The pastor leaves.
Sadly, by this stage, haters almost never repent.”
Joel and his three supporters need to realize that the probable outcome of this conflict is that either Joel will leave … sending the church into turmoil … or the hater and a few of his minions will leave instead … the optimal option for the church’s mission at this point.
Second, the hater will hold secret meetings and invite disgruntled churchgoers to pool their grievances against the pastor.
Joel told his three supporters:
“The hater has already determined my fate: he wants me gone. But if he goes after me alone, he knows he won’t succeed. He’ll be outnumbered. He needs allies … as many as possible … so he calls a meeting … shares a few of his complaints … and then solicits complaints about the pastor from others … the more, the better.”
Someone will be asked to record the complaints.
If the pastor has committed a major offense (heresy, sexual immorality, or criminal behavior) … and it can be documented … anyone who attends the secret meeting can take their evidence to the church board, and the pastor most likely will be dismissed.
But secret meetings aren’t intended to come up with serious charges, but many charges … any one of which are trivial and petty.
Pastor Joel told the men:
“This is what happened to me in my second pastorate. A group of 15 people came up with a list of 22 offenses I had supposedly committed. The list was then distributed via email all over the church as if to say, ‘Anyone so flawed should never be our pastor.'”
Pastor Joel went on:
“I was accused of not dressing appropriately for a church event … driving a car that’s too expensive … counseling women alone (even though there’s a window on my study door) … changing the worship order too often … letting my wife miss a Sunday when she was sick … and so on. They were all that trivial … and many of my accusers were guilty of the very same things!”
Joel added:
“The problem with soliciting grievances is that everybody has a different set of complaints. I might feel passionate about two complaints of my own, but I don’t feel as strongly about the complaints of others in the group.”
Joel went on:
“We need to find out who attended the secret meeting, and then send a message to the hater and his minions: ‘Select two people to present your complaints. The board will select two leaders to hear those complaints. That’s fair … a two-on-two meeting.'”
Joel then asked Tim:
“Has any list been distributed to the church yet?” Tim said, “Not as far as I know.” Joel replied, “Good. Let’s put together this meeting before any list goes out.”
Third, the pastor’s opponents will assume that the sheer quantity of charges against him will be enough for him to be terminated.
Some charges might be incident-based: “We saw the pastor do this after a service … we heard his wife say this after a small group meeting … we know that the pastor’s son was sent to the principal’s office at school.”
Other charges will be pattern-based: “The pastor is too intellectual when he speaks … he never takes my phone calls … he doesn’t show up for workdays … he strikes me as being depressed.”
Joel shared:
“Once again, if my opponents can produce even one impeachable offense, they won’t need to create a list of offenses. The list is their confession that they really don’t have anything substantive to use against me. We could create such a list against anyone in this church. Remember that.”
Joel then said:
“Most charges will be exaggerated to some extent. Listen for the words ‘always’ and ‘never.’ And listen for complaints to be overstated: ‘When the pastor made that decision, fifty people left the church.'”
Joel then told his supporters:
“When two leaders meet with two others from the faction, ask them how many offenses they’ve recorded. Then ask them to read each one … and you answer each one before they read the next one. Do not let them read the whole list because you can’t answer the whole list at once!”
Joel continued:
“As you answer each complaint, they will begin to lose heart. They may not even finish the list. When their complaints have been exhausted, ask them what they expect to do next. They will probably say, ‘We need to report to our group.'”
Joel advised:
“Ask them at that point, ‘Who is in your group? Who is leading your group?’ They probably won’t share any information with you, but they’ll know you’re onto them. By answering their charges, you will have exposed their plot … and their hearts.”
Joel then shared an insight from family systems theory:
“I have learned that when you can ‘peel off’ one or two of a pastor’s antagonists, the whole plot usually unravels. Suddenly all the fun is taken out of attacking the pastor.”
Joel then shared one more step:
Finally, tell the group in writing what you expect from the pastor’s opponents … including them.
Joel explained:
“Tell them that we have a simple process for handling complaints at our church. If you believe the pastor has wronged you personally, then set up a meeting with him and share your concern directly. If you want, one of us can meet with you as an impartial witness.”
Joel then added:
“If you are upset about church policy, you are free to speak with anyone on the board because the board sets policy. We will either ask you to make your complaint in writing or ask you to attend the next board meeting personally. After we have heard your complaint, we will discuss it and make a decision, and ask you to abide by it.”
Joel then said:
“Ask them, ‘Do you understand our process? Will you abide by it?’ Assuming they agree, then hold them to it.”
Joel then added:
“Then tell them, ‘We believe that our policy for handling complaints is consistent with Jesus’ words in Matthew 18:15-17 and Paul’s words in 1 Timothy 5:19-21. We believe the Bible teaches that conflict should be handled above-ground (in the light, not in darkness) and that those who are accused of sin should be able to face their accusers.'”
Joel then said:
“It’s my belief that if you handle matters this way, the two individuals will either leave the church immediately (the more likely scenario) and take others with them, or they will slink away and lose their appetite for getting rid of their pastor. And if they bow out of the ‘get the pastor campaign,’ others will probably follow suit.”
After some discussion, Joel concluded:
“If we as leaders take control of the process for resolving these differences, then we will likely take control of the results as well.”
What do you think about Joel’s strategy for beating back his opposition?
Share this:
Like this:
Read Full Post »