A wise old pastor once warned me to avoid "the kiss of death."
The kiss of death for a pastor isn't administered by a woman ... or a governing board ... or a government agency.
No, the kiss of death occurs when a pastor resigns his position without anywhere else to go ... because when churches are looking for a pastor, they prefer to call one who is already serving in a church rather than one who is in secular work or unemployed.
I nearly experienced the kiss of death in my second pastorate.
The church I served as pastor was the result of a merger between two churches ... and I had led one of those churches.
The church board and I went on a retreat in the mountains. We evaluated the entire ministry, including ways to improve everything we did.
This included the music ministry.
The board agreed to allow a band of young men to play for our services on Sunday mornings and evenings.
(The mother of the board chairman liked the band so much that when she died, she requested they play at her memorial service.)
However, when we made this change, I warned the board in advance that some people weren't going to like it.
And I was right.
One middle-aged couple in particular became incensed about the music. The wife refused to come to church. Her husband eventually stayed home as well.
One year later, this antagonist contacted my district minister to complain about me. By this time, he had gathered together a small but vocal contingent of people who viewed me as the antichrist.
One night, my district minister and I had a conversation in which he recommended that I resign to keep the peace in the church.
However, the entire board had told me that if I resigned, they would all resign along with me ... leaving the church in the hands of the antagonists ... who didn't have a collective clue as to how to run a church.
Fortunately, the board stood with me ... but the district leadership wilted.
For years, this scenario has played itself out in thousands of churches:
*The district leaders of a denomination hold a training time for pastors.
*The pastors are encouraged to institute changes in their churches so they will grow numerically.
*The changes always involve taking risks ... and such risk-taking always angers some attendees.
*Those attendees who are angry about the changes don't speak directly with their pastor about their feelings.
*Instead, they go around the pastor and form a faction inside the church designed to oust the pastor.
*In the process, someone in their group calls the district minister and complains to him about the pastor, intimating that the pastor is so divisive and/or ineffective that he should be removed from office.
*The district minister listens to the complainers, ends up taking their side, and then recommends that the pastor resign to keep peace in the church.
That's exactly what happened to me 25 years ago.
Here's the problem, however. For any church to grow:
*The pastor needs to assume leadership.
*Leadership involves taking risks.
*Risk-taking always provokes change.
*Change always provokes anxiety and even anger.
*And those reactions are always aimed at the leader ... in this case, the pastor.
*If the pastor receives support from the church's governing board, he will survive and the church has the best chance for success.
*The pastor also needs support from his "superior," whether that's a district minister or a bishop.
*But if either the board or the district collapses on the pastor, he may be forced to resign.
I've recently been reading an insightful and motivating book on denominational leadership at the district level.
It's called Hit the Bullseye by former denominational executive Paul Borden.
Borden says that district leaders need to become coaches for pastors, who need to become better leaders in their churches.
And if this occurs, Borden writes about district leadership:
"We are also willing to confront those congregations and congregational leaders (the emotional terrorists) who for years have chewed up pastors and spit them out. We have confronted both pastors and congregations even though it has cost the region the loss of financial support."
That last statement takes great courage to implement. One of the reasons district leaders side with a church over against their pastor is to keep donations to the district flowing.
Borden continues:
"Finally, we are adamant about not letting the region be used to promote congregational triangulation, which allows laity to condemn pastors anonymously. If any lay leaders call the region to complain about their pastor those leaders are told they must first confront their pastor before we will become involved in offering assistance, if that is required."
Borden goes on to say that "congregational transformation will create tremendous conflict in dysfunctional, dying churches" and that "the worst thing that can happen in the midst of such conflict is mediation, since the conflict is more about the transfer of power and who will lead the congregation, than individuals or groups not being able to get along."
Let me tell you one reason why so many churches aren't growing and so many pastors are ineffective.
It's because pastors instinctively know that for a church to grow, they'll have to take risks ... and if they do, they may very well end up standing alone without any support ... because many Christian leaders will not stand up to emotional terrorism.
Will you?
WordPress.com
