ChurchWhisperers.Org

Is There Hope For The Congregational Church?

My impression is that increasing numbers of pastors of evangelical churches today (2011) have “just about had it” with congregationalism, that form of church government which invests every member with the right to speak up, vote and get involved in decision-making processes.  Pastors – not just those who lack patience, but those who want their churches to become effective missions to their communities – are “beyond frustrated” with the downsides of congregationalism, and, in my view, they should be. 

Churches are supposed to be storming “the gates of hell” (Matthew 16:18), not guarding the keys to the coffee supplies.  Pastors are supposed to be training ministers for ministry (Ephesians 4:11,12), not entertaining the critics of the minister.  Churches should be adapting themselves to “win as many as possible” (I Corinthians 9:19-23), not falling all over themselves to lose as few as possible.  With all the great books that pastors are reading and conferences they are attending, the gap between the contrasting visions for the church held by pastors and church attendees seems to be growing.  One of the results is old-fashioned “pastoral frustration,” but another is an abandonment of congregationalism (viewed as the disease responsible for diverse and serious symptoms).

I remember chatting about this half-seriously as a young pastor.  My pastor friends and I loved doing ministry but trying to lead, govern and manage our congregational churches was driving us crazy - we all wanted to go to a mythical “Camp Burnout” for pastors.   Our frustrations were also driving us to the fantasy that all our troubles would be over if we were leading chapels instead of churches.  This frustration probably has something to do with the growth of the Calvary Chapel movement as well as the movement of some of our best “lay people” into churches without voting memberships where a few self-perpetuating elders (church board members who re-up or replace each other without any input from the flock) “run the show.”

I don’t blame these folks for their frustration, especially where it is fueled, not just by elitism or impatience, but by a strong desire to be a part of missional churches – churches that are truly doing something to expand the kingdom of God.  The problem I have with this movement (and I think that it really is a movement) is that, like a lot of pastors and other leaders in the Evangelical Free Church, I still believe in congregationalism.  I believe in it not so much because I believe that the priesthood of the believer demands it (I’ve never understood that argument) but because, in my reading of the New Testament, the people, the flock, did seem to have a say in what their churches did  - as in Acts 1:23ff, Acts 6:5, etc.  If we still had Apostles (Ephesians 4:11)  - and Evangelical Free folk generally believe that we don’t – I would be fine with the appointing of leaders by Apostolic decree, as in Acts 14:23 or Titus 1:5.  In the absence of Apostles, I have to concede that the congregation – the local body of adult believers – should have a say at least in who their leaders are going to be. Having them vote on a few other things as well, like the purchasing of land, the building of buildings, the approving of an annual budget or the implementation of major new policies, just seems “right” to me - and I know that people will vote with their feet if they don’t get to vote with their hands or pens.

So here’s the burning question: is it possible to have congregationalism that works (and “works” should be defined in terms of kingdom expansion success, not just congregational happiness)? For the sake of getting a discussion started, I believe that there’s hope for the congregational church if:

1. We teach Biblical leadership and followership.  In the church polity (government style) of the New Testament, the leaders lead and the followers follow.  This is just common sense.  Leaders put many hours (and hopefully much prayer) into their leadership proposals.  Followers should give the benefit of the doubt, appreciate the work done by their leaders and, unless they have strong reasons to speak up or vote “no,” they should follow.  Hebrews 13:7 & 17 and I Thessalonians 5:12 tell us to respect, emulate, follow, obey and submit to our leaders.  Churches need to be taught this with patience as well as with the expectation that “this is the way we’re going to do it here.” Vast numbers of American Christians assume that because we’re Americans, our leaders should be suspected, mistrusted, spoken against and opposed! This is far from what is taught in the Bible!  Pastors need to dare to teach what Scripture really says about this and allow those whose “bent” is to defy God-given authority to go elsewhere.

2. We repudiate parliamentary procedure and Robert’s Rules of Order. Parliamentary procedure (as found in Robert’s Rules…) is fine for American government, the Lions club or the Rotary.  In my view it has no place in the church of Jesus Christ.  Robert’s Rules allow for the church’s official (we believe “God-given”) leaders to be publicly opposed by the followers, their proposals turned on their heads at business meetings, without any forethought at all. Robert’s Rules allows the newest member of the congregation to make proposals at meetings which are then voted on by the members without the legitimate leaders being able to veto them.  From the standpoint of many Americans who are new to the church, this is the way it should be.  From the viewpoint of Biblical leadership and followership, this is beyond absurd.  In Scripture, followers who do such things are burned up, struck down, swallowed up by the ground or turned into lepers!  It’s time for us pastors to teach the truth about these matters and to call for the “banishment” of parliamentary procedure from our churches.

3. We turn business meetings into occasions for formalizing and celebrating God-instigated forward progress. Good, careful leadership involves the conveying of information by leaders, careful listening to the responses generated, the willingness to re-think proposals after listening, convincing ever-widening concentric circles of “influencers,” even the solicitation of opinions from those who are likely to be against the proposal (because they’re against most proposals).  If leadership is done right, the “yes” vote has been decided well in advance of the formal business meeting.  This good leadership allows our official meetings to be occasions for last minute answers to legitimate questions and for votes that are celebratory, not controversial, in nature.  Most people in most churches rejoice when their leaders stop relying on the followers to try to lead at business meetings and start practicing careful, bold, united leadership.  Everybody wins when the meeting becomes a celebration.

4. We courageously confront bullies.  I’m so grateful for Tim Addington (“High Impact Church Boards,” “Leading From the Sandbox”) and other authors for emphasizing the need for courage for all church board members.  Bullies, controlling people, folks who love being “big fish in small ponds” love democracy (congregationalism in its worst form) because it allows them to drive the bus from the back seat, to make “scenes” at business meetings, to reach up and pull the break cord (like on old-time trains) and to get their way for the worst possible reasons.  Some of these folks need to be stood up to, rebuked, warned, maybe even removed from their churches. Leaders who think they’re being “gracious” by letting these people “run wild” are practicing neither grace nor responsible leadership (where the shepherds protect well-behaved sheep from biting sheep).

5. We demonstrate real competence as pastors and boards.  Pastors desperately need to become proficient at leadership because every church needs an effective “leadership relationship.”  That is, every church needs to have a pastor/leader who is competent at leadership and whom it will allow to competently lead them.  Next, all pastors need to teach (or find somebody who can teach) their church board members how to be effective in their roles. Most church board members are wonderful people who have no idea how to be church board members because no one has taught them.  In many cases eight board members have eight different ideas about what the board’s role should be.  If you don’t agree with the books that I love to use for this purpose (the aforementioned “High Impact Church Boards” and Larry Osborne’s “Sticky Teams”) find a book or books or curriculum that you agree with and teach it until senior pastor and board are functioning like a strong, bold, careful, united, effective leadership team. Most people will give their leaders lots of latitude to lead, they will follow with joy, if (a big “if”) and when their leaders demonstrate competence.  If you want to escape from the morass of congregational mistrust, this is the most important way out: you’ll get all the leadership traction you need by demonstrating both concern and competence.

6. We demonstrate that it’s about God’s kingdom and God’s glory. While trying to lead boldly we must continue to demonstrate real humility (which shouldn’t be so hard since we’re so fallible!) and meekness.  When you mess up, apologize.  Tell your people constantly that Jesus Christ is the head over everything for the church (Ephesians 1:22,23) and that you’re trying to be good leaders by becoming good followers of Christ.  There is only one king in the kingdom we are building.  To lead well, we need meekness (the willingness to not get our own way) as much as we need boldness (the courage to point to the right way). People will not surrender their right to lead from the floor of business meetings if they fear the foolishness of those who want to lead them.  But most will gladly surrender that right (or so they thought it was) to leaders whom they love and trust, for good reason.

I think there’s hope for the congregational church.  Do you?

"In Defense Of Playing Defense"

(or “What the Packers are teaching me about redevelopment pastoring”)

Okay, I might as well admit it.  I’m the guy (or one of the guys) who’s always talking about playing offense, not defense, in the ministry of the church. “I love playing offense,” some of you have heard me say, “I don’t like playing defense, and I hate punting.”  I’m not really talking about football, of course – though I will in a minute – I’m talking about being proactive instead of reactive, acting on instead of being acted on, advance planning instead of “winging it” and teaching the whole Bible instead of teaching the topic that corresponds to last week’s crisis.  I’m talking about doing more discipling and less counseling, more pre-marital counseling and less marriage counseling, more leadership and less management, having a program (as a leadership team) instead of reacting to the “program” that some folks in the pew have for us.

I’m also talking about regular days off, vacations and retreat days instead of emergency stays at “Camp Burnout” and training anyone and everyone in our churches for ministry instead of scolding them for their bumbling missteps.  That’s not all. I’m also talking about having a deliberate strategy for evangelism, a comprehensive ministry plan, putting fear in the heart of our Enemy instead of being gripped by fear ourselves, and, in general, storming the gates of hell – as in Matthew 16:18 – instead of cringing behind the gates of the Museum of Christianity (which pretty well describes too many churches). 

I still believe in this stuff.  All of it, as a matter of fact.  Give me half a chance and I’ll preach, teach, write or do seminars on it.  But I have to admit that my circumstances and “my” Packers have been opening my eyes to the other side of the story.  The Packers won the Superbowl – and a few other games this past season – with their defense, not their offense.  Their offense is pretty impressive too, and you can guess that that’s where my main interest lies (sorry, defensive players).  But in games like the Superbowl, when their offense was stymied by a very impressive Steeler defense, it was the turnovers turned into points-off-turnovers that saved the day.

Pastors who are not so driven, Type-A, task-oriented, group-oriented and long-term oriented as I am have known the value of playing defense for a long time.  It takes guys like me a little longer to catch on.  I’ve also discovered that I don’t have to give up my overall “offensive strategy” in order to play some good defense; great defense can be built into a “storm the gates of hell,” offensive strategy.

Here’s what I mean.  The redevelopment pastor rolls into town and starts teaching the board about the importance of standing together as one, keeping confidences and leading carefully but boldly. “Leaders should lead and followers should follow, and in that order,” they hear me say, over and over.  Some folks get it right away.  One good teaching session on these topics and they’re good to go, onward, upward and forward. 

Others however, don’t catch on so quickly.  They usually give their assent to such concepts, but in their hearts they don’t understand and neither do they cooperate.  They “leak” sensitive information out of board meetings and equivocate when cornered by church bullies. Proactive (and, let’s face it, impatient) guys like me can get frustrated and cranky at that point, or we can catch on to the fact that we are being given an opportunity to play some good defense, a “teachable moment” some would call it. We have been praying and praying that God would really, dramatically change the church.  At times like this we need to open our eyes and see that God is giving us a great opportunity to help make that happen. 

In most cases these slower learners are not “bad” people who need to be driven out of their roles, they’re just good people who take a little longer before they “get it.” After some gentle confrontation and instruction many of them become terrific team players.  A “defensive moment” has been turned into “points off turnovers;” God be praised!  I am learning to view these “tests” as God-given opportunities to teach the board (or staff, or both) in a way that really “sticks” – that is, at a far deeper learning level than they had reached after reading a book or hearing me teach from an outline.

Here’s another example.  I teach backwards and forwards about the effort and courage it takes to guard the unity of a church.  “God has given authority to church leaders which He expects them to use to deal with deviant behavior from good people and impossible behavior from impossible people.” The preceding is almost a mantra on my lips. “Some churches are virtually junk churches,” I shock leaders by adding, “because the leaders will not stand up to bullies and control freaks who won’t allow the church to move forward.”  Again, most good people in most churches will agree (at least after recovering from the shock), theoretically at least.  The “rub” comes when I expect leaders to start acting like we really believe these things.  I’m learning that the old bully or melodramatic suicide threatener (for there’s more than one way to control a church) can be my teaching partner at such times.  His or her attempt to reign in the newly deviant behavior of the church’s leaders (I mean that they actually start leading and expecting folks to follow!) becomes my opportunity (though never a pleasant one) to help the leaders to practice what I’d been preaching. Bingo!  Points off turnover again.

I could cite more examples, but I’m guessing that you get the point.  God’s plan for the transformation of His churches is not neat, clean, classroom cognition. It’s messy.  It’s more like potty training than classroom education.  But if playing defense is what it takes to really change a church, I’m all for it and I’m working on my attitude.  So while I’d love to win with nothing but offense, in the real world, playing defense matters too. 

Do We Have To Have These Business Meetings?

Many  pastors enjoy church business meetings as much as root canals.  A trip to a proctologist or a funeral for a thither is a more welcome event on the calendar.  "Do we have to have these business meetings?" they groan to no one in particular. Far too often these necessary-but-evil events turn out too long, too boring and too contentious.  While in most cases we do indeed have to have them, there are some things we can do to make them more pleasing to all involved (including God!).

• You might be able to have fewer meetings.  Churches that are "very congregational" sometimes have constitutions/bylaws which demand monthly meetings.  In other cases, it's just tradition that they are held that often.  In the worst cases, congregations are led to believe - by virtue of their frequent meetings - that the "inmates" have the right to "run the assylum."  Some churches have to decrease the number of meetings to change this mindset - and it isn't easy.                                                                                                                                             
• You might need to have more meetings.  No kidding. I like to use a big triangle to illustrate three basic types of church government.  One point is labeled "congregationalism" (democracy), another is labeled "elder rule" (oligarchy) and the third point is labeled "episcopal"  (dictatorship).  My observation is that no church is "purely" practicing any of these three; we are all somewhere on that triangle, between the points.  Savvy observers have pointed out that, in truth, every church is at least somewhat congregational.  If the leaders pay no attention to anyone outside their ranks, the followers will quit giving and quit following and the leaders will have no one left to lead. The people will be heard, whether we're listening or not. If your church has only one official meeting a year - and it's not pleasant - you may need to increase the number of meetings to give your people an outlet for tension and a  chance to be heard.  One interim pastor has a quarterly update meeting - every time there's a fifth Sunday in a month - to let folks know how the interim process is going and get their questions answered. Even though I'm uncomfortable with folks making speeches "from the floor" in an effort to sway their fellow members to adopt their viewpoints, I believe there's a time for this.  What we don't let folks say "from the floor" they will say in some other venue, oftentimes with a more negative attitude.  Better yet,

• Challenge your people to re-think the whole concept of "business meetings" as we have practiced them.  Think about it.  At 10:30 AM we're in our favorite chairs or pews worshipping God with "reverence and godly fear."  A few minutes later we come back to the same room which has now magically become a town hall.  The pastor or other leader up front has become "the enemy" and we now find it acceptable to be disrespectful, cynical and rude.  I have found that when I challenge this whole paradigm, God's people respond, repent and change their behavior dramatically.  Instead of just "preaching this" through a prayer at the beginning of a meeting (you know you've done this!), take the time to really teach it.  Challenge the assumption that there is a time or place when it is acceptable for us to treat each other like political adversaries. 

• Challenge the use of "parliamentery procedure" as found in Robert's Rules of Order.  Many congregational churches have constitutions that demand the use of "Robert's Rules..." so you may be stuck with them for a while.  In other churches it's just a tradition. My view is that Robert's Rules are fine for the actual town meeting or the Lion's Club but that they have no place in the church of Jesus Christ.  Robert's Rules, if genuinely followed, allow the newest church member to make proposals from the floor which are then voted on.  I believe this is just plain, flat out unscriptural.  In the church as found in the New Testament, good ideas can come from anywhere, but leadership comes from mature and godly leaders.  Mature and godly leaders may, in fact, love the idea proposed by the newest church member "from the floor" of the meeting, but wisdom dictates that they thank the member for the suggestion and then talk and pray about it carefully the next time they meet as a board.  A simple reminder that "in our church, proposals that we vote on in meetings come from the board, but we're open to suggestions from anyone" is usually sufficient.

• Include prayer, praise, worship, celebration and appreciation of people in the meeting. Try to make your meetings a celebration of what God is doing.  "Isn't it wonderful that we have to buy a larger van for the youth group?"  All but the most task driven people in your church will appreciate your "sweetening" your meetings with some of these elements. (Let those "most task driven" people stay home; they aren't going to be happy no matter how you do the meeting.)

• Do laborious presentations - like the new church budget - in advance of the real meeting. This diffuses tension, gives folks a chance to ask good, hard questions, find errors and make great suggestions.  The few folks who are really interested in the nitty gritty details of the budget can attend this meeting; the many folks who aren't don't have to listen to the endless questions at the annual meeting. Some people have to find errors and point them out publicly; let them do it at some time other than the official annual meeting.

• Don't surprise people. Nobody likes having a new idea thrown at them with the idea that they will immediately accept it and vote "yes."  For most of us, when we are presented with a new idea and asked to vote on it at the same session, the vote is going to be a resounding "no." 

• Don't vote if it's not going to pass.  The experience of the followers rejecting the proposal of the leaders is unpleasant for everybody.  Lead by concentric circles.  Typically, this means that the pastor has the great idea (I'm assuming a lot here!), he convinces his staff and board members, together, they convince a wider circle of leaders.  Informal surveys are taken to guage the readiness of the church to follow their leaders. In most cases, following this methodology, negative votes on proposals just don't happen.

• Avoid votes that create winners and losers. I should have listened to a wise elder before I engineered a vote on a change of worship service format.  This is something we could have simply decided as elders - carefullly, of course - or had the congregation vote on our proposal: 9 AM Worship Service and Sunday School and 10:30 Worship Service and Children's Church (or whatever).  Instead, we had the church vote on several options.  We ended up with winners of course, but a lot more people who had voted for the losing options than the winning one - and a lot of grumpy attitudes. 

• Don't let people behave badly.  As Cesar Milan, the Dog Whisperer would say, "be the pack leader." Again, teach people that the business meeting is not a format where it's okay to act like unbelievers.  It isn't.  Teach about how we should treat each other - everywhere and always - and when someone violates this, gently call them on it.  Remind them of what you've taught and offer to "hear them out" in some other venue. Practice a line or two which you'll use to stop bad behavior.  Almost everyone will deeply appreciate your willingness to do this and your meeting attendance will improve.

• Change your own attitude.   First of all, stop seeing the glass half empty and start seeing it half full.  You can choose to believe that meeting attendance is low because people don't care about their church or you can choose to believe that meeting attendance is low because the followers trust their leaders.  In many churches the latter is definitely the case.  You can thank God that people trust you! Beyond the way you view the glass, following some of these suggestions can greatly improve your meetings and greatly improve your attitude toward them.  I've come to see the meetings of our interim pastorates as milestones, important, celebratory events where vital, future-shaping decisions are made. Some of the meetings we've experienced in interim ministry have left us shaking our heads in wonder and joy over what God has done in our midst.  "Can you believe such and such a church just voted unanimously to ___________?" Donna and I exclaim to each other.  We've come a long way since we were asking "Do we have to have these business meetings?"

Traditions or Trends: Which Should We Follow?

 

Most of the readers of this blog know about the dangers of traditionalism.  Yale University professor Jaraslov Jan Pelikan has been credited with saying that “Tradition is the living faith of those now departed.  Traditionalism is the dead faith of those now living” [emphasis mine].  A “dead faith,” I’m sure Pelikan meant, because the traditionalist follows his traditions without knowing why; it is loyalty to nothing more than a concept, a memory. Traditionalism is continuing a practice for no other reason than the fact that it is a tradition – and that’s not much of a reason.

God’s friend Tevia in the great film “Fiddler On The Roof,” claimed that it was tradition that kept our lives balanced, even so far as being able to keep the fiddler from falling off the roof.  But most viewers of the movie would agree that Tevia’s traditionalism kept him imbalanced, loving his traditions themselves at least a bit more than he did his family.  Unable to search the Scriptures himself to discover which traditions were grounded in God’s will and which were grounded on thin air – like marital matches being made by a village matchmaker – he clung to every tradition he knew with equal tenacity.

Maybe we can concede that Tevia had a point: tradition can keep us from too quickly and mindlessly following a crowd.  Before we scrap a tradition maybe we should make sure we know why it became a tradition – for there was probably a good reason - and what we might be losing by discarding it. Paul told the Christians at Thessalonica in II Thessalonians 2:15 (KJV),  “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”

At times, traditionalism is more comic than harmful.  There are other stories to illustrate this, but my favorite is the one about the newlywed wife whom her husband found cutting off the end of the roast before putting it in the roaster.  “Why,” he queried “are you doing that?  It looks like it would fit just fine.”  “My mother always did it this way, but come to think of it, I don’t know why she did.”  A few hours later her curiosity caused her to call her mom and ask the now-burning question.  “Well, I guess, because my mother did,” was the reply.  The young bride’s curiosity was now greater than ever.  She called her grandmother, told her the story and asked her why she always cut the end off the roast.  “Oh, don’t you remember honey?” grandma answered, “my roaster is such a little thing, I’ve always had to cut the end off the roasts to get them to fit.”  Would that our traditionalism never caused any more trouble than a wasted slicing of a roast!

At its worst, however, traditionalism is deadly.  Millions are headed for an eternity without Christ because their faith is grounded on the religious traditions they have been told to rely on.  The young Saul of Tarsus was murderously zealous for the traditions of his fathers (Galatians 1:14).  Jesus spared no one’s feelings (Mark 7:1-23) when he denounced the traditionalism of the Pharisees which involved breaking the commandments of God in order to slavishly follow the traditions of men.

But we can be just as foolish in the following of trends.  A lot of young men are going to be plenty embarrassed someday when they see family photos of themselves with their pants falling down!  Eventually, removing tattoos and repairing body piercings will be a big business.  Ephesians 2:1-3 depicts lost mankind as blindly following the “ways of this world” and the “ruler of the kingdom of the air.”

Sadly, as pastors, we can be almost as foolish - and we don’t have the excuse of being under the Devil’s sway. Every few years a new church becomes the “hot” place to go for “how to do it like we do” conferences.  If it’s bringing in multitudes in Chicago or Los Angeles, it must be something God wants me to do in Omaha. We fly in by the thousands and fly home with our shiny three ring binders telling us how to do ministries that might be perfect for the host church and disastrous for our own church.

Donna and I have had the privilege of visiting churches on Sunday mornings the past couple of months.  It’s been enjoyable and encouraging but I can’t help smirk a little bit that so many churches have departed from having “traditional worship.”  That would be fine in and of itself but why is it that in our departure from traditionalism, we’re all doing pretty much the same thing?  It sure looks like a new set of trendy traditions to me.

One of our interim pastorates was with a church that considered itself very non-traditional.  I pretty quickly found out that they had their own, non-traditional traditions which were sacred to them.  I’ve now concluded that the non-traditional church can be just as traditional about it’s non-traditional traditions as the traditional church is traditional about its traditional traditions.  Is it really any better to follow trends than it is to stick with traditions?

Here’s what I’ve concluded so far, and you’re welcome to add to my understanding with your response: Traditions and trends can both be good if they are Biblical and effective.  Traditions and trends can both be worthless, or worse than worthless, if they are unbiblical or ineffective.  We should hang unto our traditions at least until we know what they were for and if they are working.  The latest trends, likewise, should be considered and evaluated with open hearts and open minds and forced to face the same test: Is it consistent with Biblical principles and purposes?  Will it work in our context?

Let’s not be traditionalists or trendishionalists.  Let’s be like the God-impassioned, no-longer-tradition-bound Apostle who said “I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some” (I Corinthians 9:22).

When Church Members Leave

For many of us, the very mention of the subject of church members leaving knots up our stomachs faster than a phone call from the IRS. Painful memories flood my mind as I sit down to write - and I thought I’d gotten “good at” letting people go. Not that we really want to get used to losing people, but most of us would like for it to be less painful for ourselves and we’d also like to see our departed ones have a quick turnaround time: to get fully engaged quickly in a new church without cynicism or bitterness.

Why is this so hard for us?

Church Secretary Occupational Hazards

1. Church secretaries need to be carefully protected (mostly by the Senior Pastor, but others can help) from “secretary abuse,” such as:

• Expecting the secretary to do too much. Secretaries are frequently servants in their spiritual giftedness (Romans 12:7). Servants gladly take on more and more because they are so motivated to help. Wise bosses watch secretaries carefully to help them to say “no, I can’t do anymore” when they need to say it.

• People expecting the secretary to be on the job on Sunday morning (or any other time she’s in the building)

• People calling her at home - She is an hourly, not a salaried employee

• People who are not her “boss” acting as if they are (walking in and giving her work, etc.). The secretary has one supervisor, the Senior Pastor. Those approaching the secretary with work requests can be told by the secretary, “Pastor _______ wants me to refer requests for my time to him, so please wait here while I go and ask him about this.”

• Pastors telling them too much about church problems or problematic people and so weighing them down with troubles they are not given God’s grace to handle. (I’m sure I’ve been guilty of this.) Some secretaries grow into wonderful counseling partners for the pastor – particularly when he has to speak to other ladies alone. But be careful! This can lead to a good relationship becoming too close. (For the same reason, I avoid praying with church secretaries/administrative assistants one-on-one. Praying together really draws people together!) In some cases the pastor’s wife is a more appropriate partner for counseling females. Other secretaries are simply not gifted by God for this ministry and will be discouraged by trying to perform it. Of the many secretaries and administrative assistants I’ve had the joy of working with, only one became an occasional counseling partner.

2. Church secretaries frequently “morph” into telephone counselors, which can be wonderful but can also become too much of a good thing.

• Protecting the pastor from having to hear about minor problems that the secretary can help with is a wonderful ministry. See Acts 6

• Providing a listening ear is great; many secretaries save their pastors hundreds of hours by just listening to and praying with the troubled people who call or stop in.

• But some people need to learn how to open their Bibles and get down on their knees and find the answers to their problems. If the church attendee is now leaning on the secretary too much (instead of leaning on the pastor too much) somebody, (more than likely the pastor) needs to teach this dear brother or sister how to find some answers on his/her own.

• No one needs a counselor who becomes an enabler, whether or not the enabler is a co-dependent person or a healthy and well-meaning but mistaken person.

3. Church secretaries can tell people too much, they can hear too much, they can pass things along that shouldn’t be passed along - See I Timothy 3:11

• Some people go on "fishing expeditions" when talking with the secretary.

• A secretary must be able to keep confidences, even from the spouse who is a board member!

• The secretary needs to get very good at saying, “Whoa, wait a minute, you need to talk to so and so about that,” the phrase I teach churches (with hand motions) to stop gossip.

4. Church secretaries, like young pastors, can develop a habit of well-intended meddling: volunteering to solve problems for people which they ought to be solving themselves (Proverbs 26:17 & I Peter 4:15). Teaching people to handle their problems God’s way is part of the ministry description of every mature Christian.

5. Church secretaries frequently “morph” into administrators. Most often, they need some training in administration to avoid the pitfalls inherent in management. Their authority as administrators needs to come from the pastor (or whoever conveys authority in your church) and be clearly communicated to the church before the secretary begins acting in that capacity. In one of my interim pastorates, a staff member had morphed into a capable but overzealous, micro-managing administrator. Many in the church, besides being offended by her management style, did not feel that she had received her authority legitimately.

6. Church secretaries need to communicate to their families that phone calls to “mom” are limited. “Mom” is not helping her church or her children if she spends long periods of time counseling her family. Family member “visits” also need to be limited.

7. Church secretaries need to be zealous protectors of the pastor’s time. The Sr. Pastor needs to convey clearly how he wants the secretary/receptionist(s) how to handle:

• Walk in salesmen – “If you want to leave some literature regarding your _____ I’ll show it to Pastor So and So” or – at the secretary’s discretion – “If you’d like to show me your product that’s fine but Pastor So and So is not available for product demonstrations.”

• Phone salespersons – “Our church doesn’t purchase anything as the result of a phone solicitations. If you’d like to send some literature for your ______ I’ll pass it on to Pastor So and So”

• Walk in “counselees” – “Pastor So and So can’t see you right now, but he’d be happy to make an appointment with you.” (I always tell secretaries that my exception to the “walk-in counselee” policy is when someone’s life is in danger, i.e., if the person appears homicidal or suicidal.)

• Phone calls for the Pastor. Simply asking “Can I ask what this is in reference to?” or “Can I ask why you’re calling?” can protect the pastor from many calls from those who want, but don’t need, to talk to him.

8. Church secretaries/receptionists/administrative assistants need to be carefully protected from the complications that result from multiple relationships.

• In many cases, the employee’s spouse is also a church attendee and sometimes a leader. Spouses must sometimes be asked by the Pastor to not interfere in the employee/employer relationship but to encourage the employee to handle his/her problems in normal (but mature Christian!) ways.

• In many cases, handling these situations takes grace and tact and the guidance of God. In one ministry the administrative assistant was (1) my employee (2) an elder’s wife (3) my friend (4) my wife’s friend (5) a church volunteer in several capacities (6) the mother of a girl who was my son’s age (7) my son’s teacher (8) the mother of kids in classes I was teaching. This gets complicated. Fortunately, God can and will help us make these situations work!

Our secretaries are precious people (not quite an endangered species yet, but precious people). Let's help them to serve God (their real boss) joyfully and productively.

Biblical Principles Related To Conflict and Unity

1. The glory of God is of paramount importance. It’s what the church is for. We have been left here as the body of Christ to make God look good, to improve His reputation, to “do Him proud.” There is something very wrong with us if winning, or if defending our own “name” is more important than God’s Name (Ephesians 1:6, 12, 14).

2. Love and unity are to be the prominent “marks” of the church, not “rightness” (Matthew 5:23-26, John 13:34,35, John 17:20-23, Ephesians 4:3). Making the church a “stench” in the community is to be avoided almost at all costs (without betraying the gospel or the “fundamentals of the faith”). Unity is so vital that it must be pursued with zeal and haste. Problems left to themselves seldom go away; they usually worsen.

3. Loving, respecting, being patient with, seeking to live at peace with, all persons involved, are Biblical requirements (John 13:34,35, Romans 12:9,10,16,18, I Thessalonians 5:14).

4. Humility, meekness and “sweet-reasonableness” (Galatians 5:22,23; Philippians 2:3,4, 4:5) are always expected of all of us. There is no place for “turf wars.” There is no room in any church, however large, for anybody’s ego. There is no time when it is appropriate to talk about “my church.” The church belongs to Jesus (Matthew 16:18). If the church you are a part of is now “your church” then you must have stolen it from Jesus!

5. The Bible teaches what I call “no excuses Christianity,” “no excuses counseling” and “no excuses pastoring.” Being in Christ, with the persons we used to be crucified with Christ, with the Holy Spirit within us – and willing to control us – we can do what Scripture says. We can be what we have been called to be. The commands of the New Testament are all promises (Romans 6:7,7, 8:9; Galatians 2:20, 5:22,23). We do not have to have churches full of gossip and conflict. Our churches do not need to be never-ending soap operas – though some people would like to star in them.

6. Closely related to the above, we are each 100% responsible for our own actions. Pastor So and So’s carnal actions are no excuse for my carnal reactions. We will stand before the judgment (reward! Thank God!) seat of Christ, one at a time. Our excuses will look ridiculous on that day (I Corinthians 3:10-4:5).

7. Closely related to the above, we must fight spiritual battles with spiritual weapons (such as prayer and speaking the truth in love, as in Ephesians 4:15). We do not chase out a pastor or church member we don’t like by behaving badly. (This really is done.) God has given significant spiritual authority to churches and their leaders to judge justly, oppose sin and resolve disputes (Matthew 18:15-20; I Corinthians 5 & 6; II Corinthians 10:1-6). However resistant modern Americans (including evangelicals) are to submission to God-ordained authority and spiritual leaders “telling them what to do,” church leaders must nevertheless, calmly but firmly exercise their God-given authority for the health and purity of the Church of Jesus Christ. No team of church leaders should put up with gossips, power-plays, petitions (written or unwritten). People who cannot follow their duly elected leaders gladly should be asked to find another church. In the words of former Evangelical Free Church District Superintendent, Gus Bess, “It’s not a sin to change churches; it’s a sin to stay in your church with a bad attitude.”

8. Gossip is a serious sin. It is an attack upon our brother and an attack upon God, as our brother bears the image of God (James 3:9-4:12). We should never empower, encourage or reward gossip. Gossiping new believers need to be confronted with great patience and carefully taught how to practice Matthew 18, Ephesians 4, Galatians 6, etc. Hardly anyone learns to not gossip just by hearing about it in a sermon; almost everyone needs to be confronted on this and “steered in the right direction” before they actually begin handling their conflicts in God’s way (“Speak to, not about” Amy Carmichael). Older believers need to be confronted more firmly, as they certainly know better. Some churches are full of people who know better but keep handling their conflicts in worldly ways because for decades, their leaders have allowed them to do so. Some divisive individuals need their “mouths stopped” (Titus 1:11). Some people are what Kenneth Haugk (in his book, “Antagonists In The Church”) refers to as “antagonists.” As Groucho Marx sang, “whatever it is” they’re “against it.” The psychological world might label them persons with personality disorders. Whatever they are, these people must be stood up to with great grace and great strength. They must not be empowered.

9. In listening to our critics and even in confronting gossips, we must be ready to forgive freely, sometimes “settling for” improved behavior, even when we’d like to hear a thorough-going apology (Ephesians 4:32).

10. In listening to our critics and even in confronting the worst gossip, we must be willing to listen for the “kernel of truth” that is probably there. God uses even our carnal critics to change our lives and ministries.

11. Congregational meetings during times of conflict should be held only with great care and careful planning. There is strength in numbers. Allowing people who are behaving badly to “gang up on” a pastor or church leadership team in a congregational meeting is to court disaster. Allowing people to sin by continuing on in their gossip or by “making charges” in congregational meetings is not doing them any favor; we are only enabling them to sin and throw away their future rewards. We must not in any way reward people who have been talking with each other, signing petitions or holding secret meetings. The church is not a democracy and we are not holding “New England Yankee” town hall meetings. (I am not against “listening session,” information gathering meetings which do not reward gossip.) Many wise pastors are moving their churches in the direction of having “family gatherings” with church members placed at round tables with elders or other leaders spread out among the tables. People are allowed to share their opinions freely on important topics as leaders listen to them carefully, but are in the “friendly” context of a table of brothers and sisters they have just dined and laughed with instead of in the confrontive atmosphere of a church business meeting with people lined up in rows and Robert’s Rules of Order. (I ask churches where we ever got the idea that the church “business meeting” is a venue where it’s okay to ignore everything Scripture teaches about how we should speak to one another!)

12. Duly elected church leaders, by whatever title, should be respected and, generally speaking, followed, because of their office. Leaders who are inviting disrespect should be confronted in the spirit of Matthew 18, Ephesians 4 and Galatians 6. Charges against elders (and pastors are “elders who are paid to be old”) should be brought in accordance with I Timothy 5:17-22, which assumes that the instructions of Matthew 18 have been followed first (I Thessalonians 5:12ff; Hebrews 13:7-19).

13. Church leaders must stand together. The NT picture is that of elders functioning as united teams (Acts 20:17ff). Elders who cannot stand with their brothers and stand by decisions they themselves were a part of making should resign gracefully. Every church board on the planet should study “The Unity Factor,” by Larry Osborne and “High Impact Church Boards” by Tim Addington.

14. Symbiotic (helpful to all concerned) solutions should always be prayerfully sought. Acts 6 gives us a wonderful example. There was murmuring. The murmuring probably wasn’t right (God dealt with this quite severely in OT times and in the New Testament gave us the admonition of Philippians 2:14ff.) But since, in this case, there was a very legitimate complaint – widows being neglected - the Apostles did not pay much attention to the murmuring, they went to work on a solution which resulted in a better church. Did they ever address the murmuring? Perhaps. We don’t know.

15. Leaders should always lead as servant-leaders of their congregations. We must make our decisions on the basis of what will be best for our followers. (What is best for our followers is that which glorifies God.) Congregations need leaders who have strong mandates to lead from their congregations. Chaos and confusion result when leaders do not have the “coupons” they need to lead. Sometimes we pastors must pack our books and move on, in love, so that we can get fresh starts and so that our congregations can get fresh starts with leaders who have the ability to lead, even though we were blameless.

16. With our propensity to sin and deceive ourselves (Jeremiah 17:9), all of us, pastors included, sometimes need rebuke and correction from those who are able to view our situations with a degree of objectivity which we do not have. One of the best reasons to have church fellowships (or denominations) is to provide pastors with a measure of accountability. All of us have reacted sinfully to our critics at one time or another.

Letter To a Hurting Church

The following is a letter (with names removed) I sent to a church which was on the brink of splitting in two. I’m sorry to say that I think the letter probably has application to many other situations. I wrote it – and am placing it here – in hopes that God will use it to influence some of His people for good. BAT

To my dear friends at ________ Church,

Words can’t express how greatly you encouraged my heart as I kept hearing that God was working so powerfully at __________. I’ve been learning a lot about how the Apostle Paul felt: you are “my joy and crown” (Philippians 4:1). Neither can words express how heartbreaking it has been to hear about the division and strife that has occurred more recently. The following are mostly thoughts that occurred to me while talking to _______ ________ last night. You may do what you want with them of course; I’m no apostle, but Donna and I love you and I think that gives us some credibility.

The first and most important thing I have to say to all is, please, please, please understand that this is not a contest between people; this is primarily a contest between God and Satan and I do not mean to imply that some of you are on God’s side and some on Satan’s side! I mean that you caused our enemy (your brother is NOT your enemy; the devil is) great consternation while the church was going “great guns.” Do not be ignorant of his devices; his best methodology is to simply use the flesh of Christians (our sin-powered humanity) to destroy our absolutely essential unity. Galatians 5:15 says “If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.” As Donna says, when the same old tactic works so well year after year, why should the devil come up with anything new?

It sounds like unity at the board level is what was sacrificed first and that was a mistake. A great pastor, Larry Osborne, wrote a book on the subject called “The Unity Factor.” At some point in your healing process, study it carefully. There’s no getting around the necessity of a unified board/pastor leadership team.

I don’t pretend to know or understand all that’s gone on in your fellowship in the past few months. I’m confident that none of you do either; there are at least three sides to every story, yours, mine and God’s; the essential matter is what you do now.

My understanding is that Pastor _______ has resigned. Now you’re going to be tempted to be embittered with each other. Don’t fall for it. Forgiveness is absolutely essential and it must be given even to those who never apologize for what we see as their sins. Our value differences cause us to see things differently and to sometimes view our brother as sinning when he or she is absolutely confident that he is doing the right thing. This even occurs in our marriages because of the different FOO (family of origin) cultures we’ve come from. What Donna considers sin I consider acceptable and normal and we’ll never completely see every issue eye-to-eye. Some of you have a very strong loyalty ethic and believed that you should stand by Pastor _______ no matter what. Others among you have very high standards regarding a pastor’s loyalty to a church constitution. It may be that you will never, until reaching heaven, agree on this. Better yet, put your good values together and go forward into the future with an absolute commitment to maintain a tight, tight unity at the leadership level, to deal with your differences in godly ways and to have a “rule book” (constitution) that all agree to follow. In any case, the crucial matter right now is what you do right now.

Right now, tonight, you need to start forgiving one another and moving in the direction of reconciliation. (It will take time to feel good about each other.) You can beat the devil at his own game if you will start forgiving now. You are handing him a victory on a silver platter if you don’t. This is not about your “rightness;” this is about God’s glory. God will be glorified, His reputation enhanced, His power displayed, if you reconcile and become a stronger, holier church. You will give Christ “a black eye” if you don’t.

Right now, tonight, you will need to resolve to not make the situation worse with blaming and name calling. “Getting it out” is a worldly concept, not a biblical one. Anger expressed without restraint does not “spend” the anger and lead to peace; it leads to hotter, more deadly anger. You might want to read Ephesians 4 together, very slowly. If you must meet tonight, make your comments from the floor addressed to the “chair” and do not allow any angry outbursts by anybody, period.

You will need to resist the temptation to think with your hearts. Hearts are for feeling; heads are for thinking. Do not try to fix your problem by latching unto someone nearby who seems like “pastor material.” Of course you need someone to come and preach and teach on Sundays for awhile, and God will greatly bless you through these speakers, but they will not be a substitute for the “native guide” which you will need for a few months. You need more than a godly man; you need a trained and experienced man who knows how to lead a church through a process of reconciliation. I shared with ________ the name of an organization which might be able to provide some wonderful, short-term help with reconciliation. I also shared with her that I have names and phone numbers for three organizations which supply trained and experienced, peacemaking, interim pastors to churches. This is what you’re going to need now (and I don’t mean me! We have our hands full here in __________). In time, you will need to oh-so-carefully call a new long-term pastor. In the meantime, your best chance for healing is going to be with the help of someone who has been gifted by God for just such a time as this.

We love you all and will be praying for you tonight and in the weeks to come.

For HIS Glory,
Brian Thorstad

Twenty Observations About Troubled Congregations

By Peter Steinke

I have worked with troubled churches for 20 years. I never cease to learn from these experiences. The list below includes some of what I have learned about congregations in times of conflict.

1. Most people are interested in relieving their own anxiety rather than managing the crisis or planning for a clear direction. Their primary goal is anxiety reduction, not congregational renewal.

2. Under certain conditions, anxiety is neutral. As much as possible, effective leaders normalize anxiety. Considering what is happening, anxiety's presence is what we would expect. By normalizing, people will not automatically think anxiety exists because the community is flawed.

3. If anxiety is high, people lose their capacity to be self-reflective. They look outward, not at themselves. Self-awareness is dim, and the ability to identify with the life processes of others is impaired.

4. Peace is often preferred over justice. Congregational members can resist or be hesitant about taking stands, making decisions, or charting a course of action that would offend or upset the community. By placing a premium on togetherness, they play into the hands of the most dependent people who can threaten to incite disharmony as a way to receive what they want. When such superficial harmony--so-called "peace"--must prevail, then the pursuit of justice often is sacrificed and others who are involved become excused from responsibility.

5. If an individual becomes the lightning rod for people's anxiety and cannot extricate him- or herself from that position through self-differentiation (or the environment is so perverse that no one can escape from that position), trying to maintain his or her position or presence in the emotional system is unproductive as well as painful.

6. All disease processes are enabled. Viruses need host cells. Not all people designated by anxious systems as the patient are sick. The illness is in the interactive system, to which the following observations attest:
"All neuroses have accomplices" (Carl Jung). Anxiety not resolved in one relationship will be acted out in another relationship.

"Unless the leader has a degree of self-knowledge and self-understanding, there is the risk that he or she may use the organization to address his or her own neuroses" (Peter Senge et al.).8
7. The way we use information is an emotional phenomenon; what we hear and don't hear, what we remember, how we gather and exclude data are all connected to emotional processes. We gravitate toward information that coincides with our viewpoints and that promises to contribute to our survival.

8. The healing process for midrange to severely anxious congregations takes two to five years.

9. Losses (membership, offerings, attendance) will result no matter what choices are made. Most congregations regain their losses within two years.

10. Secrets--that is, hidden agendas and invisible loyalties--in most cases need to be brought to light. What about sin and evil? Expect it; expose it. To expose the demonic, name it (recall the story of Jesus and the demoniac in Mark 5).

11. Reactivity can issue from people who are leaders, erudite, talented, wealthy, well-educated, pious, charming, or normally calm folks. None of the above characteristics indicate that these individuals are mature emotionally.

12. Issues must be clearly identified and individuals must be challenged to act. No anxious congregation can handle more than three to five issues at a time. The issues must be condensed.

13. The sabotage of a process to deal with conflict should be expected. The usual saboteurs will be those who are losing control or not getting what they want from the process.

14. Murray Bowen claimed that all dyads are unstable. Therefore the basic molecule of all relationship systems is a triangle (the use of a third party to reduce tension between a twosome). A Swahili proverb reads: "When the elephants fight, it's the grass that gets crushed." Triangle formation is natural. Triangulation is another matter. It happens when the third party allows the original dyad to escape responsibility for its actions by assuming their anxiety and taking responsibility for them. Whenever a congregation brings in a third party, such as an intervention team, there is a triangle. Triangulation would occur if the team became anxious and felt responsible for the conflict's outcome.

15. Five styles of managing conflict have become commonplace: accommodating, problem solving, compromising, avoiding, and fighting. They are useful for recognizing general patterns of behavior under pressure. But they are not helpful when used as predictors—"Oh, Susan never takes a stand. She'll compromise on anything." People like Susan do not function in the same way in every context. At home Susan may compromise but at work she's quite a problem solver. Even in the same conflict, people may shift from one style to another. One may begin as a fighter, only with time to become an accommodator. Further, not all avoiders or problem solvers are equal. There's a range to their functioning. People's functioning is not determined by a style but by the context.

16. Recent research challenges the prevailing assumptions about conflict behavior being mutually exclusive. For example, direct fighting and problem solving are more effective in combination than they are in isolation. The continuous repetition of fighting, then problem solving, and then fighting is effective.

17. How the conflict is framed affects the behavior of those involved. When the conflict is conceptualized as cost or benefit, the participants' behavior changes. People become more involved if they anticipate losses as a result of the conflict than if they anticipate gains. Losses arouse greater emotional force. Researchers found that a prospect of loss led to less yielding behavior. Even when the opponent is about to suffer a loss, there is more cooperation from the other side than if the opponent enjoyed a profit.9

18. No emotional system will change unless the members of the system change how they interact with one another. Patterns of behavior tend toward rigidity. Conflict may be necessary to jolt and jar the shape of things in order to reshape the pattern. But the degree to which that change is positive or negative depends on the leadership present to respond to it.

19. The parties involved in a rift are in a poor position to settle the dispute if anxiety is high and rampant. Being too closely and emotionally involved in a circumstance, they will find it difficult to provide a fair overview.

20. Final or perfect solutions are not available. Conflict leaves things messy. The best solutions to insolvable problems are the approximate solutions--ones that prepare a system for new learning and a new beginning.

"Twenty Observations about Troubled Congregations" by Peter Steinke is reprinted from Alban Weekly (No. 124, 2006-12-04) with permission from the Alban Institute. Adapted from Congregational Leadership in Anxious Times by Peter Steinke (http://www.alban.org/bookdetails.aspx?id=2830). Copyright 2006 by The Alban Institute, Inc., Herndon, VA. All rights reserved.

Alban Weekly is a free electronic newsletter sent once a week with timely and concise information on emerging trends and Alban's latest resources and upcoming events. Sign up at http://www.alban.org/albanweeklysignup.asp