Consider these two situations:
- A pastor has embezzled $50,000 from her congregation.
- A pastor is hearing rumors that some members of his congregation are unhappy about his “leadership style,” or his “effectiveness,” or that he just “doesn’t seem to fit this congregation.”
Which congregation is faced with the more difficult conflict?
In fact, the first is a tremendously difficult and painful situation for the congregation, but the source of the conflict is clear. The second situation is likely to be the more difficult to resolve because of the variation of feelings among members and the lack of clarity around the “problem.”
Recently, a congregation contacted Alban asking for help with conflict regarding its pastor’s leadership. In looking into the situation, I found:
- A woman whose husband died of cancer who was very grateful to the pastor for being there with her in this time of loss.
- A member of the governing board saw the pastor become angry at a recent meeting and believes that this pastor frequently “loses it” over the smallest concerns.
- A member who has a close friend at the pastor’s previous church and “knows” that it went “down the tubes” under this pastor’s leadership.
- Another member whose family had attended that same previous church, and, after moving to this area, began attending this congregation precisely because they had such a good experience in the previous church.
- Many members who simply didn't know what to believe because they personally had never had a bad experience with this pastor, but so many of their friends are unhappy.
In the midst of all these stories is the pastor—with his or her own beliefs about what lies at the heart of the recent conflict, what strengths and weaknesses he or she brings to this ministry, what unresolved issues pre-date his or her tenure, and what needs to happen next.
Several studies over the past 25 years show that conflict over the leadership of the pastor is often a reason pastors leave a congregation. Furthermore, Dean Hoge and Jacqueline Wenger’s 2005 research on clergy transition revealed that a whopping 41 percent of the clergy who left their local churches say that the cause was conflict in the congregation, conflict with denominational executives, or because they were feeling burnt out, frustrated, constrained, or inadequate—feelings that can be caused by unresolved conflict.
In my consulting practice, I estimate that 50 to 60 percent of my cases involve a high level of conflict over the leadership of the pastor. Many other conflicted issues can and do emerge in a parish, but it is often conflict over pastoral leadership on which congregations get stuck. They are unable to deal with the conflict and they feel helpless to halt its escalation.
Conflict over the leadership of the pastor is a pervasive problem that does not appear to be decreasing. My work with congregations has shown me that this conflict is equally agonizing for pastors and members alike. Left unchecked it can escalate to even higher and more destructive levels that will eventually cause serious damage to the health and vitality of the congregation.
A Lack of Internal Accountability
In my experience, a nearly universal characteristic of conflict over the leadership of the pastor is a lack of internal accountability. “A lack of internal accountability” means that it is not clear who should be held accountable—pastor, staff, board, or congregation—or how internal systems for accountability should be established and maintained.
When I enter a church in which at least part of the conflict revolves around the leadership of the pastor, I often find the following:
- Very few members have any idea about the agreed upon procedures for dealing with concerns about the pastor or staff.
- No practical process exists for providing constructive feedback to the pastor and staff.
- No group within the congregation is designated to deal with concerns about the pastor. Or, the group that has been designated is not functioning well or does not understand its role in dealing safely and effectively with these issues.
- Members of the church who have concerns about the pastor are not being held accountable for the ways in which they are expressing their concerns. For example, they are either using indirect methods of voicing their issues (such as only talking to their friends; engaging in gossip; and passing on second-hand, often inaccurate, information) or they are engaging in mean-spirited, even cruel speech.
Most destructive behaviors are indirect, but I have often seen very uncivil behaviors targeted directly at clergy and staff. I have seen nasty letters and emails, harassing phone calls, and verbally abusive in-person encounters. This type of behavior wounds the pastor and staff, depletes their energy and enthusiasm for ministry, and provokes understandably defensive postures. These reactions to the attacks lower the effectiveness of the pastor and staff, which sometimes generates more complaints. In an environment which lacks internal accountability, there is no way to stop this cycle of behavior.
A lack of internal accountability about how the congregation deals with the pastor and staff can be a sign that internal accountability may be lacking in other areas as well. For example:
- How are the finances managed?
- How is the governing board functioning?
- Does the congregation hold itself accountable to its own mission?
The congregation as a whole system may well be out of balance. I often say to church leaders, “The healthiest churches I know have the lowest tolerance for bad behaviors. Unhealthy churches tend to tolerate outrageous things!”
Let me give a fictionalized example (a composite of real congregations with which I have worked):
A congregation with a painful history of sexual misconduct by a former pastor has now called a new pastor after a protracted, interim period of healing. The new pastor discovers that there are no functioning committees, the governing board has no real idea of how to work in partnership with its pastor and the members of the church behave more like members of a country club than a group with a clear mission and purpose. There is a great deal of competition among groups for limited financial resources. Staff members have never had a performance review and no one seems to understand that the senior pastor’s role includes being head of staff. The more deeply the pastor looks into the system, the easier it is to see this lack of internal accountability exists throughout the system. This situation is a recipe for conflict down the road for the new pastor, no matter how effective or skillful he or she might be.
Another fictionalized example:
Imagine that the pastor has become less effective over time. Perhaps he or she has become burned out, is in the midst of serious family issues, has an undiagnosed anxiety disorder, or major depression. Most of the high-level-conflict congregations I see who name “the pastor” as the problem have no idea about how to provide on-going meaningful support for the pastor or deal with the pastor’s need for specific help.
When the pastor is at the center of congregational conflict, the issue typically comes to a head when some members begin to demand that the pastor be replaced, and others resist. However, before a congregation and its pastor can accurately discern whether or not the pastor needs to stay or leave, the issues regarding internal accountability need to be addressed.
In my experience, there are essentially three exceptions to this need to first address the internal accountability issues within the congregation:
- When the pastor has been so negatively impacted by the conflict that her/his physical or emotional well-being is at risk if s/he remains,
- When there are such serious issues of misconduct that the denomination needs to intervene and investigate – situations in which substantiated findings could result in the suspension of the pastor’s credentials, or
- When the congregation has slipped beneath the threshold of change and is no longer capable of revitalizing.
In these situations, it is often necessary for the pastor to leave. Otherwise, one of the first things we will begin working on is building a more accountable internal system of communication and behavior.
Strategies for Building Internal Accountability
The first step in building a more accountable system is to learn more about your system as it currently exists. As a lay leader in your congregation, you can use the following experiment to gather information about your congregational system.
Step 1. After a congregational event, such as a worship service or fellowship event, ask a few folks if they know the procedure for dealing with concerns about a pastor or staff person in your church.
- Be sure not to ask only your close acquaintances. Include persons less well known to you.
- Try to ask persons who represent different age groups, different levels of involvement in committees and activities, and so forth. Be sure to ask participants, not just leaders.
- It is important that you ask this question tactfully, carefully and with a genuine sense of curiosity. You might say something like, “I’m trying to get a sense of how well we have done as leaders in educating the congregation about how we handle such things.”
- Don’t judge anything that anyone shares or scold anyone for not knowing the correct answer.
You will likely be surprised at how widespread the confusion is in the congregation.
Step 2. If congregational members do know the proper channels, and you are consistently getting the correct answer, move on to the proper group (e.g., the personnel committee, the pastor-parish relations committee, etc). Ask them essentially the same question: “How does this group handle concerns regarding a pastor or staff member of our church?”
- You might discover that this group is unclear about what to do with these concerns.
- It may not see that it has a role in handling concerns.
- It may not have a process for effectively communicating with the pastor.
- It may not be providing good job descriptions and performance reviews.
- Members of this group may not ever have received any helpful training in order to serve in this capacity.
- Perhaps this group is not made up of the right individuals, or charged or authorized properly.
- Perhaps the relationship between this group and the pastor has deteriorated to the point that it can no longer support good communication.
This experiment will give you some ideas about the nature of communication and accountable behavior in your congregation. Just taking the step of asking these questions and listening to the responses will help you better understand your congregation.
At this point, let me offer a warning:
Whatever you do, do not survey the congregation in an effort to find out whether or not members like the pastor or think the pastor is doing a good job! This type of survey usually causes more problems, and rarely provides you, as a lay leader, with the type of information that will be helpful in proceeding to discern a faithful and appropriate set of actions.
The “next step” will depend a great deal on what you learn during the first two steps of your experiment. Regardless of what you learn, and of the particular details of your situation, respect, clear communication, transparent processes, and behavior that reflects these values characterize the most successful journeys through this discernment process.
On Demand Webinar
I discuss common pitfalls and strategies for moving forward in a webinar that is available on demand
here
.