Helping People Leave Your Church Graciously
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Mon, July 16, 2007
- Viewed 158
- (43) comments so far
I think I touched on this last week… I am many times discouraged by the number of stories I hear about churches who are struggling because of people who are fighting tooth and nail against the leadership of the church.
As Craig points out, it’s important to leave the back door open a crack. Some people in your church will, inevitably, keep your church from moving forward. But how do you help these people either get the vision of your church or leave graciously? That’s a great question, and I’m glad that Craig is tackling this subject. We’ll be watching this week’s posts with you… it should be great. Here’s post #1.
QUESTION FOR TODAY: Honestly now… do you feel like your church has people that need to leave? Why do you feel this way? How are these people derailing your churches mission and future?
Craig Groeschel is starting a new series this week at the LifeChurch.tv Swerve Blog on people who need to leave your church. Craig asserts that "occasionally, there are some church members who need to leave for the ministry to move forward. These people might be miserable. Maybe they hate change. Perhaps they care more about their own needs than the needs of others. If someone is directly opposed to the direction God is leading your church, we should do our best to lead them to embrace the vision. If you’ve tried and tried and continue to fail, you may need to gently, lovingly help them find another church." I wholeheartedly agree...
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
M&M on Mon, July 16, 2007
It is easy for me to agree with most of the comments written already. I know how to “lead” my church. I’ve read the leadership books. I’ll be sitting at Willow in just a couple weeks for my yearly pilgrimage to learn how to be a great “leader.” I know that leaders must make tough decisions in order for their organizations to grow and often times, these tough decisions involve people.
On the other hand, I also know I am called to be a “shepherd.” God has entrusted me with a “flock” and I am responsible to love, tend, care, and nurture them. I wonder, should I be able to sleep at night knowing that I’ve left the back door open for a flock member who is not as easy to love? I wonder if there was an internationally satellite broadcast conference on shepherding and pastoring we might not rest so easy in our answering of this question.
Tye on Mon, July 16, 2007
Nice job Todd! It worked!
First, is the church based on servant leadership?
Second, is the mission, vision, and values clearly presented through various forms?
Third, the goal of the church is discipleship.
The question is, after all the above, what do you do with someone who refuses to play a simple game of “follow the servant leader.” If they are unable to do that, they should probably find another place to serve, but only after all avenues have been exhausted.
Make sense?
Leonard on Mon, July 16, 2007
One of the primary tasks of shepherding is leadership. M&M;we are not mearly to love, tend, care for and nurture them we are to lead them, discipline them, (shepherds of old actually broke the legs of wandering lambs) we are to show them the right paths, we are to guard them as well. If there is a threat in the pen, a good shepherd will keep an open spot for that danger to leave. I am sure you know this as well.
PeterD on Mon, July 16, 2007
There are many churches where God needs to clean house. Whether that be by us showing people the door or them leaving of their own accord. Yes, we are shepherds, and just because we let a person leave does not mean that we are letting them leave the flock. Remember, the church universal is the FLOCK. Yes, some people need to leave, and the sooner the better. Maybe your church needs to go from 5000 to 500 before God can do a work there. I know that may be an exaggeration, but think about it. My home church went from over 200 in attendance on Sundays to under 30. And yes, that many people needed to go. There was infighting and no peace. God did a miracle, and today that church is thriving. The people that left still go to church elsewhere, and for the most part have found the part of the flock they should be in.
Tom on Mon, July 16, 2007
Right now I can’t think of anyone about whom I would say, “It’s time he was encouraged to use his gifts elsewhere.” There are definitely people who are more in tune with the vision of the church and others who are more nostalgic for the church of years gone by. But right now there is a spirit of grace and tolerance and we are going in the direction the leadership is leading. My prayers these days are prayers of thanks. It hasn’t always been this way, and it won’t always stay this way, but for this period of time it is going well, thank the Lord.
Vicki on Mon, July 16, 2007
We DID have people who needed to leave - and most of them did - some left well and others did not. This is a touchy subject for me because (as I said in a previous comment on another blog) I am a “lifer”. Some of the people who left our church (and NEEDED to leave) were life long friends. It was painful to say the least. Some tried to badger the leadership into their way of thinking with treats, mistruth (just say it, lies…) and manipulation. They gathered like minds together and had “prayer meetings”. It was really ugly for about 6 months. The longest 6 months of my life I might add. I tried arguing with them (big mistake), but ultimately they chose to leave and when they did we (as a staff) decided to send them with our blessing. We’ve committed to being open, friendly and welcoming when we see them even though it is awkward at times.
Yes there are folks that need to leave. The key is having a unified leadership team. Without that, the pastor is going to be hung out to dry. We stood our ground, made some mistakes along the way, but ultimately were able to love the people who left as much as those who stayed. After the dust settled, some have come back with a sweeter attitude.
The dissenters tried to derail the mission and oust the pastor, but they failed. The church is stronger and healthier (though somewhat smaller in number) now than before. We are growing again. There are still people problems, only now they are the problems that come with baby Christians instead of adolescent or adult problems. I like it that way.
Larry on Mon, July 16, 2007
I tell my fellow pastors that we are just a couple of funerals away from real church growth. We have been transitioning from a small traditional syle church to a contemporary outside the four walls kind of church. There are some of the congregation, less than a handful that are not voiceing their unhappiness in the group but by their attitudes and through the grape-vine gossip are causing problems. I have been here over three years and I am about ready to call it quits if these attitudes can’t be changed. I have come close several times to asking those people to either come along or find another church. I have prayed that God would move them, either in attitude or out of the church. What boggles my mind though is the fact that these people cannot see the damage and hinderance they are to the body of christ.
Gpaofive on Mon, July 16, 2007
After a pastor, staff, and/or lay leaders make a serious attempt (often requiring repeated exchanges) to communicate with an individual or group, and there is no “meeting of the minds” or willingness to change on the part of the aggrieved; yes, it’s helpful if those people leave a church where they can serve in harmony with the philosophy of the church they attend.
Wesley H Boyles on Mon, July 16, 2007
The question is there times to ask people to leave your church and the answer is not an easy one to say the least i have watch as God began to do great things at the church that i pastor. To answer the question there are times that for the health of the church that you must ask someone to leave and this is to be done with the right kind of attitude. This is to be done only after other we have exhausted all other means of restoration. I know that a lot of the problems could be avoided if only we would follow church discipline (a lost doctrine)and also if we would prepare our churches for the changes that will follow growth.I have a open door policy at the church that if you have a problem we will set down and discuss it and pray over it and come to an agreement if i am violating the scriptures then i am the one that must change if they are the ones in violation then they must change. H ere is the amazing thing i have discovered is that most people will stay if pastors are acessible to simply to listen to them and why i am here one of the things that Pastors try to do is change a church overnight it did not get in that shape overnight and it will not be straigten out overnight we as pastors need to exercise Godly patience. There are times that i have asked people to leave the church some over dicipline measures and some who wanted to change the whole direction of the church over a personal preference i lovingly try to tell the them of a church in the area that has those kind of ministry that they prefer and the key for a pastor is to keep the right attitude.There is a refreshing when God remove the hinderances
Tobias on Mon, July 16, 2007
I think the inverse is often true of our churches: people want to leave, but feel they can’t because of the pressure to stay.
Heck, if they want to leave, they must be backsliding, right? Or “losing the vision”, bitter, unable to change, or whatever other reason we conclude, conveniently excluding any possible positive reasons for their leaving. Because, of course, if someone is leaving our church for another, and it isn’t “understandable” (a new job out of state or something), it must be bad. But, just maybe, their reason is positive for their Christian life. That could, but does not necessarily mean something negative about our church!
Why can’t we let people leave gracefully, instead of pressuring them not to leave or “gracefully” making them leave? Why not have both front and back doors wide open? We’re not a gang. We’re not faith in Jesus, but local fellowships together living out our faith in Jesus. Let’s live out our church’s vision, but not project problems onto those who leave. Talk to them. Understand them. Not everyone leaves because of “their issues.” Some will leave because they have issues, but some will leave because we have issues, and others still because they feel called elsewhere.
Mark Biel on Mon, July 16, 2007
It would be difficult not to “release” people gracefully with a church name like “Rock of Grace.” I am confident of this - all sheep need a shepherd - but shepherds do not need all of the sheep that “wander” into their sheep pen. I preached a sermon which included the phrase “If you are hearing this message this morning and I am not your pastor - then you are in the wrong church!” Peoiple need to leave if they are going to be part of the problem rather part of the solution. The church is a sacred trust both for the pastor and the flock.
A pastor is not a hireling - he needs to know in his or her heart that they are sent by the Lord to shepherd His flock. The church in turn compensates the gift from the Lord comenserate with both their means and a deep sense of honoring the Lord in a spirit of thanksgiving for His grace gift to them.
Bruce on Mon, July 16, 2007
It is not a question of asking these individuals to leave, the question is how do you do so? Even the most loving encouragment may not be enough. Trust me I know as I have been involved in two churches that have allowed the “frozen chosen” to control things. I empathize with Tim as I have pastored two churches with the similar problems and now am out of the pastorate because of them. When you have individuals that are in direct opposition to the leadership and the vision of reaching the community for Christ how can you loving encourage the opposition to find another place to minister? Normally the opposition has been in the church for years and have a vested interest in the church as well as a following. More times than not they will not leave, but they will withold their money and attack the leadership with barbs of criticism as they mount the opposition. I would be curious as to how you get such individuals to leave especially in an established church?
stephen riches on Mon, July 16, 2007
Well, Todd, you’ve picked a great topic this time. I think in any congregation, there are going to be differences of ideas and opinions concerning virtually everything. I don’t necessarily agree that the solution is to encourage departures, however. Too many people already use this as a fix every time they have a disagreement on some subject, and some church traditions have dwindled historically because of such attitudes and policies. Some counselling / admonition may become necessary, but should always be for a restorative or rehabilitative goal rather than to initiate a departure.
A more serious challenge is faced when there is division among leadership concerning vision, goals, or the process of change, and the congregation, in turn, alligns with one leader or another. And certainly there are even biblical examples of such (Paul vs. Peter; Paul vs. John Mark; and so on).
A brief response to a few of the comments already registered:
Vivian - I appreciate your heart - I too think we need to work through differences with patience and compassion.
Peter
I would suggest that the door of the church IS open, like it or not, and perhaps not for us to close. Of course, Jesus is that door. I appreciate that shepherds or elders of the flock share a responsibility to guard against heresies, but otherwise shouldn’t we rather be committed to building up all who come and to have a desire to turn none away. That increases challenges, I realize. But is this not in keeping with biblical teaching. Who said that if someone forces you to walk a mile, go two miles. And who called Simon Peter “Satan” and urged him to stop obstructing the mission. What worse threat could there be than attack from Satan? But the disciple wasn’t asked to leave the group! Jesus had plans for him, as he does for all of us.
Also, your comment on “the hymn thing” suggests a lack of appreciation for a variety of musical styles. And if that’s your personal experience at the moment, I accept that. But division along musical lines is one of the most unfortunate of realities in the church today. And it is a topic with which I’m intimately acquainted both because of my personal education in the music field, and from personal experience in church situations over several decades years. I am convinced that the compartmentalizing of congregations by musical style makes all of God’s people the poorer, both for the lack of diversity, and for the resulting musical and generational ghettos that are created. Sadly, there is a trend today toward exclusively contemporary church music, so that even music written before about 1990 is looked upon as old and therefore inappropriate. With a life span of less than a generation, therefore, either a change of policy will be needed within little more than a decade, or everyone 35 and over will have to say goodbye to all of the favourite church selections they enjoyed as young adults. Or alternatively, leave the church of their youth in search of a more familiar ghetto. This is the logical conclusion for the current trend. And such a limitation on music (to have only contemorary) is as inferior an experience as those who want to hang on to weary and mediocre traditions of past eras. Only by embracing the best of all eras and styles can we truly have the best. Without such an eclectic commitment, we are destined to embrace mediocrity or worse simply because it fits our stylistic category.
Leonard
The biblical standard is not in any way similar to baseball’s three strikes. When disciples asked Jesus if forgiving seven times was sufficient, Jesus suggested seventy times seven, or 490 times. Clearly Jesus’ message was not 490 times, but rather that there should be no limit to our forgiving, notwithstanding, of course, the responsibilities of church elders, as already noted.
Steve Nestor
The fellow who said that he considered it his role to be to make trouble is in serious need of “studying to show himself approved”.(2 Tim 2:15 - KJV) I don’t recall the listing of “troublemaking” either as one of the “fruits of the spirit” or as a qualification for church leadership. There are, however, many admonitions concerning how such people who are contentious are to be dealt with. This fellow should certainly be cautioned….in a kindly way, of course. Persistent troublemaking would reveal a lack of respect for the teaching of scripture, and suggest that he is one who is really not a member of the flock at all, but rather who is still among the lost whom Jesus came to seek and to save.
The challenges certainly aren’t easy. But I believe we need to learn to accept and embrace diversity, and cope with challenges with an inclusionist approach and attitude wherever possible as long as it does not violate our integrity in terms of our understanding of the message of scripture. And I’m confident that such a commmitment will make all of us the richer for the experience.
Steve Riches
PT on Mon, July 16, 2007
Thank you, Vivian, M & M, and Tye for a boldly challenging what has become the popular leadership-perspective-fad-for-the-day! This is a subject that concerns me, especially how quick and even enthusiastically so many redeemed servants of Christ will choose to avoid, reject and/or get rid of another.
Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that we need to ALLOW people to leave if they are genuinely determined that they cannot stay in reasonable unity. The problem, I believe, is we are too quick to oversimplify and react to these situations. I have many questions that I fear are too often not adequately (if ever) meditated upon before the Lord in these situations.
1.) WHOSE role/place is it, really, to decide whether or not someone should leave a church? Why and under what circumstances?
2.) Is the ‘crack in the door’ really there to give people an escape, or is it really a ‘trap door’ to push aside anyone who dissents or has a different vision?
3.) Why is there rarely any distinction made between what constitutes valid debate, discussion and disagreement versus what is sinful (in Jesus’ eyes, not just my own) rebellion? If the latter, is that not a case for church discipline (truly a lost doctrine) rather than an open invitation “if we don’t like it, leave”?
4.) If Jesus wants us to conform to His image, and love as He loved, then isn’t His example one of SACRIFICIAL love? Where/how is that being applied in these situations? Doesn’t that mean loving and giving to others even as they betray you, argue, defy and throw stones?
5.) How does Luke 19 apply here? PeterD, I think I understand where you’re coming from. However, it seems in your example you’re really talking about the wolves in sheeps’ clothing. But, what about the black sheep? The spooked, independent, wandering or occasionally rebellions sheep that suddenly finds itself separated from the flock? Aren’t we to PURSUE, not open the gate, say goodbye and recommend another sheep pen? I would also challenge the exegesis of “the Church.” Anywhere I read Scripture referring to the church in specific instruction, the context is behavior/belief/attitude within a particular community. That is, the local church. Though no doubt well-intentioned, it seems to me that inviting someone to leave one local church go somewhere else and then saying they weren’t asked to leave “The Church” is a ‘cop-out.’ Like asking, “What does ‘is’ mean?”
6.) 2 Co. 5:18-21. Where does the ‘ministry of reconciliation’ come into this discussion?
Except for instances of gross, habitual sin that, even after Biblical and loving accountability, is not confessed or repented, I just don’t believe we have the right to dis-invite anyone from the fellowship of the local church. And, even in such instances, it should only be with the intent of discipline that will one day (shortly) bring them back into loving reconciliation.
BTW: there was a time I would have largely agreed with most of the above sentiments - but Scripture challenges me otherwise and i have seen far too many individuals and churches devastated by spiritual arrows of this sort.
PT on Mon, July 16, 2007
Steve R,
Excellent! If I had seen your response first, I might not have bothered with mine.
Page 2 of 3 pages < 1 2 3 >
Post a Comment