|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Terms of Office for Pastors? - 8/6/2008 9:27:54 AM
|
|
|
drfuss
Posts: 188
Joined: 3/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
quote:
ORIGINAL: drfuss
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
Of course, the deacons were chosen by the congregation.
drfuss: We are talking about pastors (elders), not sure what deacons have to do with this.
I guess there's no connection to the discussion if you don't consider deacons as leaders. The comment was in response to:
quote:
Does anyone know of any biblical examples, Old or New Testament, of a congregation voting for or against their leader?
drfuss: Okay, I misinterpreted your posts. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Terms of Office for Pastors? - 8/6/2008 9:59:55 AM
|
|
|
drfuss
Posts: 188
Joined: 3/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Consecrated2God
The Bible says not to receive an accusation against an elder except by 2 or 3 witnesses. If there is substatial reason to remove a leader, there is a process for that. But a vote of confidence every two years turns the pastor into a politician--he's got to stay on everyone's good side or they're going to vote him back out. In a vote of confidence, the pastor might not have committed any sin or done anything worthy of removing him from office. People could vote against him because he preached too hard on sin, or they thought he was too young or too old. They might take a sermon personally and feel he was singling them out. They might not like his haircut or the version of the Bible he used. The power to oust a pastor based on non-biblical reasons should not be granted to those he is trying to lead.
drfuss: The above are good points, particularly from the pastor's perspective.
Without a vote, the laymen who want a change of pastors, can either passively resist his leadership (I was here before he came, he is not going to drive me out) or go to another church. Thankfully, there is usually another like church close by which the disenchanted can go to.
We went to another church 16 years ago after the new pastor went to contempory Christian music with the jungle beat, promoted unstable people as leaders in the church, etc. We have been happy with our new church ever since. BTW, about two thirds of the members from the previous church, left the church over a period of two or three years for the same reasons. The older folks said they were too old to change and endured it for their remaining years.
IMO, the best approach is to have a required secret ballot vote on the pastor every two or three years. The ballots would only be counted by the pastor with the understanding that he tells no one the results. The above should be required in the church bylaws rather than the pastor or deacons requesting a vote. If a secret ballot vote is requested, then the question is why.
A good pastor, who does not receive a good vote, will either make arrangements to find another church or try to change his style of leadership so that the laymen will respect him as leader.
Of course, this does not protect the church from a bad pastor who has decided to stay until retirement regardless of the effect it has on the church.
Do you think this approach would work better for the church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Terms of Office for Pastors? - 8/6/2008 10:10:34 AM
|
|
|
Consecrated2God
Posts: 4984
Joined: 4/4/2005
From: Formerly Jesus Land
Status: offline
|
I think what would work better for the church is that if people have a problem with the pastor, they come to him and discuss their concerns with him. An anonymous ballot would tell the pastor absolutely nothing he could use. All he would know is that X number of people wish he would leave. He wouldn't know who or why or what he was doing wrong.
_____________________________
<--Plantation house in Louisiana
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Terms of Office for Pastors? - 8/6/2008 11:02:39 AM
|
|
|
drfuss
Posts: 188
Joined: 3/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Consecrated2God
I think what would work better for the church is that if people have a problem with the pastor, they come to him and discuss their concerns with him. An anonymous ballot would tell the pastor absolutely nothing he could use. All he would know is that X number of people wish he would leave. He wouldn't know who or why or what he was doing wrong.
drfuss: First of all, if up to 10% of the members vote for him to move on, that should not be a surprise. He should not expect to get 100% of the vote. People are people. A pastor who expects to get 100% of the vote is not being very realistic.
On the other hand, if 30% voted for him to move on, then he should be concerned. Assuming this is a surprise to him, then he should discreetly try to find out what the problem is.
Concerning people coming to the pastor with complaints about what the pastor is doing, many people will tend to withdraw or passively resist rather than to be known as a complainer. Too many times over the years, I have seen people with complaints being labelled as trouble makers by a pastor. I for one would not complain to the pastor about something I did not like about what he was doing, unless he specifically ask me. It is the non-vocal members that the vote would tell the pastor about.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Terms of Office for Pastors? - 8/6/2008 11:29:27 AM
|
|
|
Consecrated2God
Posts: 4984
Joined: 4/4/2005
From: Formerly Jesus Land
Status: offline
|
Complainers usually complain to everyone (except maybe for the person they have an issue with). They are very vocal. They have an issue with everything that goes on, and they stir up gossip and dissention in the church.
quote:
I have seen people with complaints being labelled as trouble makers by a pastor. I'd be interested in knowing how you found out that information. Did the pastor tell you these people who came to him with their issues were troublemakers? If so, shame on him for betraying a confidence! It shouldn't be spread around. If you went to your pastor and said, "I have a problem with jungle beat music" then the pastor should discuss that with you and with no one else. If it stays between you and him, then there is no trouble making, because you aren't making trouble. You are bringing your concerns to the pastor in a biblical way.
I know that people have a tendency to handle their issues the wrong way. The solution is not to cater to them by making it possible for them to kick the pastor out anonymously, but to encourage them to come to talk to the pastor if they have any questions or concerns about anything the pastor of the church is doing. Bad behavior shouldn't be legitimized. It's the coward's way out, and it's not biblical.
_____________________________
<--Plantation house in Louisiana
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Terms of Office for Pastors? - 8/6/2008 1:28:10 PM
|
|
|
drfuss
Posts: 188
Joined: 3/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Consecrated2God
Complainers usually complain to everyone (except maybe for the person they have an issue with). They are very vocal. They have an issue with everything that goes on, and they stir up gossip and dissention in the church.
quote:
I have seen people with complaints being labelled as trouble makers by a pastor. I'd be interested in knowing how you found out that information. Did the pastor tell you these people who came to him with their issues were troublemakers? If so, shame on him for betraying a confidence! It shouldn't be spread around. If you went to your pastor and said, "I have a problem with jungle beat music" then the pastor should discuss that with you and with no one else. If it stays between you and him, then there is no trouble making, because you aren't making trouble. You are bringing your concerns to the pastor in a biblical way.
I know that people have a tendency to handle their issues the wrong way. The solution is not to cater to them by making it possible for them to kick the pastor out anonymously, but to encourage them to come to talk to the pastor if they have any questions or concerns about anything the pastor of the church is doing. Bad behavior shouldn't be legitimized. It's the coward's way out, and it's not biblical.
drfuss: To answer your questions.
Concerning the jungle beat music, I personally did not go to him about it. Many others did and were told that this is the way it is going to be. I am sure he could tell by my response during the song service that I did not like it.
I did not have to worry about being labelled a trouble maker in this case, because a majority of the people did not like it, only some of the under 30 crowd. His intention was to appeal to the younger crowd that he considered to be the future of the church. The feelings of the people who built the church and sustained the church all those years, did not count.
My experience in people being called trouble makers occurred many years ago. The pastor started resenting and considered disrespectful any opinions about church operations from the board members that differed from his. A few years after it was all over, he admitted that his real problem was his family problems which led to his divorce. However, people close to him called me and said they forgave me for what I had done. When I ask them just what I was being forgiven for, they could not tell me. They apparently were told that I had wronged the pastor (I assume it was for expressing my opinions during board meetings). BTW, it was not just me, the other board members also were labelled. Also, his sermons reflected his troubled condition.
I can see no reason why a secret ballot vote counted only by the pastor would not be a good thing; or how it could be a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
