Envisioning the future while not disempowering the past

Every new senior leader faces the twin challenge of moving the organization they lead forward and at the same time doing so in a way that does not detract from what leaders have done in the past. All too often we envision the future but do so by directly or indirectly dissing the past. It is not necessary nor is it helpful.

Take a new pastor coming into a church that needs renovation. Because they are new their focus is on the future and they have no ownership of the past. What we often forget, however, is that our constituency is often far more focused on what was and what is than on what will be. I know of pastors who have publicly criticized the past practices of the church they take, the state of the campus facilities, the architecture and other things that in their eyes were broken.

They may be right in their analysis but they do not help move the congregation forward by marginalizing the past or those who made the church what it is today, imperfect as it may be. Remember that if change is needed it will take these very people to go with you. Thus I would offer several suggestions for envisioning the future while not disempowering the past.

First, honor the past: It got you to where you are. Find the positive things to honor and do it publicly.

Second, honor the faithful folks who are responsible for where the ministry is today. They may or may not represent the future but they have been faithful.

Third, position change not as a criticism of the past but as a necessary step to stay engaged with a changing world. Rather than positioning the past as "bad" position the future as "different" as we respond to a changing world environment.

Fourth, always be gracious. We would desire the next leader to be gracious with us after we leave. We need to set the stage by being gracious to those who have led in the past. There is rarely an excuse for a lack of graciousness.

Fifth, be very careful in how you communicate a need to change. Think about how your constituency will interpret your words from their point of view and experience. When in doubt, find a colleague who can give you feedback. How we message is as important as the message itself.

Sixth, don't move faster than your constituency can follow. Moving too fast sends a message that we do not value the past. Words are not the only things that matter. Our actions and attitudes send messages as well.

People who choose to leave their ministry by taking shots on the way out

So let me just say: It is not cool to take public shots at the organization we have been serving on the way out whether it is justified in our minds or not. It does not serve Jesus, it is not necessary and in the end it reveals more about our character than it does about the faults of the organization we are leaving.

When we choose to leave a ministry for whatever reason, we always have a choice as to how we leave. We can preserve unity, good will and relationship or we can destroy all three. Usually when we choose to take public shots it is more about our lack of EQ and character than it is about the shortcomings of the ministry. 

It is one thing to privately share our observations and concerns with those who can do something about them and it is another to go public with those who cannot and may not even know there are issues. I have watched pastors split churches and staff seek to hurt other ministries they have been a part of on leaving.

Ironically, any ministry that a disgruntled staff member goes to after they have publicly castigated their prior ministry is foolish to receive them. Why would they think that the individual will be any more gracious to them than to their prior ministry? They may feel good at the moment that the individual wants to work for them (and look how much better we are than that other group) but those who speak ill of their prior group may well do the same to the new group.

There are no perfect organizations, or leaders. But what would motivate one to seek to hurt or cast aspersions on either as they leave? The motivation certainly cannot be the betterment of the group they are leaving as they are no longer in a position to contribute. Those doing it certainly know it will not help their prior ministry. Usually the motive is personal and the behavior passive aggressive. It certainly does not fit the criteria given by Paul that what we say ought to build others up. In the end it is simply sad!

As one who has consulted with many churches and organizations I understand dysfunctions. But when I hear public criticism of a ministry as a staff member leaves it usually tells me a lot more about them than it does the organization they are leaving.

A very tough decision: When it is time to leave!

All of us face this decision from time to time in our lives. Henry Cloud calls them necessary endings. It is making the decision that it is time to leave a job - whether for another - or even not yet knowing what is next.

A good friend of mine just announced his resignation from a ministry. I asked him what he was planning to do and he simply said, "I am concentrating on finishing well and the rest will sort itself out." His internal compass convinced himself that after a ten year run it was time to move on. Even though he does not know what is next.

There are times when we know that our time is finished but we cannot pull the trigger to resign a familiar position. We are afraid for the future. Yet the coinage we trade in is that of faith and these are times that require great faith. Even when we leave for another position there is uncertainty and the requisite fears about leaving the familiar for the unknown.

In his book Necessary Endings, Henry Cloud rightly makes the point that in order for something new to start, something old must die. It is the nature of life. That is why there are endings that are necessary. The courageous heed the inner signs that it is time. Often we know in our heart of hearts that it is but resist out of fear. When we resist we miss out on that "new thing" that God wants to do in our lives. 

A tough decision but often the most important decision. Knowing when it is time.

If I truly understand that all people are made in God's Image...

The theology of creation and God's amazing decision to make us in His Image has implications for all relationships and interactions. The more we understand what it means that all are made in His Image, the more we will live out the following commitments. We will:

• Treat people with dignity and respect - all of them
• Not marginalize any person
• Exhibit the fruit of the Spirit in our interactions with others
• Want the best for other individuals
• Not slander others
• Treat all with fairness
• Desire that all come to know the One who created them
• Want all to fulfill their God given potential
• Reject all attitudes and actions that diminish life
• Never use people or our selfish purposes

Everyone you meet today is an Image bearer of God, tarnished as that image may be. Think of how Jesus treated all those around Him. As the creator He understood the implications of the Image He planted in every human being.

Theo geeks in the church

There is a place for slicing and dicing of fine theological points but it is rarely in the church. Certainly all Christ followers should be able to articulate the major doctrines of evangelical theology - and there is way too much Biblical illiteracy in the church today. However, just as Biblical illiteracy is a problem, those who are "Theo geeks" (I believe Paul Tripp used this term) can also be a problem, when they want to debate all theological points with very little tolerance for those who don't hold to their particular point of view. On a church board, they can tie up time and energy with their fine tuning of doctrine - by their interpretation.

There is nothing wrong with desiring to understand the nuances of theology. It is when we start to confuse the pillars of the faith that define orthodoxy with non-essential doctrines which have been debated for centuries that we get ourselves into trouble. My own denomination has a wonderful saying for this: "In essentials unity, in non-essentials charity." The essentials are spelled out in our statement of faith. On the non-essentials there is considerable latitude and points of view. 

Theo geeks are often not satisfied with latitude on non-essentials. They can be very black and white thinkers for whom latitude is not part of their vocabulary. The problem is threefold. First, in not making a distinction between essential and non-essential doctrines they elevate all doctrine to the same level which the church has never embraced. The various well know creeds of the church are all about the essential doctrinal issues that do in fact matter. 

Second, in doing this they often create conflict over issues that were never meant to divide people or the church. When non-essential doctrine becomes a cause of disunity there is usually an underlying issue of black and white, inflexible individuals who are majoring on the wrong things and need to have their views accepted. 

Third, narrow theological thinking (we all need to agree on all points of theology) often leads to a theological pride. The focus on getting every jot and tittle correct marginalizes those whose tittle might end up elsewhere and the focus on fine points of theology takes our focus off of the grace of Jesus, the transformation He wants to bring to our lives and the practical application of the Scriptures to our every day lives. When intellectual pursuits and knowledge become more important than grace and transformation the end result is pride and arrogance.

The study of theology ought to engender humility not pride. The longer I am immersed in the Scriptures the more clear I am on the essentials of the faith and the more humble I am about how much we do not understand of the fullness of God. In all eternity we will still not plumb the depths of His greatness and the breadth of His person. 

The problem with small untruths

It is easy to justify a small untruth. It is small and insignificant and has little impact one way or another. Except: With that small lie, I have moved the boundary of my moral compass ever so slightly, but it has moved which makes it easier next time to move it just so much more until the boundary become malleable and subject only to what I can justify. 

This last statement is very important because most of us will not tell an untruth that we cannot justify. That is why lies start small. It is something that is not too hard to justify and if the boundary of truth moves ever so slowly we can keep up with it. And the thing about self justification is that because a lie creates dissonance between our belief system and our actions it becomes necessary for us to justify the action and pretty soon we actually believe our own justification, skewed as it is.

I have met very bright, sometimes brilliant Christian leaders who have caused immeasurable hurt to others through promises not kept, untruths, financial mismanagement, unjust firings and the like. And they have a justification for all of it. Nothing is their fault, they don't take any responsibility and their justifications while absurd to others make perfect sense to them. They believe their own lies. Why? Over time their moral boundaries moved ever so slightly until they were now a great distance from where they started and the only one who does not see it is the individual himself or herself.

The problem with small untruths is that multiplied over and over they become large untruths. And one day, there is no way to even confront those lies because the justifications are believed by the one who has moved their moral boundaries. And it happens to believers and non-believers alike. Even Christian leaders!

Don't get caught in the trap of those who want endless dialogue as a means of getting their way

There are people who must have their own way and when that is challenged they try to rope others into endless dialogue designed to wear people down until they give in. They use phrases like, "I am not being understood, can we talk?" or "I am confused by your position," and "I must not be making myself clear." If it is a group decision and their position is not being agreed with they may try to triangulate with others on the team to get their way.

Those who rope others into endless dialogue have a strategy. They have learned that they can wear others down by debate and eventually many will simply give in or give up. Often they have strong personalities and the dialogue becomes a method of intimidation until people basically surrender. 

I once observed a dialogue between two senior leaders. One of them was trying to convince the other to make a certain decision that he did not want to make. The aggressor kept coming back with different angles, never acknowledging that the other party kept saying no. It became so problematic that I finally asked them to take a time out so I could suggest to the aggressor that he needed to back off and leave it alone.  He was simply unwilling to take no for an answer and his MO was to keep pushing until someone gave in. This behavior is nothing other than bullying and intimidation under the guise of dialogue.

Healthy people don't keep pushing others when they have clearly indicated their preferences. Humble individuals do not try to force others to agree with their position. Don't allow aggressive and pushy individuals to rope you into endless dialogue. They know exactly what they are doing and it is not about "understanding each other." Rather it is simply about getting their way.

Signs of Humility

We care deeply about what God thinks and says.

Life is not about us!

We honor other people above ourselves.

It is not necessary for us to always get our way.

We can submit to the decisions of a team or board.

We are deeply aware of our shadow side and seek to manage it well.

We understand and are willing to live under authority.

When people disagree with us we listen respectfully.

We don't need to be right.

We are not self absorbed.

It is easy for us to admit when we are wrong and to apologize.

We are not quick to judge others.

When success comes we can give credit where it is due.

When others succeed we celebrate their success.

We love to serve others.

We have a balanced understanding our ourselves, our strengths and our weaknesses.

We keep our egos in check.

Pastors and their dreams

Most pastors have dreams for their congregation and ministry. After all, they are leaders, they have a vision of what the church should or could be and they have a powerful platform from which to share those dreams - the pulpit.

The question, is not whether we have dreams for our ministry but whether we have a shared vision of what God wants to do in and through us. When my dream is only my dream, it is about me. When we are able to develop a shared dream and vision it is about us - together. As leaders we can use our leadership capital to build something for ourselves or we can build something together and which comes from a group of leaders seeking God's agenda together.

Corporate dreams have far more lasting power than individual dreams. God may well use a leader (think Nehemiah) to spark a vision of what could be but that then needs to be shared by those who must make it happen. Good leaders inspire others to action but they also help others gain ownership of a common vision.

And ultimately it should be God's vision for what He wants from our ministries. God calls us to things that are on His heart and when we discern that together, the conviction of the Holy Spirit binds good leaders together to move in a common direction.

All leaders have dreams. Ask yourself this question if you are a leader. Is this my agenda and vision or a shared agenda and vision. And, does that agenda and vision come from me, us or from God?

Best practices in pastoral searches: Moving beyond Kumbaya

The unfortunate fact is that many pastoral searches do not lead to a good marriage between the senior pastor and the congregation. I have watched great search processes and really poor ones. Here are some very practical suggestions that go beyond the need for prayer and the Holy Spirit's leading. They go to the core of understanding if this is likely to be a good fit or not.

Rather than a job description which no pastor can usually fill focus on the necessary competencies needed for the job. Then, write the actual job description around the individual you call with a focus on their particular strengths. He can then build a team to compensate for his weaknesses.

Resolve issues you know to be dysfunctional before you call a new leader - or - be fully disclosing as to what those issues are and how you will work with him to resolve them. Never hide the truth of your situation, just as you do not want the candidate to hide the truth of who they are. Give them the good, bad and the ugly so there are no surprises when they come. If the bad and the ugly scare them off, you have the wrong individual.

Ensure that your candidate knows where the authority lies in the congregation. It is a bad surprise for a new pastor to find out that authority he thought he had is withheld or that there are power factions in the church that hold veto power even over the board's decisions. If there is a church boss or some power faction, be sure they know about it.

Ensure that you are clear with the candidate as to what their authority is and is not. We don't like to talk about these things when we are courting a pastor but the fact is that they must know the boundaries of their role. If those boundaries are not acceptable to them they can self select out on the front end rather than fighting battles once they get there.

Every congregation has a DNA - some good and some problematic. Be sure that your candidate understands what that DNA is, what the strengths and weaknesses of the congregation as a whole are. If there have been significant conflicts or there are yet unresolved issues or a need for reconciliation tell the candidate.

The one group that the pastor must deal with regularly is the board. Be honest about the health of the board and allow the candidate to speak frankly and confidentially with whatever board member(s) they choose to get the real story. Unhealthy boards are as dangerous as unhealthy pastors. Don't hide reality from the individual who must deal with that reality for their leadership tenure.

Clarify in writing issues that need to be clarified in either direction. For instance, one search committee I met with could not explain who actually had authority for what: Board, senior pastor, staff or congregation. That is enough ambiguity to sink the relationship fast if not clarified. Some things need to be clarified up front just as in a marriage.

Don't try to make everyone feel good in this process. Good marriages take hard conversations and so do good pastoral/board relationships. Allow your candidate to ask the same hard questions of you that you ask of them. This is not about everyone being able to sing Kumbaya but about the ability to work together long term. Some things may need to be negotiated and agreed to up front.

Be clear about whether the new senior leader has the ability to change his leadership team which means staff. If you as a board see some staff as off limits for change (they are your friends or whatever the case) be honest about that.

Be honest, candid, up front, frank, how many ways can we say it! Tell the truth, don't gloss and be sure you are ready to keep promises that you make.

One of the fundamental ways that trust is broken early between new pastors and boards is when they are surprised by realities that the board fully knew but chose not to tell them in the candidating stage as it might scare them off. Where this happens the process lacks integrity and the potential damage to the congregation and pastor can be high. Be up front on the front end and you will build trust for the back end.

First look at the upcoming book Deep Influence

Table of Contents

Forged on the Inside

Choosing a Posture of Humility

Allowing Suffering to Mold

Embracing Spiritual Transformation

Managing the Shadow Side

Growing Emotional Intelligence

Leading from Who God Made Me to Be

Choosing Intentionality

Thinking as a Contrarian

Getting to the Freedom of Clarity

Living with Transparency

Guarding Our Hearts

Vital statistics on pastors that all pastors and church board members should know

How healthy are pastors today? What is their spiritual life like? What do they struggle with? Who are their friends? What is their drop out rate. The following article is sobering for pastors and their congregants alike and calls for some serious discussion.

See article here

An insightful article by Albert Mohler on Gay marriage and the evangelical church

There Is No ‘Third Way’ — Southern Baptists Face a Moment of Decision (and so will you)

See article here

Every person of influence has this characteristic

They are purveyors of hope!

Every day we are bombarded with messages of pessimism and fear whether it is the economy, the political situation, challenges in the workplace or ministry. Good leaders and people of influence don't live in the world of pessimism but in the world of hope and they transmit that hope in all that they do. When others say, "It won't work," "We cannot do it," There are no good options," leaders resist the tide of pessimism and provide their people with hope!

One of my heroes is Winston Churchill who almost single handedly provided hope to the nation of England when appeasers wanted to make peace with Hitler, when the blitz threatened to destroy London, when their ships were being sunk and the nation was nearly bankrupt and no one was providing help. It was Churchill who refused to give in to despair even though he knew the odds were stacked against his nation. Time after time, in Parliament and on the radio his voice was the voice of hope and it literally changed the course that history might have taken.

Think about the message of Jesus. "The thief comes to steal, kill and destroy but I come to give life and life abundant (John 10:10)." Or, "In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world (John 16:33)." If there is one thing I don't understand, it is believers who live with fear and pessimism rather than peace and hope because that is what Jesus came to give us and we have its reservoir in our hearts through the Holy Spirit. 

The Apostle Paul understood that! Because he understood God. He was no pessimist even in the midst of a tough ministry. He wrote, "Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to His power that is at work with us, to Him be glory in the church and in Jesus Christ throughout all generations, for ever and every! Amen! 

On a hard day think about that!

These are not easy days to be in ministry. Good leaders though see the possibilities and threats but they rally the troops to see what can be rather than what many fear will be. They are optimistic while still being realistic, find ways to overcome adversity and believe that God is a big God not a small God. Their perspective becomes hope that others can borrow from. They are purveyors of hope.

Does your team understand and practice robust dialogue? Want to know more?

Robust dialogue is the ability to put any issue on the table for discussion with the exception of hidden agendas or personal attacks. The truth is that most teams do not have the permission or the ground rules for candid and frank discussion and it hurts them. This applies to teams and boards alike. In this short video I talk about how to engage in healthy robust dialogue in your setting. I hope it can encourage leaders and teams to take the next step in learning how to communicate for maximum ministry impact.

Hit this link to my short talk.

Avoiding paternalism in missions through a round table approach with ministry partnerships

Missions is changing radically. We are moving from a paradigm of missionaries being primarily doers to being primarily equippers. The following short video unpacks this change and addresses the issue of paternalism in the missions enterprise.

Link to Develop Empower and Release video

The poverty mentality in many churches

One of the challenges of working in the majority (poor) world is that there is often a "poverty mentality," which focuses on what they do not have rather than what God has actually given them to use for his purposes. Some of the training we do in these contexts is to help folks look around them and discover the resources God has given them and then how to use those resources for ministry, rather than thinking they are poor and need outside resources for everything they do.

A poverty mentality is not only the domain of the majority world, however. There are many church staffs who believe that "if only they had more resources," they could get more done for Jesus. This sometimes translates into heavy handed and even manipulative "God talk" from the front on how the congregation should be more generous in their giving. I have seen this in churches of 5,000 and churches of 500. 

Often this reflects the dreams of a leader more than the intentions of God for a congregation. I believe that God is fully capable of providing a congregation with whatever they need to do what God is actually calling them to do. If we don't have enough, perhaps we are doing things God has not called us to do. Or going about it in the wrong way.

Furthermore, the answer to all ministry opportunities is not simply money. We have people who have skills and gifting that can be brought to the table. My experience is that God's people are generally very willing to be involved personally in ministry when it is in line with their gifting. What they resist is the pressure by staff to get involved in things that they are either not gifted to do or programs that fulfill a dream of church staff that they feel no compulsion from the Spirit to participate in.

We need to get away from the thinking that ministry is simply what happens inside the four walls of the church or must be a program of the church. What would happen in terms of impact if every individual was simply living out the "good works God prepared in advance for them to do (Ephesians 2:10)" in their places of influence. That takes no money, no staff, no programs. It is just us living out the calling of God on our lives.

Don't get caught up in a poverty mentality. God provides what we need for what He has called us to do. And remember, it is not all about money.

Celebrity Christianity

I get the fact that some Christian leaders will become well known. And, that they will be pushed to become celebrities because that is our culture. We celebrate celebrities, we love to rub shoulders with them, name drop that we know them, visit their churches and buy their newest book. Even quote them - almost like Jesus. And perhaps we often treat them a bit like Jesus.

Celebrity Christianity is very foreign to the humble ministry of Jesus which pointed people to the Father and made it clear that He was doing what the Father told Him to do. Here was a member of the Godhead pointing people to the Father through Him. He served others rather than wanting to be served. He humbled himself by becoming a creature and like those he created. He was not interested in being a celebrity - He was interested in people hearing the Good News and He went to the most unpretty people to share it as they were the most receptive. I wonder if He would even recognize the celebrity Christianity of our day.

Again, some will be well known whether they like it or not. But there is a great difference between those Christian leaders in that category who live with humility and servanthood and those who use their star status for self promotion, book sales and a platform for themselves. I can name well known individuals in both camps. For examples of the humble side consider John Ortberg, Rick Warren and Timothy Keller. You can contrast those with individuals who fit the other description. 

The bottom line is that when we turn the spotlight on us we have turned it away from Jesus. When we promote ourselves we have ceased to promote the Father. When we use our ministry for personal gain we have crossed a line from calling to self aggrandizement. In ministry, our platform is simply one of turning the spotlight on Jesus continuously. The larger the platform He gives, the more focused we must be on where the light is shining.
If we represent Jesus we must be sure that we look like Jesus. 

Ten things that drive me crazy about working for a church

Very interesting and a quick read

Ten Things that drive me crazy about working for a church

Optimistic leaders often need to temper their optimism with realism

Optimism is a wonderful trait and I share that outlook on life. It is an outlook that sees the best, believes that barriers can be overcome and that God and we can do great things. Who wants to work for a pessimist! After all, we work for a God who can do far more than we could ask or imagine (Ephesians 3:20). 

Sometimes, however, optimism can become a handicap just as any strength can become a weakness if not managed well. Optimism as an outlook on life is a positive trait. There are many situations we face as leaders, however, that require realism more than optimism.

Take a staff situation where there is regular under performance. My optimism may get in the way of critical evaluation and understanding that unless something is done, the staff member will likely not succeed. Simply wanting them to succeed does not make it so. Realism is required to figure out the cause of the performance problem and resolve it.

Optimistic leaders often overlook the difficulty of getting something done by their staff. In their "gung ho" spirit they can simply assume that the requests they are making are easy to carry out when in fact they may may be causing a great deal of difficulty as staff scramble to meet their expectations. Often they need a dose of realism to understand the impact of their requests.

Highly optimistic leaders often assume that the results of their ministry are significant when in fact they can be simply marginal. Why? Because in their optimism they neglect to take a realistic look at what is actually happening. Optimism should never be a substitute for realistic evaluation.

I would much rather be an optimistic leader than the alternative. But I must also be a realistic leader if I am going to lead well.

For a cause greater than us!

One of the great privileges in my travels has been to visit the US armed forces cemeteries: Arlington, France, Hawaii, Manila and others. It is not easy to comprehend the names upon the wall, or the perfect rows of silent white crosses and the Stars of David. It is a visual and mute testimony to men and women who gave their lives for a cause greater than themselves. I think of the families who gave their sons and daughters to the cause of freedom. Conversations in these sacred places takes place in whispers as we acknowledge the hallowed ground as such.

Whenever I walk the rows of the fallen I think of another group who has no cemetery, whose numbers equal those fallen in war and who also gave their lives for a cause greater than themselves: The men and women through the ages who gave their lives for the Gospel of Jesus.  Their honor is yet to come but it was their sacrifice that continues to fuel the growth of the church. Just as soldiers went into harms way for the cause of freedom so these went to hard places knowing the possible cost.

There are causes in life that are greater than our individual lives. We are recipients of those who understood that and were willing to pay the price. We are indebted to them. Let us never forget.

Ensuring that our greatest strengths do not become fuel for our greatest weakness

We rightly celebrate our strengths as they are God given and when we live in their lane we are often very effective at what we do. I call it "our lane" or "sweet spot." However, these very strengths can become our greatest weaknesses if not managed well. Every strength casts a shadow and the greater the strength the greater the shadow. 

So the very strengths we were given from God can become a weakness if not managed. Take three of mine: Achiever, maximizer and strategist. As an achiever I want to get something done but the down side is that it could cause me to be driven. As a maximizer I want to maximize ministry opportunity but the down side is that I could "use people" in the process with more concern about the end product than than the people in the process. As a strategist I often understand how to get to where we need to go and can become impatient with those who don't. In other words, each of my strengths can, if not managed become a significant weakness that impacts those around me.

I find it immensely helpful for a team to discuss their strengths together so that they understand one another. It is equally helpful to then ask the question, what is the dark side of those strengths and how do they get us in trouble if not managed well? That is the discussion where I see most light bulbs go on because we don't often think about the dark side of our strengths.

When not managed, the very strengths that go us to where we are in life can conspire against us to destroy what we have accomplished. Pride fueled by a lack of management of our weaknesses will destroy quickly what it took long years to build. When leaders crash and burn it is often this situation that causes the loss. Success is a delicate thing easily undercut by pride and carelessness that can quickly lead to a fall.

A major way that leaders disempower staff

Picture this all too common scenario. A staff member has been given a responsibility or a project. They spend days or months working on it. When they show it to their supervisor he/she makes significant changes to what has been done so that it fits their preferences.

It is one of the most disempowering actions a leader can take and they often don't realize the damage they do by redoing what they have asked someone else to do.

Some leaders do this routinely, blithely unaware that every time they do it they lose coinage with staff who wonder why they were asked to design something in the first place when it is going to be redone by their leader.  If one is going to delegate authority one must also delegate responsibility and be willing to live with the result unless there are glaring issues unaddressed. 

Leaders who routinely change the work of their staff are usually doing so because something does not fit their own personal preferences. But how is a staff member to know what those preferences are and why are preferences of a leader fair game to change the work that has been delegated? Preferences are just that - preferences - and not non-negotiables. If a leader has a preference they ought to state it up front so the work they have delegated does not need to be redone after the fact - a disempowering action.

Inherent in delegation is the fact that things may not be designed as I would design them. The key is that the objective is reached, not how it is reached in most cases. If I have to redo the work of staff I either have the wrong staff or I am not flexible enough to allow for things to be done in ways other than my own. And that demonstrates a lack of humility as I must have my way. 

The more we embrace this practice, the more influence we have

It is a very simple practice: Being an encourager of others. The staff you have who encourage other staff are invaluable staff. Those in the church who encourage bring hope and life to hurting people to keep going - cold water for the weary. We rub shoulders every day with people who need a kind word of encouragement which is why there are so many "encouragements" in Scripture to "encourage one another."

I remember one particular vacation years ago when one of my sons was in a phase of life that specialized in sullen silence. It was frustrating and irritating. We were with friends and I said something to them about my frustration which they observed. One of them kindly said, "He will grow out of it and it will be just fine, relax." To this day I remember those words and have often quoted them to other parents in a similar situation. Those words were just what I needed from someone who had gone before and could see what I could not see. In fact, some of the most powerful words that stick in my memory are words of encouragement spoken to me in a time of discouragement. We remember harsh words and we remember encouraging words.

We should never underestimate the power of encouragement. It is why Scriptures say that God encourages us, the Holy Spirit encourages us, the Scriptures encourage us, fellow believers encourage us and we are to be a constant encouragement to others. And everyone can do that. It is not reserved for a select few. Encouragers are amazingly influential in a world that specializes in discouragement.

If we want to be like God who is the ultimate encourager (Romans 15:5) make this a daily practice. The more we embrace this practice the more influence we have and the more we look like the Father.

Good EQ in crisis situtations

It is in crisis situations that our EQ and character are truly forged. Whether it is a situation where we have some control or one where we are in a position of no control, what we do, what we say, how we manage our emotions and the actions we choose to take say much about our Emotional Intelligence and character. 

Here are some of the EQ tests that crisis brings:

• Am I able to manage my anxiety and emotions when I face uncertainty, am angry or otherwise disappointed? It is not that we don't feel those emotions but keeping our powder dry is critical to responding well.

• Am I able to control my conversations and words? Words are powerful things and what is spoken cannot be taken back. There are many instances where keeping our own counsel is far wiser than not.

• Am I able to be patient enough to let matters play out when that is a necessary part of the equation? Impatience almost always works against you while patience almost always works for you. Impatience prompts actions and words that are problematic while patience allows others to come to the same conclusions you may have.

• Am I trusting God in the situation or trying to solve an issue myself? When we get in front of God we inevitably cause ourselves problems.

• Am I able to treat those involved with dignity or in my anxiety to solve something will I hurt someone that I should not? How we treat people matters and in a crisis it is easy to forget that.

Wise individuals learn that acting out of fear, anxiety, or without thinking through the ramifications is unwise. The wise manage their EQ even when under pressure.

Healthy board/pastor relationships in the church

A key factor in leadership health in the church is the relationship between the senior pastor and the board. When this relationship becomes conflictual, dysfunctional or unhealthy it hurts the ministry of the congregation. Here are some things to consider in that equation.

While senior pastors are accountable to their board and an employee they are also members of the board and should be full participants of that board. Senior leaders should have significant influence in the crafting of the ministry in a collegial board atmosphere. When boards treat their senior leader merely as an employee in an employee/employer relationship they have moved from ministry to business and away from the model we see in the New Testament. In my experience, where this happens, leaders also tend to lead the church/ministry as a business rather than as a ministry (acknowledging that good business practices are always important).

Where boards seek to control their leader or the leader seeks to control the board and ministry it becomes about power rather than a healthy team under the lordship of Christ. Mutual respect, humility, deference for one another and a willingness to submit to the will of the majority after prayerful consideration of issues is the sign of board health. The desire to control is not healthy, nor is it in any way biblical.

Boards and pastors have many common ministry issues but they may also have issues of special concern to one party or the other. The ability to appreciate those concerns and the ability to speak candidly and respectfully about them is a sign of good relationship. The marginalization by pastors of concerns of the board, or of boards of the concern of the senior pastor is the sign of dishealth. I have met pastors who will not listen to their board and boards who marginalize the concerns of the senior pastor. Neither are healthy.

We all operate under authority and in most churches the accountability of the senior leader is the board. Accountability matters and when senior pastors are unwilling to be accountable to their board or resist it, they have stepped away from being under authority. 

Clarity between the roles of the senior pastor and his staff and the role of the board is critical to a good relationship. Management and governance are two separate responsibilities. Staff designs and  board refines! Too many boards get into management responsibilities that should be the purview of staff. Clarifying what each group is responsible for removes ambiguity and potential conflict.

If there is tension between the senior leader and the board, don't let it fester. Bring in someone you trust who can speak to the relationship, help clarify the issues and chart a way forward. The relationship between a senior pastor and board must remain healthy for the church to remain healthy. Don't allow it to deteriorate. Often tensions can be resolved if attended to early.

Never stop developing the health of the board. Candid discussion and growing the board is always a best practice. Talk about how the board is doing, read some good books on leadership together, study the Scriptures and pray together. Bring Jesus into the equation all the time. Jesus is reason that we serve in church leadership and we are simply His undershepherds.

Every board ought to have a board covenant that spells out acceptable behaviors and how the members relate to one another! Poor behavior without the will of the board to police itself is one of the major causes of dysfunction in the church. It is also a major discouragement to pastors. See my blog: Operate without a board covenant at your own risk.

A real time picture of globalization: Most commonly spoken language (other than English) in each London borough

See this amazing picture of globalization

The Church: Helping people grow up

Here is an interesting concept: The church is a place where we help people grow up! We have a Father and the Father wants us to grow up in Him from kids to maturity. Jesus accepts us for who we are but wants us to become like who He is. Maturity is the goal according to Paul in Ephesians 4. 

Think about some of the implications of this. Many people expect the church to be the source of their spiritual growth. That is the perspective of immaturity. Growing up means that I take responsibility for my spiritual life and don't outsource it to others.

How many congregations deal with petty conflicts? Growing up means that we treat one another with honor and dignity, allow others to think differently than ourselves and living in peace rather than in conflict.

Many leadership groups in the local church find it hard to agree to corporate decisions. We want our way like toddlers who won't let others play with their toys. Growing up means that we have respectful discussion, make corporate decisions and agree to live by them.

Often our congregations think that the church is primarily for their benefit. Growing up means that we choose to live like Jesus and reach out to those who are not yet in the church. If the church is about me I am living from immature selfishness. If the church is about others who need to hear the Good News I am living in maturity and generosity.

Growing up is a great metaphor for what the church is about and what the Christian life is about. Where do you (and I) need to grow up? Where does our congregation need to grow up? 

When I have to deal with problematic situations as a leader

Leaders regularly face issues that have consequences depending on how they are handled. Many times we act either too fast out of anxiety or too slow out of fear. So how should we process such situations in our own minds? Let me suggest four issues we ought to be concerned about.

The first is discernment! Problematic situations are often more complex than they seem on the surface. Take a church conflict, for instance, or a dysfunctional staff - there are usually multiple dynamics that play into the situation and acting too quickly and without understanding the full picture can cause additional problems.

Discernment is the process of seeking to understand what is actually happening, who is involved and why there are issues. Getting to discernment is often a matter of thinking, talking to the right people, and taking the time to ensure that we have adequate undertanding.

Discernment is critical but so is the wisdom to know how to address the issue at hand. Understanding one's problem is only part of the puzzle. Knowing what to do about it, and when and how is another. This is about process. One can make the right decision but cause additional problems through a poor process.

Wisdom asks questions like: "How do I address the issues at hand in a way that is not going to cause additional problems?" "If I take this action what are the potential ramifications or unintended consequences?" "Am I prepared to deal with those consequences?" "Is this the right time to address the problem?" "If the issues become public do I know my response?" Wisdom is all about knowing how to do what we need to do and be smart in the process.

This often requires courage! It is one thing to understand what needs to happen and it is another to have the courage to do what needs to be done, knowing that there are risks involved. Many leaders live with unresolved issues in their organization precisely because they do not have the courage to deal with them. Unfortunately this usually complicates the situation.

The fourth component is favor with those involved. Actions we take, if not supported by those around us, including staff are problematic. But if people believe that we have run due process, have acted in fairness and integrity and with grace, we gain the favor we need to do what is necessary. Favor is also generated by enough relationship that trust can be granted.

So here are the four questions we ought to ask ourselves when dealing with problematic situations:

• Have I discerned the situation clearly?
• Am I addressing the situation with wisdom?
• Do I have the courage to act?
• Do I have the favor of those who will become aware of my actions and if explained will they see my actions as necessary and reasonable.

Of course, praying for all four of these is what wise leaders do. They practice all four and they pray for all four.

For MKs everywhere

I love MKs. Growing up cross culturally is an amazing experience. I would not exchange it or anything. This video is for MKs everywhere!

For MKs everywhere

Neither Christians nor LGBT individuals should be punished or fired for their lifestyle.

See this column in USA today by an evangelical pastor

Neither Christians nor LGBT individuals should be punished or fired for their lifestyle.

Why defensiveness can be deadly

Defensiveness seems to be common among ministry leaders. I believe that this is because it is very difficult for them to separate themselves from their ministry and therefor any perceived disagreement with something in the ministry is seen as a personal attack against them. Whatever the reason for defensiveness, it can have deadly consequences.

Defensive behavior can take many forms. It can be anger, the shutting down of discussion, using one's authority to intimidate staff, communicating by body language that one is unhappy that a topic has been broached, marginalizing people who disagree with them. All of us are guilty of it from time to time but healthy individuals work hard to live non-defensively with a nothing to prove, nothing to lose attitude.

Why is defensiveness so unhealthy?

First, it comes from our own dishealth or poor EQ. Not once in the gospels do you see Jesus defensive no matter what the pharisees goaded Him with - and they tried hard! He listened to them, He was rarely reactive and when He was it was never without a purpose (driving the moneylenders from the temple). He often responded to the goading of the Pharisees with a question. On the other hand the Pharisees were continually displaying defensive attitudes. 

Defensiveness is part of our sinful nature and the need to prove something or to be right or to keep our pride. It is really self righteousness. Non-defensiveness, on the other hand is not worried about any of those things. It comes from a healthy place that is self-defined but not needing to prove anything. For healthy people, life is a journey toward not needing to prove things to others. We are OK with their opinions because we are OK with ourselves and our positions. 

Second, defensiveness hurts relationships. For those of us who are married, think of how damaging some of our conflict with our spouses has been because neither of us was willing to admit fault or give on our position! Defensiveness pushes others away while non-defensiveness invites them into relationship. 

Third, defensiveness hurts us. Usually we are defensive over something because we don't want to be challenged, and know that there is some truth in what is being said. Why would we be defensive if there is not some truth involved?  If we listened and asked some questions it might be that we would learn something. We have everything to gain by listening and nothing to lose. 

Again, I would look to the example of Jesus in the Gospels and the Fruit of His Spirit and ask whether defensiveness should be part of our lives. 

For those who need to proof-text all truth from Scripture

OK, so I will make some unhappy on this one. While all Scripture is truth, not all truth is found in Scripture! Don't get me wrong, Scripture is the final revelation of God until He returns and we realize His personal presence for eternity. The Scriptures give us what we need to understand God, ourselves, salvation and what it means to be transformed into His image. It is not, however, designed to prove all things. While you can reference many things back to Scripture (like theology), it was never meant to be the proof text for all things.

I am bemused by those who desire a verse to "prove" all things. Without the verse, some will reject any proposal related to the church or the Christian life. That is frankly an unnecessary exercise in many cases. Ironically, those who need a text for all issues often misuse that text. 

But there is another issue. The Scriptures talk a great deal about wisdom. In fact, one could argue that wisdom is the central theme of the book of Proverbs. What is wisdom? It is the application of intelligence, common sense, shrewdness, astuteness, judiciousness, judgement, prudence and circumspection to issues at hand. For the believer, the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom for it informs all of our decisions but life and leadership is full of issues where we must apply our common sense, intelligence and wisdom to the issue at hand.

God gave us minds to think. He did not give us a manual to look up all situations in the Bible. In most cases, we must make appropriate applications to the issues at hand. 

In a recent blog I suggested that the New Testament gives us implicit and explicit suggestions as to who makes for a good leader in the church.

An anonymous reader left this message: "Perhaps you could add some biblical support to this article, so we know how you arrived at your conclusions, eg. A verse for each leader qualification. Thanks!"

I answered: "With respect, it is not necessary to find a proof text for each of these. For instance it is self evident that an individual who is not passionate about Jesus cannot draw others to him. It is self evident that a leader must love people as Jesus loved people. It is self evident that humility is a requirement as that is the heart of Jesus and in a team setting one must submit themselves to the will of the majority (speaking of healthy church leaders)."

Anonymous replied: "TJ, how do you know that that these things of which you write are self-evident?"

Evidently if there is not a verse this individual won't buy it. I don't get that. What I do get is applying good thinking to good theology and coming up with good practices.

Great article on the costs of constant ministry innovation

There are leaders who love to innovate and do it all the time. Often they are simply imitating others. This is a great article on the subject. If you are addicted to innovation it will give you pause.

Link: 3 Costs to constant ministry innovation

Thanks to the Vision Room for the article

Who is best qualified to be an elder or church leader?

I am in a friendly dialogue with a large church regarding the qualifications of those who would serve on the elder board (the leadership board) of the church.

They have traditionally taken the posture that anyone who meets the Biblical qualifications of an elder is eligible to serve on the leadership board. These are the character qualifications spelled out in the New Testament. When I suggested that there are some other issues that need to be considered, the suggestion was made that these are "extra biblical" qualifications. I do not agree with that assessment.

While the Scriptures are clear on the character and spiritual qualifications of church leaders there are in fact other implicit or explicit issues that are laid out in the New Testament. For instance there are six responsibilities that leaders are given in the Scriptures. They are to keep the spiritual temperature of the congregation high, ensure that the congregation is taught well, that they are cared for, protected from the wolves of division, heresy and serious ongoing sin, that people are released into meaningful ministry and led well.

There are many Godly people who by character and spiritual health are qualified to serve as elders but who are not necessarily be qualified to carry out these responsibilities. For instance, there are many conflict avoidant individuals who do not like to confront problematic behaviors. There are people who do not have a leadership bone in their body but simply love others. There are many who cannot think systems which is how you carry out some of these responsibilities in a larger church. There are others who can only drill down to tactics but who cannot think big picture.

My point is that character and spiritual qualifications are fundamental but that there are other characteristics of good leaders that must be taken into account. The very reason that the vast majority of churches in the United States are plateaued or in decline goes to the heart of this issue of leadership. Leadership requires a skill set and not all Godly individuals have the skill set.

If the above are the six key responsibilities of church leaders, what is the personal profile of a good church leader? If we look at the New Testament for its explicit and implicit statements on the matter we see 13 non-negotiable characteristics of an effective church leader.

1. They exhibit a Godly character and lifestyle
2. They have a deep passion for Jesus
3. They exhibit personal humility
4. They love people
5. They are life long learners
6. They agree with God's leadership assignment for church leaders
7. They are able and willing to grapple with the future
8. They are team focused
9. They are a willing leader
10. They have a positive influence on others
11. They are purveyors of hope
12. They have an action bias
13. They have good emotional intelligence

We are frankly naive to believe that just because someone is Godly means they can lead well. It simply is not true. I encounter many church leaders who are Godly but who cannot lead effectively and it hurts the church. Just look at the state of many churches today and you realize that unless you guard the gate of church leadership you pay a high price! The larger the church the more complex leadership becomes and the more expertise that is required to lead well.

The most powerful group in any church are those who choose who will be in leadership because the quality, skill, wisdom and discernment of leaders will either contribute to church health or to dysfunctional and unhealthy ministry. As one who consults with many churches I see the latter all to often and the former all to seldom. Be smart in leadership selection! You get what you choose. 

The following blog links may also to helpful to you:

Eight kinds of people who should not serve on a church board

Choosing the right leaders in your church: You get what you choose

Rethinking leadership selection for the church

Choosing and preparing new board members

Toxic team and board members

Did you train the individual you put into a supervisory role?

One of the most common errors in staffing is to put someone into a supervisory role without training them what it means to supervise. Yet it happens all the time in both the ministry and the for profit world. Consider the skills necessary to lead a team:

• Ability to run a productive meeting
• The skill to empower staff and hold them accountable
• The ability to not micromanage
• Understanding how to position people for their greatest effectiveness
• Moving from an independent producer to leading through team
• Providing clarity to the team as to what they are about and how to get there
• Good emotional intelligence that allows for robust dialogue and the clash of ideas
• The ability to resolve conflict
• Understanding how to develop people

I could go on. What should be obvious is that we should never assume that an individual who has not supervised before knows the necessary skills. Even bright people need training in order to supervise well. Just because someone has been successful in their position does not mean they will supervise others well without some intensive and intentional training.

And if we don't provide that training? You doom those being supervised to frustration! You disempower a whole team when you do not provide them with good leadership.

Ten things every church board should pay attention to for the congregation they lead

1. That Jesus is the center of all that we do
2. That we live in spiritual and relational health
3. That we are seeing life change on a regular basis
4. That people are coming to Jesus regularly
5. That leaders are leading intentionally
6. That members of the congregation are being developed and released into ministry in line with their wiring and gifting
7. That we have a balance of ministries focused on the body and ministries focused outside our church body
8. That we are clear on who we are and where we are going
9. That our church "culture" is supportive of our church "mission"
10. That we evaluate the above nine regularly

Pastors who see leadership as an anti value

From time to time I come across senior pastors who either don't like to lead and so they choose not to or, who believe that leadership apart from preaching is not necessary and largely ignore it. In either case, this is a problematic posture and one that hurts the church.

For context, the issue of leadership in the church has not always even been a value in the seminary context. A whole generation of pastors was taught that all you really needed to do was to preach the word and everything else would take care of itself. My own father pretty much believed this and I remember our conversations on the necessity of a pastor leading in his church of 1,000 plus. I have watched over the years as some good preachers built significantly sized churches due to their preaching and then lost those churches when they did not provide the requisite leadership.

The larger the church the more important the quality of its leadership because large congregations need missional glue - a common and relevant ministry direction - to remain healthy. When that is absent, the church loses its way, staff wonder what they are to do and people become restless.

The metaphore of a shepherd for a pastor is instructive. Shepherds feed their flock, protect their flock, care for their flock and lead their flock. If a shepherd is not leading his/her flock to the next place of healthy grazing the flock dies. Shepherds are in fact leaders of their sheep. The sheep don't simply wander around themselves to find good grass and left to their own devises they often get lost.

I understand pastors who are not wired naturally to lead. Unfortunately those same pastors often don't want anyone else to lead for them. If one is not going to lead, then someone must be empowered to lead for them. It is not an option to say, "I don't like to lead." Left without leadership long enough, the congregation will flounder and prescient individuals will find another church because they understand the necessity of missional leadership and direction and are unwilling to settle for less.

A more difficult situation arises when a pastor has an anti leadership bias: They don't think leadership is that important, do not do it themselves and resist giving away any authority to someone who could. This leaves the congregation in a bind. Not only will their leader not lead but resists allowing someone else to lead. Their pastor simply wants to preach the text assuming that this is all that matters. Well and good for them but not for others!

When this occurs the first place that dysfunction shows up is usually in the staff who need a leader in order to function as a healthy team. Eventually staff become frustrated: some leave, some try to fill in the leadership void and all live in ministry silos because there is not a leader to integrate a common philosophy, direction or ensure cooperation. It is a no win situation for staff.

Eventually the issue will get to the  board level and the board must figure out how to deal with the lack of leadership. It is now their leadership wisdom that is necessary to find a solution that does not hurt the church but rather strengthens it. When boards are not able or willing to deal with the leadership dysfunction the issues eventually spill over into the congregation and become more serious to the church. 

If a pastor has an anti leadership value, boards must initiate a conversation to find a way for the church to be led by someone. If the senior leader is unwilling to provide that leadership in a satisfactory way, they must be willing to allow another the authority and empowerment to lead and themselves stay out of the way. No organization will remain healthy in the absence of leadership. 

(Posted from Oakdale, MN)

Antiquated church governance systems that hurt the mission of the church

A fundamental concept for any governance system (how you do leadership) is that the system should serve the mission. Unfortunately, there are still many churches that are living with antiquated and ineffective governance systems that actually hurt the congregation's ability to do what Jesus called them to do. In these cases, the mission ends up serving the governance system - the opposite of what ought to be the case.

Poor governance systems tend to be "permission withholding" structures rather than "permission granting" structures. 

In permission withholding structures:

• Decisions must be made more than once
• Permission and agreement must be negotiated with multiple groups
• Timely decisions are tough
• There is confusion of authority and responsibility
• Church bylaws are confusing and bureaucratic
• It is hard to make decisions and implement them
• The mission of the church is compromised

In permission granting structures:

• Decisions are made once
• There is no need to negotiate permission with multiple groups
• There are clear lines of authority and responsibility
• Church bylaws are brief and allow for flexibility
• It is easy to make decisions and implement them
• Timely decisions are easy
• The mission of the church is easier to implement because the systems support the ability of leaders to lead.

Jesus designed the church to be the most effective, flexible, and missional organization on the face of the earth. Permission-withholding structures (most antiquated church governance systems) make the church inflexible, relatively ineffective and certainly compromise its mission. If your governance systems are antiquated and no longer help fulfill your mission, be courageous enough to change them. The third section of "High Impact Church Boards" provides a roadmap for changing your governance systems.

Continuing the conversation on whether staff should serve on the elder board

Recently I reposted a blog on whether staff should serve on the elder board of a church. You can see that blog here. My answer was that as a practice it is a bad idea apart from the senior pastor and in a large church the regular attendance (but not a voting member) of the executive pastor. 

This generated some comment from those who believe that all pastors are "elders" and therefor should be on the board. I will not repeat what I said in the earlier blog but would like to point out some fallacies of trying to "prove" everything we do in church governance from Scripture.

First, Scripture gives some overall guidance on what leadership in the church should look like but it does not give specific guidance on this. What we do know is that there were overseers or elders and deacons and deaconess. And their qualifications are spelled out in the text. We also know that the church was flexible and responded to the needs it had as in the book of Acts when the Apostles appointed a team to look after the widows.

Because Scripture is not overly specific on these issues is why you can "prove" various ecclesiastical models from the same text! 

Second, God designed the church to be the most flexible, missional and effective organism on the face of the earth so that it can flourish in any political, economic or social system. That very flexibility will demand different models for how we do church governance. A house church in rural China is very different from the typical church in the United States. Context and size make a difference in how one can govern and lead well. You do not lead a church of 100 like you do a church of 1,000 or more. For that matter, the early church was more likely to be a house church than what has become the norm in the west. 

Third, God tells us to use wisdom in all that we do. In other words, while Scripture gives us very broad principles in the area of church leadership and expects us to use wisdom in how we apply them to our situation. What is clear is that leaders are responsible for the spiritual climate of the church, that the congregation is taught, protected, cared for, released into ministry and led well. How that happens is not spelled out and of course will depend on the size and context of the church. We must figure out how to accomplish these Biblical mandates in our own situation.

This leads to the final thought. Governance and management of the day to day activities of ministry are not the same thing. We know that the early church made a distinction between teaching elders and non-teaching elders so why would we not make distinctions as well. Taken to the extreme, a large church with 30 pastors could have 30 pastors on the board as they are qualified as "elders." We all know that you cannot lead a large church with a huge group. Just because one is qualified to be an elder does not mean that they serve on the governance or leadership board of a church. For that matter there are many people in a larger congregation who are Biblically qualified as elders who do not serve in that role.

My point is that you cannot "proof text" the details of good church leadership but need to use wisdom and best practices to accomplish it. Be smart in how you lead not because the church is a "business" but because God designed it to be missional, effective and flexible and we must figure out how to do that in our context.

(Posted from Oakdale, MN)

Five things congregations need to know about crisis management in the church

Church leaders are periodically called to the unenviable position of needing to deal with crisis situations in their church. I say unenviable because crisis management is not an easy task and every member of the congregation has an opinion as to what should be said and done making it very difficult for leaders to negotiate the multiple opinions people have. 

Having served in this role as a church leader and consulting with churches walking through crisis situations, here are a number of things congregations need to know before they become critical of their leaders.

One. While I am always in favor of being more candid than less the truth is that leaders often cannot divulge everything they may know. There are people involved, legalities involved and "telling everything" is often not possible or helpful. Just because I am a member of a congregation does not mean that I have the right to know everything, especially in messy situations. Further, be wary of criticizing when you don't have all the facts.

Two. Remember that we choose leaders to lead on our behalf and we have a choice to either trust them or not. Too often, when leaders don't do what we want them to do (and we don't have all the information) we choose to mistrust their actions. That is deeply unfortunate as they are often deep in the muck solving issues on our behalf. 

Three. The more significant the crisis, the greater the chances that leaders will make some missteps along the way. This is not because they are unwise leaders but because it is the nature of crisis management. Before we criticize their actions, give them time to deal with the multitude of issues they are juggling. If we were in their shoes we would not get it all correct either.

Four. Unless the leaders themselves caused the crisis they are managing (usually this is not the case) remember that they are in the unenviable position of cleaning up a mess someone else created. What they need is our support and encouragement, not our criticism and our mistrust. It is easy to criticize. It is a lot harder to actually clean up or deal with a crisis situation.

Five. Often the crisis that leaders are dealing with have to do with sinful actions on the part of someone. Often, the most vocal critics of leaders as they handle the situation are doing so with sinful attitudes, words and actions. Don't compound the issues with responses that are un-Christlike. All that does is compound the issues.

What is the appropriate response of a congregation in a crisis situation? Pray for your leaders. Avoid gossip. Seek the unity of the church. Encourage those who are cleaning up on our behalf. Be patient. Do not judge motives of leaders. Be part of the solution, rather than adding to the problem.

(Posted from Charlotte NC)