Occasionally people ask my opinion on various personal or church issues. I recently received the following question which I have reprinted below, followed by my response.

QUESTION

Dear Bob,

The deacons of our congregation recently voted by 5-4 that they could no longer support our pastor.  This action led to the resignation of our pastor in his attempt to not cause a church split by bringing the vote to the church.

Ultimately, the reason given for the lack of support was over preferences and no sin that would prevent him from serving as a pastor.  There had been years of concern regarding the lack of depth in his messages.  He also liked to use videos in evening bible studies that a few of the members did not like.  Some also didn’t like how much vacation time he took, even though he didn’t take any more time than was given to him by the deacons.  

Like all of us, our pastor had strengths and weaknesses.  Delivering messages may have been considered a weakness to some, but his strengths were that he knew his flock personally, followed up with visitors and worked very hard within the church.  

My question – Is “preferences” a biblical reason for not supporting a pastor?  

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

MY ANSWER

There are so many unknowns about the situation you describe that I am hesitant to make definitive comments.  I am always concerned that someone uses communication from me as ammunition to lobby church members against one another. However, since this is such a common problem in churches, I will take this opportunity to underscore what I believe the Bible says about the structure of church leadership — especially as it relates to the preaching pastor.  But please remember Jesus prayed that His followers would be unified as a testimony to the world that He is the Christ.

On his second missionary journey, the Apostle Paul appointed elders in each church he visited.  The elders were also called overseers, shepherds or pastors.  The elders were to “direct the affairs” of the church, and that’s a heavy responsibility.  (Apparently, in your denomination it’s the deacons that form the local church’s governing body.)  Paul told the Ephesian elders, “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock over which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers… I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and not spare the flock” (Acts 20:28-29).

Good shepherds are to protect their sheep against predators that would isolate and devour the young lambs.  The pastors are instructed to protect the church against false teaching, divisiveness, and immorality within the body of Christ.  “Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw disciples after them.  So be on your guard!” (Acts 20:30-31)

Good shepherds are also to lead the sheep.  In 1 Peter 5 elders were instructed not to lord it over the flock but to set an example for them.  The good shepherd doesn’t drive the sheep or bark at them from behind.  He loves the sheep, and the sheep instinctively know his voice and are willing to follow where he leads.

The good shepherd also has a responsibility to see the sheep are fed.  He leads them to green pastures and still waters where they can be nurtured and grow to spiritual maturity and health.  The shepherd sees that the flock is fed the Bible, which is called meat, milk, bread, and honey for the soul.

First Timothy 5:17-18 teaches that while all the elders are worthy of double honor, the one whose responsibility is preaching and teaching is to be compensated for his concentrated effort and especially respected.  The elder who preaches is not the only pastor, but he is one of a plurality of shepherds who work together as co-laborers with Christ to care for the flock.

You describe a situation where the lay leaders were divided over the support of the preaching pastor because his preaching lacked depth.  If the preaching pastor’s gifts are limited, that can result in a hungry, disgruntled flock.  In that kind of scenario, the other elders need to take appropriate action rather than let the sheep starve.  It’s not just a matter of preference it’s a matter of the health of the church.

If I had the opportunity, prior to your deacon’s lack of confidence vote, I would have several questions for them.

1.  Have they done everything they can to help the preacher grow stronger in the areas where he is weak?  The minister is expected to wear so many hats it’s impossible to do every task with excellence.  Preaching the Word of God is such an important part of his assignment that if he is not a gifted communicator, the other elders should do their best to provide additional training and encouragement before considering dismissal.

2.  Do they have realistic expectations?  Technology has provided us with immediate access to the best of teachers through the internet and CDs.  That’s helpful but very few local preachers can measure up by comparison, and as a result, less gifted ministers are subject to unwarranted criticism.  If the church is small and located in a rural area where the opportunity to reach multitudes is limited it may be prudent to be content with a preacher who is a caring pastor and individual encourager.

3.  Is it wise to take drastic action on a 5-4 vote?  The Holy Spirit working among elders is not going to be divided.  Until there is unity at the core, there is certain to be division and unrest among the flock.  When the primary leaders are divided, they need to spend more time on their knees together, and until they can rise in unison, no action should be taken.

4.  Are they taking full advantage of the plethora of opportunities to see that the congregation is fed?  I see it as a plus that your preacher is exposing the congregation to various lessons on video in the evening Bible Studies.  Rather than interpret that as a weakness on his part it may be better for the overseers to reinforce and even increase that practice.  Most of us get our meals from a variety of sources these days, and few rely on just one cook for every meal.

5.  Are your leaders sensitive to the fact that some church members complain about “not being fed” because they are spiritually lazy and lacking exercise?  Some shallow believers never come to an understanding that spiritual growth eventually changes from learning more Bible to serving people.  When we are infants in the faith, we are nurtured by learning more Scripture.  Then after learning the basics, we hunger for the “meat” of the word and learn from Beth Moore, Henry Blackaby, and other “in-depth” teachers.  Eventually, we should reach a level of maturity where our primary spiritual growth comes, not from learning more Bible but from sharing our faith and serving those in need.  After ministering to the woman at the well, Jesus told His disciples, “I have food to eat that you know nothing about.”  L.D. Campbell, minister of the First Church of Christ in Burlington, Kentucky once remarked to a woman who complained she wasn’t being fed, “It’s time to take off the bib and put on an apron!”

You commended your preaching pastor for being caring and hard working. I commend him for resigning and not forcing a congregational vote.  The unity of the church needs to take precedence over our own ambitions and feelings.  I suggest since the action has already been taken that you pray for the deacons and then follow your former pastor’s lead and, “Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3).

– Bob

.

Follow BobRussellKY on Twitter and LIKE the Bob Russell page on Facebook