Are Pastors Really The Pastor

What started this was after reading for about three years that the best estimate is that 70-80 percent of the churches are plagued by one or more antagonists.

A few months ago I asked a group of pastors if they were pastoring according to what scripture teaches. I got a few funny looks and then I asked them about how division is dealt with and how a divisive person is dealt with. Is the decision left up to the church, to the church leaders, the pastor? If the church can vote to dismiss a pastor who may want a divisive person dismissed as scripture teaches then it is not operating according to scripture but a democracy. When I asked them to consider who hires the pastor and the congregation votes on him then they are not the pastor but hired to preach and teach and not lead. They are in essence at the mercy of the leadership in the church. I have seen leadership who were a bunch of PC folks and not leaders who were willing to make tough decisions.

Only two of the twelve pastors said they pastor the churches they are at. I know both of them and in the church are men they are accountable to. The churches have no voters who can vote on the pastor. Both of those churches have experienced those who were divisive and they were dealt with as scripture teaches. After the incidents the churches kept on going. During that same time other churches have died due to division started by one or two people.

 

The two men I spoke about are probably two of the most respected pastors in the city. They do not spend much time chasing problems but are much more focused on leading the people there. Both of them have had people lead their churches when their congregation grew and they moved to a larger building. It was if nothing ever happened. While so many other pastors have come and gone they are still here.

I happen to believe that elders are not typically pastors but simply leaders pulled from the congregation. If one equates elders with pastors then why are the elders not preaching and leading the congregation including the messy things such as discipline and dealing with divisive people. The fact is that the pastor will know things that others may not know about. For example a friend of mine was in a church where they nominated and voted on deacons in a church meeting. Just before a vote for two men the pastor had a recess and a wife of one of the men talked with the pastor and told him that her husband was having a homosexual relationship with the other man. Apparently nobody else knew about the issue except the men and the wife.

I have seen it where church leaders who are men will not stand against someone they know who is divisive. I have seen too many churches where elders were elected and the next time an election came up the troublemakers were at the meeting to vote while other members who were not a part of the trouble were not there. Because the divisive people had power and control it made it increasingly difficult to do as scripture teaches and so the church continued to work with them as they gained power and votes. anyone who has seen rapid growth in a church has most likely experienced this.

A friend of mine who was part of an organization that helped establish health to troubled churches. The church must agree to visit people and for every leader to resign and have the pastor appoint leaders as he sees fit. He told me that it has worked well. Over and over he mentioned about how many churches are troubled because of leaders who have more control and power than they should. Some should not be in leadership.

My point in this thread is that if the pastor does not have the power to lead in a stand against divisive people without his place of leadership being threatened then he is not pastoring but rather working around issues and is not able to do his job. I think that is one of the biggest reasons why pastors are constantly changing churches.