Pastor Search Committee

As a pastor, I too would have concern over so many connected to deacon ministry were on the team... at some point, I probably would have brought it up in discussions.

That said, regardless of what the minimum standards for the church are if all I received was 75% of the congregational vote, I would probably request some time (couple of weeks) to sincerely pray over the prospect of serving/leading a chruch family where 25% of the people voted against my coming as pastor. Anything less than 90% represents potential issues in the future.

 

It has been my experience both in charing two pulpit committees and also being selected as pastor by multiple pulpit committees that the process is generally flawed for a number of reasons.

First, the church starts to get anxious for a new pastor (or conversely have fallen in love for their interim pastor if one is on board) and can rush to conclusions about the best man for the job. They will find a reason to "vote" for the first man they hear that does not set their teeth on edge, especially if he has a "nice" wife who plays the piano and brings nice dishes to the pot luck.

Second, the man that the church most often needs is not the one they will select, hence the need to go through the process again in an average of 18 months (average pastoral tenure in Baptist churches in America). They base most of their criteria on whether or not they "like" a man and think they can "listen" to him preach, not on whether he has a proven track record of leadership in the direction most needed by that congregation.

Third, they fail to note that almost every pastor has one or two "candy-stick" sermons that are crowd pleasers, but who cannot deliver on a week-to-week basis without preaching the same message over and over (just change a couple of key words).

Fourth, they often feel that a man of a certain age is the right man for the job. That may or may not be true, but a pastor who is young in an older congregation will not automatically draw in a church full of youth and vigor, nor will a retired or close to retirement age pastor be able to fulfill all the needs of an elderly parish.

Fifth, what about the man that God wants in the pulpit? It always amazes me about how the "prayers" of the committee and congregation lead them to a particular man and how they declare it "God's will" that this or that man stand in their pulpit, but then they fail to follow his leadership, fail to institute the changes he proposes, and generally fight him every step of the way until they repeat the process -- always looking for someone they "like."

I'm of a mind (which should be obvious by now) that most churches do not really know what or who they need as their leader and they have no real clue how to find that person -- and so settle for someone who turns them on up front and gets booted out the door when they're tired of him later. That may be rebellion or it may simply be that people are often not good at choosing their own leaders.

 

As I read your post I was agreeing with just about everything you wrote.
I have had my share of Pastor Search committee issues in the past.

I beleive you hit the nail on the head with what you posted.

 

You make several good observations glfredrick, but what do you offer as a solution? With the congregational model only the church can choose its pastor.

I have served as interim on several occasions and consider it my calling. A good interim can help the church through this time. A good interim is NOT a preacher in search of a regular church. Your first comment mentions that the church is in love with their interim pastor. I did let that happen once and allowed a church where I was interiming to call me as their regular pastor. I still believe it was the right thing at the time but usually this is not the case. A good interim should not be a candidate but should be helping the committee and church make that selection.

 

Ah, tis true. I think that many would not like my proposed solution on this board. I'm of a mind that the traditional Baptist congregational model is broken, in fact, it has never really worked well, nor is it particularly biblical. It is, however, very American, and it finds its roots in the American Revolution, voting of citizens, etc., rather than in any scriptural model.

What I see in Scripture are appointments to pastoral roles, but that comes dangerously close to an episcopal system, and I do not see that a "universal" episcopal system is scriptural either (Catholicism, Anglican, etc.). It is on a LOCAL LEVEL, i.e., as the Bible constructs it, local bishop, local elders, local pastors, local church. All these local folks can come together to form a council of sorts (our example in Acts) and reason out local issues, but allow the local church to deal with its own issues. Of course, we do not see or do it that way in Baptist circles, with the exception of newly planted churches, which form associations, and are in large part, elder led (plurality of pastors), though retaining congregational control over some issues such as budget, hiring and firing of staff, etc. Elder-led churches function much better than congregational-led churches and their staff recommendations often meet the needs of the congregation much better than do the popularity contests (balanced by pay requirements) that are often our means for selecting our new "man of God."

 

Yikes! Tell us how you really feel.:laugh:

I definitely agree with a few of your observations. The "sugar stick sermons" are a big problem. Back in my days of Youth Ministry, a church that I served was seeking a Pastor. One of the Search Committee members told me that this had been problem in the past and stated that he would want to hear a number of sermons from a serious candidate before voting. When they finally found a candidate they liked, he came and preached a single sermon (a Q and A session was held during the P.M.). The committee decided to submit him as a candidate to the church. I went back to the committee member to ask why he would support a candidate without hearing him multiple times; he told me that his excellent education told him everything they needed to know.

Needless to say, for the next 18 months, at least half of the church complained about the lack of quality sermons. Still, he did have an outstanding trial sermon...he really did!

 

I believe most of the Search Committee consultants tell churches not consider their Interim for the job. There are, however, some instances in which God has placed the correct person in the church during an interim period and the church has realized it. Coming in this way allows a candidate to prove himself and allows him to show that he is more than a sugar-stick preacher. Still, I believe in the majority of instances, churches are not looking at their interim...I agree that this is generally a good thing.

 

Twice I have been an interim and then later selected as the pastor. Once this occurred after I swore it would never happen again! That was after a church had me for a three-month interim (which was in their minds a three-month audition - I was their second choice if a guy who was retiring from a mega church could come be their guy). All that said, I agree with the idea that the interim should not be a candidate. It's difficult to know when your ministry started. Ideally, it would take on two different forms, but the church expectations and perceptions can be rather crippling.

And we already have an episcopal (little "e") system in place. A local interim (not from these parts) has "installed" two recent pastors in their churches. He's persuaded these churches to call these guys. One has been a disaster, the other is quickly heading there, and the third has just gotten started. This is all too common. The Baptist good-ole-boy system is no more Biblical than Methodists, Episcopals, etc. They might even have a batter grasp since qualifications might actually play into their thinking :tongue3:

 

It is sad. Probably a good thing that the man lost the vote. No one should go into a situation like that without knowing what the situation is.