When should a senior pastor be fired?

A couple of problems. You are right to say that a pastor is no higher than an elder. Biblically, "pastor" defines hte role of an elder. They are the same thing. It is impossible to be higher than oneself.

But more importantly, to say that a pastor is not in charge is to deny the very meaning of one of his titles, that of overseer. 1 Tim 3 talks of "ruling well." 1 Thess 5 talks of "having charge over." Acts 20 talks of "overseeing." 1 Peter 5 says to "exercise oversight." What does that mean except to be in charge?

At the risk of stating the obvious, this cannot be proven from any passage of Scripture. It simply isn't there.

The Scripture clearly defines the elder as one who has charge over the flock. That is what it means to be a bishop (old word) or overseer. It is clearly in his description to have charge over the house of God, but to do so in humility and patience (even when people write anonymous letters).

 

First of all pastor should suffice. Most people I have met with senior in front of pastor has an ego to go with it. God has called me to work with youth and outreach. If a pastor came in and asked to resign we would take it to the church. I have put all I have into this ministry to serve my Lord. At this point I feel that God is just starting to use me.
A pastor is a servant leader not absolute authority. A man that wants evryone to resign needs to check his heart. We work for the same King!!! I will always submit to my pastor. My ministry undergirds his. But AT THE SAME TIME THE COMMITTIE THAT HIRED ME SOUGHT GOD'S WILL FOR ME TO BE HERE!!!!! What you are talking about is what we in the south calls the good ole boy net work.
God has led me every step of the way.I have left every church I have been at on My terms. Not the pastor. A pastor should have good people around him. I do what God has called me to and some know it all coming in probbally does not know God's will for my life or my family. He needs to be seeking God's will for his ministry and not how to make a power play!!!

 

After following this thread, I'm concluding that both sides of the conversation have some validity.

Does a Sr. Pastor ultimately have the right to surround himself with staff members of his choosing? Generally, I would agree that he does. However, I don't see that on a practical (not to mention Scriptural) basis he should be too quick to exercise that right, in terms of letting staff members go.

How does it look to church members when a new pastor arrives, and immediately appears to summarily dismiss existing staff, who are then replaced with (more often than not) the new pastor's cronies & loyalists? I can see how it can be construed to be a "power grab", or at least as having the whiff of a "good-ole-boy network".

Even when perceived differences exist between the new pastor and existing staff, how much of a responsibility should the new pastor assume in first seeking to address & resolve such differences? To simply dismiss the existing staff with minimal effort to reconcile the differences seems to me as being rather Machiavellian, and not necessarily worthy of someone stepping into the position of being the local churches "earthly shepherd".

I can't help but picture the example of Christ and His disciples. The disciples were certainly quilty at times of being dishonest, disobedient, disloyal, slothful, etc. Their "philosophy of ministry" clearly wasn't nearly enough in synch. with that of their Master. Even when the disciples shortcomings seemed at their worst, Jesus sought to correct them and to reconcile them to Himself all the more. He didn't simply cast them out, and replace them with new ones.

 

I have never met anyone with senior pastor in their title that has an ego. It is a designation, like "youth pastor" or "singles pastor."

That would depend on how the constitution of the church dictates it be done.

I don't think anyone here disputes that. But when the church calls him, they call him to be in charge.

A pastor who doesn't want everyone to resign needs to check his heart. In other words, checking our hearts is something we should all do. It is irrelevant to this issue.

So why say you would take it to the church if he asked you to resign? That seems contradictory.

As I said, that depends on the way that the churh is set up.

No it's not at all. Has nothign to do with that.

It isn't about a powerplay, as I said. As the pastor, he is called to lead the church, and sometimes that involves tough decisions about who is on the staff. You may be impressed with your work ethic and abilities, and he may not be. You may have too high an estimation of yourself. If is he seeking God's will for that ministry, it may be that you be gone. So don't tell him to seek something and then refuse to follow it.

 

Which is what I said.

This is not about a power play or being know it all or in charge or anything else. I have lamented at times the responsibility of being the senior pastor. It isn't a job that is easy. I have seen men whose ministries are greatly hindered because of people that they have surrounded themselves with.

There can be a number of reasons why a pastor might want to keep an existing staff, or change some of them. I don't think necessarily it is an immediate step. If I were placed in that position, I would take time to interview, discuss, spend time with the people involved to see what the best direction is. A key factor that I would want is teachability. Some people just aren't teachable. They have their minds made up and refuse to learn anything. That would be a serious reason to move on and the sooner the better.

In the end, if you don't trust the guy to make staff decisions, why would you call him as pastor? That doesn't make sense. Most church have people who will complain about paint, and schedules, and bathrooms, and staff members, but wouldn't understand false doctrine preached from teh pulpit. We care about the wrong things too often.

 

Larry,

I feel as if you consider the church some kind of business. If the church is happy with the staff performance than the pastor should let things be. Pastors are not to rule but lead. Being a leader and ruler are 2 very differnt things.

If one is true to God's word in teaching and lifestyle it should be a moot point anyway. It is not the pastors role to fire. If a member votes against him should the pastor ask that member to leave. According to your thoughts if he doesn't like them he has that right.

Larry a pastor is not a ceo. A staff member is not a junior exc. We are ministers of the gospel. It kills me to see pastors who try to run the church like a business. They have lost focus on the main thing. You are a servant not king of the church.

If a pastor has trouble with staff after he gets there, then maybe look at other options.

 

It would be helpful for you to do a study on the NT office of pastor, particularly paying attention to the term episkopos. It is a term that describes an overseer or ruler. It very clearly conveys the idea of rulership, even in the qualifications where a man is to rule his own house well, because if he does not, how shall he rule the house of God. I am not sure we can get much clearer.

Perhaps you are hung up on rulers who are abusive or dictatorial. The Bible condemns such rulership in 1 Peter 5, where again commanding elders to rule, it says to not lord it over the flock. I am not arguing for a dictatorship. Far from it.

The church is not a business, but the pastor is the leader of the church. We need to get back to Scripture and quit trying to abdicate leadership and pawning it off on others.

I am not sure where you got the idea that I think a pastor should ask a member to leave if they vote against him. That didn't come from anything I said. I can't help but think you haven't ready closely and thoughtfully. I said nothing of the kind.

As for whether or not a pastor can fire, again, that depends on the constitution of the church. If I were writing a constitution, the pastor would have the ability to hire and fire his assistants. The congregation would approve the position and pay; the pastor would have the role of hiring and firing. Again, think of how off base your idea is. Do you think the congregation should vote on what the pastor preaches? I don't, and I don't think you do. So you don't think that the church should vote on the most important thing in church life, but you do think they should vote on less important things. I think that is problemmatic. We trust pastors to preach at their own discretion. We don't trust them to do lesser tasks.

A pastor would be crazy to hire someone without having them in and preaching and seeing how people respond to the candidate. He would be crazy not to seek the advice of others, to have trusted men in teh congregation meet with the candidate. But in the end, the pastor should be able to surround himself with the people God leads him to choose.

 

Larry,

I am talking about pastor x coming in and cleaning house. I think that is unethical. Should the pasotr have absolute control over who he hires. i believe, he should have input. Every church I have served the pastor was present at the interview. Pastor should not to take the burden alone on personel matters. Should he hire the janitor as well. The pastor role is to cast a vision and lead and equip. You are asking the alot out of pastors. You should share the burden with others. Pastors should have faith in his people to seek God's man for the job. Yes, they should have input. You could leave tommorrow and then the church would be left with your choices and then the next pastor would have to fire them and then on and on

 

I am talking about a pastor not coming in and cleaning house. I don't know why cleaning house is unethical, but that's beside the point. I already specified that it might be very unwise to get rid of everyone. However, he should have the option. What if a church is dying and the reason is because of the staff? How can a pastor lead a church when the staff is the problem? What if the former pastor made bad staff choices? Should the new pastor doom the church to continued failure? I don't see why.

WHat I am asking of pastors is that they do the job God has given them. It is certainly wise for him to delegate things, and hiring the janitor may be one of those things. Does he need congregational approval to hire a janitor? A secretary? Where does that start?

Pastors should have faith in their people to seek God's man; and people should have faith in the leadership of their pastor.

Yes, a pastor could leave tomorrow and leave the church with his choices. The new pastor coming in should do just as I have said. He should sit down, have lenghty conversations with them about where he is, where they are, what their vision for ministry is, and see if they are on the same page. If not, someone needs to change or go.

 

I don't think every time a new pastor comes in a staff member should have to fear for his job. I guess alot of pastors ahve security issues. I feel like most people I know on staff makes transtion much easier. The church needs to limit pastors on hiring. You are pretty much say that a pastor is not held accountable to anybody.

I think any pastor would who would ask the current staff to leave is shallow and very insecure in his ministry. They need to rethink what the pastor role really is.

Do you give your staff freedom or do you lord over them. I have freedom to implant my own ministry. I do let the pastor hear about it 1st and discuss it with him. We will iron out differences and then he lets me run with the idea. I have never worked under someone who's ego would dictate that they have total control.

Most staff members work as hard or not harder than most pastors I know. We do not have the nice office or hear the acclades that the pastor does. We deal with just as many problems and have many different task to preform. So, someone that came in and wanted to replace me, they would see a man that stood up for his ministry and his church.
I came here by a vote of the church and it would take a vote of the church to get me to leave at this point. God will probbally move me at some point but I know it is His call and not some arrogant know-it-all. There are alot of ego driven pastors today. There little kingdom will crumble someday. You need to realize that they don't know God's will for life. As long as I am doing my job and in the will Of Christ I would fight it to the end.

 

Frankly -

If the first thing a new Pastor did in my church was fire the rest of the staff, I'd decide we'd elected the wrong Pastor and I would probably ask the Deacon Board to reconsider their choice - or change churches.

 

I swear you don't read Patrick. You are talking about a position that I have never espoused, anywhere, much less in this thread. I have never said that a pastor is not held accountable to anyone. I have never even intimated such a thing. He is held accountable to the congregation.

YOur comment that a church needs to limit the pastor on hiring is exactly my point about priorities. You don't claim they need to vote on what is really important -- what he preaches. Why not? Why are you less concerned about his preaching than about his hiring? Doesn't that strike you as oddly out of place?

You talk like this has something to do with security. It doesn't. It has nothign to do with ego. It has to do with church leadership and direction. When the staff is part of the problem, they need to go. When the staff will not work well with the new pastor, they need to go. IT is that simple. Why would anyone fear for their job everytime a new pastor comes in? Most staff members stay shorter times than the sr. pastor, and few last more than one sr. pastor. There is no fear involved in it. When a new pastor comes, you go and say, I love this place, I would love to be a part of its continuing ministry, I believe God has called me here, but if you would like me to resign I will do so. It's not hard; it doesn't seem that confusing to me. Why wouldn't you do that?

For you to say that you work harder than most pastors seems really out of place. It has a touch of arrogance to it that is completely unacceptable. You don't deal with "just as many problems." Having been on both sides of the fence, in a much smaller church as sr pastor than I was as an assistant, I know for a fact that staff members don't deal with as many problems as the sr pastor does. A Sr pastor works much harder, and handles hte daily pressure of things you probably haven't even thought of yet. A senior pastor would be absolutely foolish to insist on total control. That is a key factor in limiting the size and effectiveness of ministry. But ultimately, he is responsible for the body, and your position would be causing problems for him.

Based on this conversation, not having talked to your personally, you are the type of person I would not want on staff. You are the type that seems to create a conflict. When you say stuff like "I know it is His call and not some arrogant know-it-all" you reveal a very low regard for the man God has called to lead his church. Your claim that you are a man who would stand up for his minsitry and his church is shown to actually be a man who would create discord in it in order to protect your little kingdom you have established.

If you came by a vote of the church, then you can be removed by a vote of the church. I have pointed out many times that the arrangement by which staff comes and goes it dictated by the constitution. Many staff problems in church are created by the very scenario you describe. A staff memeber called by teh congregation creates problems and the sr pastor can't do anything about it. That is a disaster for the church, and more than one church has been split by the very attitude that you reveal here.

I would give my staff much freedom. I wouldn't want someone who wouldn't take the freedom and initiative. But I don't want someone who is pitting the church against the pastor and creating discord in the body. I don't have time for arrogance and immaturity. I don't want someone who thinks they are beyond accountability in their job performance. I don't want someone who thinks they are above the ministry.

In the end, you can do what you want, but you need to seriously think through the attitude that you have displayed. I hope that it simply came across wrong. I hope that I have misread you. But if not, put some careful thought into it. You have in your the seeds of a church split and that could be disastrous. Be very careful.

 

The focus of this thread seems to have shifted from the OP of "When should a senior pastor be fired?" to an ongoing exchange about when/how a senior pastor should fire staff members.

As Pastor Larry acknowledges, a senior pastor is/should be accountable to the church body. Therefore, in the spirit of the OP, I'd like to venture that a senior pastor should be removed for at least the following reasons:

1. Gross, unrepentant sin.

2. Heretical teaching/preaching; perhaps defined as teachings clearly contrary to the church's Statement of Faith.

 

Larry,

I am a very laid back kinda of guy. I avoid conflict when I can. Some battles you cannot avoid. I am very much a team player. I have never had a problem with any pastor I have served with. In fact I have been in the postion to cause a split and I would never try something like that.

The question at hand is something I can't see a positive coming out of firing the staff. The church would have to see the new pastor as one who has no regard for their wellbeing. You just don't do that to other men of God. I do not think that is right. If that happened, I would more than likely leave. It would be after I had secured other employment. God didn't call me 500 miles from home to see my family starve.

That is the point I think you are missing. Ministers have family to support. I sacrficed about 13,000 dollars a year to follow God's call in my life. I would not let someone bully me to leave. How would you know if their motives were pure? I feel God will let me know when it is time to move on!!!

I am not trying to say anything about you personally. If you feel you cant work with the staff in place maybe you are at the wrong place???

 

The tenure of the average pastor in an SBC church is about two years.

 

my average tenure so for has been about 3.33 years. I have had atleast one pastor change at every church I have served. It would be scary to know I would have had to resign 5 times now thats a resume builder!!!

 

Why would the church "have to see" the pastor as someone with no regard for their wellbeing? That doesn't seem to fit anywhere in the argument. And why you can't you see anything good coming from firing someone? If they are part of the problem, or if they aren't a good fit, then the best thing is to ask them to move on. THe worst thing you can do for someone is keep them in a position for which they are not well suited.

God leads our lives through the actions of others quite often. You said you gave up 13000 a year to do what you are doing and won't leave until God calls you to leave. How did God call you there? Probably through the pastor of the church, in conjunction with teh congregation. So you admit that God works through pastors and congregations. You didn't receive handwriting on the wall one night. It may be that God would take you away, in his will, through a pastor who wanted to make a change. Your style of ministry might not fit his style. Your philosohpy might not fit his. You gifts might not complement his. There are all kinds of things that could be wrong.

But I object to the very use of the term firing. The point I am talking about is offering a resignation. A firing is far different than that.

You say I am missing the point that ministers have families to support. How could I miss that? I am a minister with a family to support. But that doesn't prevent firing or resigning. If it did, then no one would ever be fired. That is an argument that won't work.

I have a question. Why has your average tenure only been 3 1/3 years, over what appears to be 5 churches (based on having to resign five times). And why did you leave the churches you did after the new pastor came?

These short stays seem very ill-advised. GB says the average SBC stay is 2 years. That is a sign of discontentment and unwillingness to be in for the long haul. I think pastors need to stay in excess of 10 years. It takes more than five years to really start pastoring and leading. When I passed the five year mark, I began to see a distinct difference in the way people responded because they knew I was in for the long haul. You can't hardly get unpacked in three years.

As for not working with the staff meaning I am in the wrong place, I think it is actually the opposite. When a church calls a pastor, they are calling a leader. If the staff can't work with him, then they are in teh wrong place. I think it would be a very rare occurrence when a staff would totally turn over, but I can see reasons why they would turn over some, particularly in a church that needs a serious change in direction.

 

Know let me clear up that last post I have been at 3 churches. I have been thru 5 changes of pastors. sorry about that.

If the staff and the new pastor both want to lead people to Christ and then make that relationship stronger than they are on the same page.Right?

A pastor cannot lead if he is not a servant first. Look at Jesus. I would follow his example than John Maxwells anyday. Jesus came to serve not to be served. While a pastor does lead it is the thru setting the example.Right? I just don't see where asking people to leave sets the right example. Maybe, I am naive.

I think when a pastor takes a church staff comes withit. Do you not meet the staff beforehand? I have always talked to the prospect during the interview process.

Maybe I just dont get it? I just dont see why a minister would want another minister to leave if there wasn't some kind of conflict. My differences are going to pop up with anybody you call. My pastor and I don't agree over every minute detail but he trusts me to do my ministry. He knows that I only seek God's will for it. Sometimes you just have to trust.

 

I talked to a committee but God gave the greatest sense of peace to me and my wife. If it wasn't His will I would not have come here.

God has called me to rebuild. So far God has used me to restore 2 youth ministries. I work very hard and I let God take control. He is just awesome in what he does. I would love to stay longer. When God says it is time to go then it is time to go!!!

This church (3) is in the very early stages of my tenure. I feel like the Lord might let us plant roots here. My son is enrolled fo r Kinder. here. so, maybe.

You look at the av. youth minister tenure and it 18 months. i have got that whooped by a good bit!!!

 

No, not at all. One may be traditional, and one contemporary. One may be Calvinist and one Arminian. One may "want" to do it, but isn't getting the job done. There is a lot more to it than this.

Yes, you are right. The pastor should be setting the example. But changing staff members is not really related to that. There are a variety of reasons why a staff change should be made.

The staff may or may not come with it. Again, as I have said repeatedly, it depends on the constitution. But meeting the staff beforehand may be enough to find out that something is not going to work.

There may be conflict, which is what I have said all along. (Something about that "not reading" bit I mentioned earlier). I wouldn't recommend just getting rid of somebody to get rid of them. But there are good reasons to make changes, such as conflict in theology, philosophy, personality, etc.

Just a closing comment, "peace" is a very subjective way of finding God's will. I highly recommend it be given a back seat ... way in the back. A lot of people have had "peace" about something only to find that it later wasn't God's will. Turned out, they looked for something God has never promised to give. That's not to say you went to the wrong place. It is simply a caution about what is an unbiblical way of making decisions.