~844 words - 3 1/2 minutes
One of the first consulting rules is to label the last consultants as idiots or at least misguided.
This allows the current consultant to propose new solutions and save the day.
What is worse is when I see young pastors who have followed long-serving, faithful senior pastors adopt the same tactic.
In William Bridges landmark book, Transitions, he has this quote:
Never denigrate the past. Many managers, in their enthusiasm for a future that is going to be better than the past, ridicule or demean the old way of doing things. In doing so they consolidate the resistance against the transition because people identify with the way things used to be and thus feel that their self-worth is at stake whenever the past is attacked.
Change “manager” to “pastor,” and it still applies.
I get it. A new pastor-leader wants to establish themselves.
In their view, some of the past practices that were once effective are now ineffective or, worse, counterproductive to the church’s mission.
Some of these past practices also involve a theological viewpoint or understanding different from that of past leaders. In those areas, a new leader will claim this is a matter of “gospel integrity” and escalate toward a highly conflicted path.
Here are my observations when I see this type of behavior and situation on the leader’s part:
The leader wants to firmly establish themselves as THE LEADER, perhaps quicker than the congregation is ready.
This is a matter of personal insecurity in their role.
It is the opposite of the Imposter Syndrome. (We will address this issue in a future newsletter.)
In some cases, I have seen the current leader, who was very effective in their prior context, attempting to bring some of those practices to their new congregation. When they meet resistance, they take it as a personal affront and rejection.
It rarely is. But it can become that when they push too hard.
Lack of Historical Understanding.
They fail to appreciate the historical context and significance of past practices and decisions.
Over 40 years of ministry, I have seen many tactics come and go. I am old enough to remember “This Phones for You.” For that matter, I remember various “stunt weekends” for churches that effectively drew community members not otherwise engaged at the church.
The context of the community, church, and other practices matter.
Some old practices harden into traditions, with teams of lay leaders highly invested in fulfilling the mission through those practices. When those practices are attacked, they see that as attacking their contributions to the mission.
When you attack those practices, you downplay those congregational members' sense of identity and self-worth.
Story Continues after this brief commercial interruption…
THERE IS A HIGH COST WHEN YOU HIRE THE WRONG PASTOR!!
Clay Smith is the Senior Pastor of ADBC church in Sumter, SC. He will step down later this year after more than 30 years of service to this church and community.
As he began thinking about his next season of life and ministry, he researched and produced a fine booklet: “The High Cost of Hiring the Wrong Pastor.”
Befitting his PhD, he conducted some statistical research and combined it with the stories of four churches.
If you want to see a copy, go here and let me know.
Join us on a webinar on March 26, 2025, at 4 p.m. Eastern as he presents his findings and takes questions. To register for that webinar, go here.
Story Continues…
Ego and Personal Vision.
There is often a rush to prioritize the leader's new vision over other practices because the leader feels they are superior to the past leader and their ways are superior.
Honestly, they could be correct. But instead of pouring out their ego for the sake of the mission, they are placing their ego ahead of the mission.
Impatient for Change.
In their eagerness to implement the new plan or practices, they overlook the value of the existing methods and how they have worked within that congregation.
Following a long-serving leader most often calls for patient change more than immediate change.
I have observed some leaders who had previously planted a church and were able to make change quickly at their old ministry assignment become frustrated at the pace of change needed in their new, often much larger, ministry setting.
It is easier to turn a speedboat than an aircraft carrier.
Here are some of the ways that a leader can dishearten a congregation.
Loss of Identity.
Criticizing past practices can make members feel that their contributions and experiences are not valued.
When this involves some key groups of leaders in a ministry, the church can often see a drop in their support of the whole mission.
Resistance to Change.
When the past is demeaned, people may resist new changes more strongly, as they feel their heritage is being disrespected.
Think of it as insulting their family identity. It is beyond just a personal feeling issue, as it taps into the feelings of kinship and clan that are not based on blood but on shared experiences guiding this congregation for many years.
Decreased Morale and Division.
Congregation members may feel disheartened or defensive, decreasing morale and engagement.
People naturally withdraw as their hearts and minds become unsettled when this happens.
This creates a spiral of division as some try to support the new path while others are not ready to accept it yet.
Erosion of Trust
Leaders who disrespect the past may be seen as insensitive or unappreciative, eroding trust between them and the congregation.
This is an unforced error.
There are ways to address past practices, methods, teams, and groups that are sensitive and can show appreciation for their service and loyalty to the church's mission.
But sometimes, one improper-cutting comment gets remembered, repeated, and stored as ammunition to shoot at the new leader for years.
We will stop there for now and pick it up in two weeks.
We will discuss how staff can help or hurt this process and what can be done in these situations.
Got a word of feedback, pushback, or way back? Just hit reply and let me know.