An irreverent look at our pastor search process, Part 1

I had a guy in one of my churches who was a sausage maker and I made a pastoral visit to him while he was hard at work. There they sat, pans and pans of blood, guts, and porcine body parts I had never seen and didn't recognize. I don't recall eating his sausage. I'll have the sausage in the nice, tidy package, thank you.

Our SBC pastor/staff search process is like making sausage. It's often ugly, some would say inherently ugly. While I could live without eating my member's sausage, most pastors and staff cannot stay in the pastoral ministry without participating in a pastor search process that involves a group of people from a church looking for a pastor.

I will admit that my experience is more limited here than many of my colleagues. I served only three churches as pastor and those for longer than normal tenure, an average of about ten years each. Nonetheless, I offer an irreverent look at our process with the understanding that some of my brethren may supplement or correct my conclusions and recommendations.

Hey Einstein, you have to deal with the process we have, not the one you wish we had.

Most of the roughly 47,000 SBC churches are single staff with attendance averaging around 100 in worship each Lord's Day. This means that most who pastor or aspire to pastor these churches will spend their career in average-sized, single staff churches, ones where they relate personally to every member. Those churches will likely have traditions and processes that preceded the pastor and that will succeed him as well and the pastor search system that they use is the most important of these.

Seems that many of my colleagues think that a church establishing a committee to interview pastor candidates and bring one to the church for a vote is not just unwieldy and messy but also unbiblical.
I'll agree with two-thirds of that but would argue that there is no "biblical" search process specified in Scripture.

I met with a search committee once and was informed that they had decided to require a 90% affirmative vote on a pastor candidate. Then one guy on the committee said that they decided to add one additional percent for God the Father, one for God the Son, and one for God the Holy Spirit, making a total of 93% required to call a pastor. I appreciated the affirmation of the Trinity but thought this line of reasoning was bizarre and wondered what other odd stuff I would find. If I had gone for a vote at the church, three or four votes could have deep-sixed my chances and undone all the committee's work.

It doesn't matter if you think churches have ecclesiology all wrong. It doesn't matter if you think the process is unbiblical. You could approach every search committee by informing them that they are unbiblical and see how far that gets you. You might also be prepared to never land a pastor position and to make plans to do your preaching, gratis, on any street corner to random pedestrians.

I feel your pain about the process but suggest that you spend all the time you wish deploring it but then spend double, triple the time acquiring the knowledge and skills to help you navigate the process we have. The former will profit you little; the latter will prove invaluable.

If you're desperate, you're toast.

You say you have bills, student loans, car payments, and a family and desperately need to land a church staff position? Why not just announce to a church committee that you've got to get some paychecks coming, and soon, so could they step on it and take your word for it that you would be a super pastor?

Money screws up everything in church life but probably does more harm to pastors or prospective pastors who have put themselves in a position of having to move, having to get a church, having to get on someone's payroll. Desperate people think they hear God's voice where there is silence and make terrible decisions. When you are desperate in this way, it is understandable that you drop kick reason, prayer, wisdom and discernment into the stratosphere and hunger and thirst after anything that will remedy your present situation.

What if you had a life skill, trade, or vocation that gave you the option of having some income independent of church income? Your congregation can fire you any time they wish. Most will be gracious, patient, kind, and considerate of your financial needs and that of your family but some will sadistically fire you regardless of the consequences to you or your family. It is a very uncomfortable position in which to be where your income as a pastor is all that stands between you and abject poverty.

You aren't helpless. There are more alternative income streams available to ministers now than ever. Some write, some easily find substitute teaching jobs, some have online businesses, some take second jobs. If you are in a desperate situation, have a plan that involves working for a living until the Lord opens the right doors.

Of course, some of the brethren have a plan that consists entirely of asking other people to give them money and some are quite successful at this. I'd bet buckets of fried chicken that any SBC minister who has been in vocational ministry for any length of time could name several colleagues who are known to fish for money from family and friends. I suggest that it is more honorable to earn your own way and not beg. Just because you are ordained it doesn't mean that others are obligated to pay your bills. Put the financial fishing tackle away and let God handle it. You go to work.

You're not Miss America, so don't enter any beauty contests

It's not surprising that some of the thousands of SBC churches have a search process that involves a parade of preachers and the church picking the one they like the best. I don't run into this so much these days as I did earlier but if you find that a church follows such a practice, be kind but say, "No, thanks." You might win the contest but lose in the long run.

You don't have the 'right stuff' so don't act like a fighter ace.

The church that has contacted you has known problems. They've disclosed some of them and you've researched it enough to recognize that they have some hisory of being hard on a pastor and some difficult people; however, you, Red Baron, think that unlike previous pastors, you have the right stuff to handle all that and lead the church to glorious harmony and new heights. You think you are bulletproof. You, alone among the brethren, have just the right combination of irresistible personal charisma, rare pastoral skills, and overwhelming pulpit presence to be highly successful in this church.

Think again, my ministerial megalomaniacal friend. You are more likely to crash and burn. God will be with you but problem churches have ruined many a minister who ignored the signs, signals, and warnings.

Sure, some pastor is God's man for such a task but think long and hard, pray longer and harder, before you drag your wife and kids into such a situation. The best person for one problem church I knew about was a semi-retired, crusty, curmudgeonly pastor who had grown kids and a wife that didn't get too involved in church business. He carried around a letter of resignation in his pocket and was known to pull it out and wave it around when presented with some church nonsense. Come to think of it, I fit the profile these days - bah, humbug.

Keep pulpit committees out of your worship service.

The crack cocaine of the Southern Baptist ministry is having another church who finds you desirable, whose job is to convince you how great a pastor you would be in their church, what a good fit you would be, how riveting and compelling your sermons are...and how much more money you would make. That siren song is often represented by the search committee who shows up in your church and sits about two-thirds of the way back.

There they sit.You spot them. Synapses fire. Dopamine flows. You're high, brother.

It is probably better for all of those involved if the old committee visit system was retired. Maybe you could put up a sign, "No soliciting" or "Pastor Search Committees Go Away," on your sanctuary front door. Maybe not. Even if you are a pastor and are open to a church change, you can request churches not just show up unless you are very serious and pretty far along. While it is important to see and hear a prospective pastor in the environment of his normal Sunday worship service, I hear you can put your sermons online these days for anyone to listen, huh? It's simple to put video online and make that accessible as well.

If you have a few committees show up at your place your church thinks you are unhappy, they conclude that you have already checked out or are done with them. Maybe you are but you don't have to disrespect the only church God has given you to pastor. It's a delicate matter but some degree of openness with church leaders about a possible change is probably appropriate in most situations.

I'm a Georgia native and was serving in South Carolina a few years back. I had a wonderful, leather-lunged church member who was attuned to committees showing up to hear me preach. Once a committee, one that eventually called me, was present. True to form, they sat about two-thirds of the way back. Sure, everyone knew who they were and I had informed a few church leaders that they would be present, just not Deacon Bombast.

After the service, when about half of the congregation was still milling around the sanctuary he hollered, "Preacher! They are from Georgia, huh?"

I had to just laugh. It was just his personality. "Yeah, Claude. Georgia."

I guess he could have said, "Go Dawgs!" but that would have stirred up the Clemson and Carolina people.

There's no reason today for pulpit committees to just show up and probably no compelling reason for a formal committee visit to your worship service. Maybe you could provide all the committee needs and not go through this...unless you need to feed your addiction.

Your church search committee and Calvinist candidates

So, your church is without a pastor and you have been elected to the pastor search committee. In addition to the usual questions about salvation experience, theology, family, and other things, should you be specific and pointed in questioning candidates about Calvinistic beliefs and practices?

In today's SBC climate you would be irresponsible not to.

A couple of years ago there was some reaction to a document circulating about how to smoke out a calvinistic pastor. Tom Ascol blogged about it speaking of that particular set of documents as "wickedness and ignorance."

Seems the attitude has changed a bit towards such things.

 A panel of SBC luminaries (Frank Page, Herschel York, Steve Lemke, and David Dockery) that included both Calvinists and non-Calvinists met last week, Baptist Press reported on it, and part of the panel discussion included advice to search committees.

Lemke said that committees should ask candidates "Are they committed to missions and evangelism," and, "Do they talk more about Calvin than about Jesus?"

Good advice, although some candidates might be offended by the latter question.

While both sides declare fidelity to the concept of honesty and openness in the search process, our search process sometimes doesn't foster a climate where both the church and the candidate is completely forthcoming.

I've never been on a pastor search committee and doubt I will ever be on one. I have been in the position of offering advice and would be more pointed today about advising such a group to be specific and clear about Calvinism.

The best indicator of a prospective pastor's future behavior is his past practices. It is sometimes difficult to achieve but a committee has to find a good way to obtain a reliable third party estimation of the pastor's behavior in his present church.

An associational missionary is sometimes a good source for this but not always. The old search process usually included attending the pastor's present church and hearing him preach but I understand that many pastors today would rather not have a committee show up at their present church.

Our pastor search system has always been messy. In today's denominational atmosphere committees must be better informed and prepared on the issue of Calvinism in the same way that it was necessary for them to be informed about charismatic matters forty years ago or about theological liberalism thirty years ago.

They cannot afford not to be prepared. 

Why I'm a bit wary of Calvinists

I'm a hacker and a plodder and am no different than the other fifty thousand or so SBC pastors but I do have a thirty year history with Calvinism and Calvinists and, unsurprisingly, have an opinion about it and them. To be candid, while I’m mostly ambivalent about Calvinism, I'm decidedly wary of Calvinists. Here’s why:

1. Calvinists can be, well, rather arrogant. No, they don’t have a monopoly on such but my observation is that they have acquired more of it than one would expect from their numbers. And since they have it, they are happy to share it with the rest of us - the unwashed, sub-calvinist masses.

I sometimes read calvinists on the blogs and get a nostalgic reminder of seminary hallway arguments, inevitable classroom debates, eager young theologs brimming with certainty, and adorable young calvinist polemicists waging scorched earth doctrinal campaigns. No thanks.

I’m all for defending a doctrinal position but perhaps there are Calvinists who will admit that there are other followers of Christ who are scholarly, biblical, and non-calvinist. Is it a lonely search for the Calvinists who has a modicum of humility mixed with the acknowledgement that there are yet some mysteries to our faith?

Maybe all of those kind of Calvinists just stay off of the blogs and discussion forums.

2. I’ve been around too many churches that have been wrecked by Calvinists.

No, Calvinists don't have a lock on wrecking churches and I certainly know many more non-calvinist pastors who have wrecked churches. The latter just don't hurl themselves headlong into the task out of their doctrinal positions.

What is one to say when a Calvinist gains a pulpit and immediately declares that there is heresy in the church that must be rooted out, the heresy being that the church is not sufficiently Calvinist?

What is one to say when sermons begin with “God doesn’t love everyone” or “God may choose this child for heaven and this child is not chosen and is bound for hell”? I recognize that these statements can be nuanced, and we all like to be provocative at times, but is it surprising that a Calvinist pastor can be said to divide the church over such teaching?

What is one to say when the Calvinist pastor aggressively tries to implement an elder system of church governance, and it appears to be less about biblical church polity than about the pastor installing his allies in positions of power and authority to the exclusion of all others?

3. Calvinists have been known to be less than forthcoming with search committees.

Tom Ascol, an erudite and reasonable man, blogged last year about some documents that were being distributed in Tennessee among SBC churches. Their thrust was described as ‘how to smoke out a Calvinistic pastor in your church.’

I can see where this stuff comes from.

My evidence is anecdotal and limited but in my experience Calvinist pastors have minimized their Calvinist beliefs with search committees in order to gain a pulpit. I hate to say it but this is precisely the technique some liberal pastors have employed with church committees - obfuscate, finesse, dart and weave.

No, I'm not saying what most calvinists say to a committee, but this is what some committee members have relayed to me.

I would absolutely advise any church to be thorough enough in their search process to determine a prospective pastor’s beliefs on Calvinism. I know that Calvinists generally eschew the term ‘calvinist’ in favor of other labels and descriptors. Laypeople must be savvy enough to understand the vocabulary.

If my experience with Calvinists did not include their negative impact on churches I would label this article, “Why I am annoyed with Calvinists” rather than “Why I am wary of Calvinists.” It is this last point that moves the conversation from annoying to wariness. I can do annoying pretty good myself.

If calvinism is appealing to young SBCers, a fact I do not dispute, it is repulsive in many expressions to not a small number of SBCers. Why is it that some circulate 'calvinist smoke-out guides' or why have some churches cut funding to calvinist SBC institutions? Are those who so act evil, misguided, or alarmist? Perhaps there is something concrete and important behind these acts.

Perhaps my experience is atypical and an aberration. I'd be pleased to know that is the case. If not, I'll look askance at Calvinists but still rejoice when Christ is preached and Christ is preached by every Calvinist I know.

IMB Search Committee: Take your time but get it right.

What’s up with the International Mission Board trustees and their search committee for the new leader?

Not much that I can see. Periodically, the committee tells we SBC commoners that they’re still looking but when they get the job done they will “have full confidence that we’re presenting God’s man.” The search committee chairman said that back in September.

I grant that the committee is genuinely interested in finding and doing the will of God in this matter; however, the ‘God’s Man’ talk is sorely overused and virtually meaningless. Would any search committee present a candidate for any position and say that he is not ‘God’s man’? Uh, no.

Nonetheless, this is one job, one position that we need to get right. God forbid that we have to go through a couple of ‘God’s men’ like the last two NAMB CEOs.

Plodder eschews inside information and cannot add any insight to what is going on. Actually, I am so much an outsider that I haven’t the foggiest idea what the problem is but most of us could guess. Perhaps the committee is divided. Perhaps they are courting a consensus candidate who can’t make up his mind. I don’t know.

I will say that the IMB absolutely must not end up with a leader who is lacking in a couple of key areas:

• He must have a record of stellar support of the work of the IMB, the Cooperative Program, and the Lottie Moon offering. Whatever NAMb has done, is doing here, I don’t think you can make even a weak case for an IMB leader who has not been a strong believer in the work of the IMB. But should the search committee be mezmerized, and no group is more susceptible to such than a Southern Baptist search committee, by one who has no record of support but whom they think is irresistible because of perceived gifts and abilities, we will be in for some acrimony.

• He much have solid missiological knowledge and overseas experience. I cannot imagine the leader of over 5,000 missions personnel not having some life experience overseas with another language and culture.

There are plenty of people who meet these two requirements.

Gerald Harris, editor of our pretty good state paper, The Christian Index, editorializes about the search and makes some good points. Harris points out that since Jerry Rankin announced his retirement the trustees have had a solid SIXTEEN months on this task.

This search committee has been working longer than any I can recall in national Southern Baptist life. I hope the length of time is rewarded by the right person being chosen. We absolutely cannot afford to go through turmoil on this one.

SBC leaders embarrassed about pay and other random plods

Friday’s random plods:

Atlanta has been determined to be the crankiest city in the nation. While my address is not Atlanta, I am in its greater exurbia, and, I’m happy to report I have done my part to help achieve that distinction. Bah humbug!

Scenes of vein-popping outrage ensued when citizens of the obscure town of Bell, CA found out that its manager was being paid over $800k, police chief about half-a-million, and part time councilmen $100k annually. Rightly so. What would happen if Baptist Press published the total compensation package of all SBC entity heads (and don’t give me a ‘salary’ figure, most clergy are onto that game)? Apoplexy? Raised eyebrows? Ho hum? Let’s do it and see. It’s our money.

Plodder is happy to report that he is more like the apostle Paul in his advanced middle age. I can’t remember exactly whom I have baptized.

A perpetual complaint among my clergy brethren is the unwieldy, ugly, and sometimes dysfunctional system we have for churches calling pastors. The latest blog on such suggests that churches find pastors from within the staff. Great…for the fraction of churches large enough to even consider doing this. Irrelevant to the vast majority of SBC churches. We might try rejoicing that the present system, praised by almost no one, actually works in most cases.

Had a brief conversation with another pastor on how weddings were such minefields these days. I suppose the numerous ‘retchality’ shows (think…Bridezilla et al) give the lovely bride and stupefied grooms far too many ideas.

I have not preached for the past two Sundays because of the death and funeral of my mother, longest such stretch in my pastoral career. The church seems to be surviving.