A recent comment about a well known pastor got me thinking about what is wrong with many of the churches we talk about on this blog. The most common thread I found is insecurity. Insecure pastors do whatever they can to build themselves up, while simultaneously tearing others down. So I did some research. What I came up with is this list:
Ten Signs of an Insecure Pastor.
10. Micro-Managing: If a pastor must know what's going on, in every area of ministry, at all times, they are insecure. Having to know what each person and ministry under them is doing and always trying to direct or lead each and every aspect is a practice to ensure that no one out shines them or gets credit for what they have done. This keeps the pastor as number one.
9. Improper Placement: An insecure pastor usually places people in areas that they are not good at or not very interested in so they won't do it too well. This includes giving people positions they have no business being in so they won't ask questions or leave the church all together. This keeps people looking to the pastor for all of their leadership needs and makes them the focus of the ministry, with all the power. That way church members rely on the pastor for direction rather then God.
8. Spys and Plants: When someone has a gift or calling and other people are drawn to it, an insecure pastor will often plant a person to come around and sniff it out. They don't want others gifts or calling to take the attention off of them, so they have to watch people with a spy to tell them what they are up to and to ensure that they stay in their place.
7. Always at Church: Secure pastor invests in family time and allow freedom to their church members to enjoy their lives and pursue other outside interests. An insecure pastor never leaves the church. They love to call meetings, counsel everyone and spend most of their free time within the four walls. They require their workers to do the same, often burning people out and demeaning them for poor performance.
6. Wrongful Dismissals: An insecure pastor will ask people to step down from ministry for no apparent reason. They will stop people from doing a good job or who get too much attention because they fear that people will somehow lose loyalty to them if members see someone else as "the next in line." These pastors will often shift people around so as not to allow any one person to be too successful in one area of church ministry.
5. Public Disclosure of Private Facts: An insecure pastor will often bring up members private issues from the pulpit. They will counsel with people, then preach about it the following Sunday. Sometimes they will even call people up to the front and embarrass them by dealing with personal sins before the whole church, making them look bad and keeping them in their place.
4. Yes Men: An insecure pastor has all sorts of people running around them fixing their clothes, giving them water, even wiping sweat from their foreheads. These pastors won't open their own doors, carry their own bible, or drive themselves around in their own cars. They require others to prove how much they love them before they acknowledge their servanthood, and by then it's too late for any independent thinkers to be apart of the team.
3. No Other Ministry: When a pastor doesn't believe in or support outside ministry, they are insecure. This is why they never support anyone that does anything outside of their church. They don't create other ministries outside of their control because they fear losing members to them. They keep everything in house and tear down anyone who tries to leave. And when someone does leave, they make them feel like they are disobedient and going to hell because of it.
2. Artificial/Phony: An insecure pastor usually puts on a mask to seem spiritual and deep. They refuse to be or seem common with the everyday people because they strive to be worshiped, adored, and even feared by the membership. They depend on their reputation for perfection to create an invisible barrier between them and their members. They have to make others feel less so they will feel important. Their love and respect is artificial.
1. Too Trendy: The number one sign of an insecure pastor is that they are always worried about what people think of them. They are constantly trying to look and act cool, compare crowd and salvation numbers with other churches, and avoid as much controversy as possible so as to not offend or make people feel uncomfortable. Their ministry is always politically correct and usually follows trends and the hot flavors of the month. They foster an environment of hip and cool, rather than real and life changing.
The bottom line is that we must all seek God's wisdom before submitting to any pastor or church. Be careful that you never follow an insecure pastor. It will only lead to bondage and spiritual entrapment. We must all make sure we are on board with genuine people. Leaders that cannot admit mistakes or appear as though they never mess up will almost always take us down a path of hurt and deception. And be sure you are not leading with any of these characteristics yourself. Let go of the control and rest in what God has already planned for us. There is no perfect human and a secure person has the ability to say "I was wrong"!
These skills seem to be ones that are acquired over years of screwing over your fellow men and women of God. What happens when the lead pastor at the church hasn’t developed these skills because his parents handed him a church? Just asking…
Ummmm…you have just described a large percentage of America’s political, military religious, and corporate leadership.
Nothing new really, the Saul principle in action.
Excellent post Reformer! You described our former pastor to a T!
I’ve been doing a survey of Blble schools to see what courses they offer to prepare people for active ministry. I seem to recall these 10 items being listed in the syllabus of a course at a Bible school in Portland. I think the course title was, “Preparing for MFI Leadership” but, of course, I might be mistaken.
Didn’t know where to post this question, but any thoughts on the title of the new series CBC is doing? It’s called “Plus Factor”… http://www.citybiblechurch.org. I have NO idea what it could possibly be about, especially considering they’re gearing up for the Faith Harvest season. I tried watching the video, but the sound didn’t work. Any insight?
Yeah, there’s this great blog that discusses City Bible Church and their teachings. I believe its called City Business Church or something like that. You can google just about anything CBC related and they will come up.
Not sure if they have covered that series yet…but they are all the same.
They are all the same…especially come Faith Harvest time.
Ha!
I know that.
I guess it is kind of redundant of them, and me to mention it.
So I’m checking out another blog about crazy Christians, and there’s a post about last year’s “Prosperity with a Purpose” at Wendell’s church. I checked out the site, and sure enough, all the usual suspects are there: the San Diego church, Ken Wilde’s church. Not one peep about City Bible (Frank must have felt dissed).
But also, I notice it was hosted by Doctor Wendell Smith. Wow. When did he get that title? I’ve always appreciated Wendell’s gifting, and I have been sad to hear of his physical struggles. But I wonder why he felt it necessary to get a title?
It’s an honorary degree, he received from some small bible college up near Seattle a couple years ago. It annoys me too. But he’s hardly the only “doctor” to do this.
What’s the link to that other blog. I’d love to check it out myself.
Well, here’s the addy to the other blog. They do keep track of the weirdos. But they are also hyper-conservative, and I just have to remind myself not to get irritated. I rarely post since I got into an argument with the blog owner about the role of women in the church. Sigh.
[Comment ID #38527 Will Be Quoted Here]
I heard that Wendell was going by Biship Wendell Smith. alrighty then.
It’d be interesting to see how he came by THAT title. Of course, now that “Bishop” is getting negative press (i.d. Bishop Eddie Long) maybe he’ll drop that one.
Like an ex-employee I was literally escorted to the exit door at CBC after asking “difficult” questions at CBC.
I guess they were difficult….for them.
I wore out my welcome there.
……………………………..
And now I am free.
Geez, Joe. That’s awful. What questions did you ask?
anna: What is the role of women in the church? In a christian marriage?
[Comment ID #38528 Will Be Quoted Here]
That’s pretty embarrassing that he is using that title. I have never, ever heard of someone who has an honorary Doctorate ever use “Dr.” before their name.
I can imagine the conversation if he runs into someone else with a real one:
“So what did you get your Doctorate in?”
“Oh, I’m a Chemical Engineer. What did you do yours in?”
“Well, uh, it’s actually an honorary one from a small bible school up near Seattle, with a 100% acceptance rate… they like me.”
“Wait, what?”
Ha!
You askin’ for another book, Former?
a book? Sure, I have been known to leave a few book long posts
But if you can give the short version we can start there?
Book? No, if a book, a Tweet Version Book. Gosh, do you guys get paid by the word when you blog? LOL
I did not get the awesome experience of going to City Bible College like most of you so instead I write all of my dissertations here
I had mentioned I got into a disagreement about a woman’s role in the church. It all started with that verse in I Cor. 14 about women being silent in church. After much study, I came to the conclusion that the passage was about church decorum, not women’s role in the church. The prophets were told to be silent if they were disruptive, and so were the women.
That said, I get the sense that Paul did not think women should be the main leader for a church, but pretty much anything else is open to them: prophet, deacon, teacher of other women, and possibly even men if it’s just giving information and close discipling and mentoring is not involved (duh).
The person with whom I was having the conversation disagreed with me and had a much narrower view of women’s roles in the church. We just discontinued the conversation with neither of us feeling like we had affected the other.
As for a woman’s role in marriage: well, there are several factors. What exactly are you looking for?
Ok, Ok, it became another book:
1 Corinthians 14:33-36 (Young’s Literal Translation) 34Your women in the assemblies let them be silent, for it hath not been permitted to them to speak, but to be subject, as also the law saith; 35and if they wish to learn anything, at home their own husbands let them question, for it is a shame to women to speak in an assembly.
The funny thing is that Paul spent his whole life teaching freedom from the law. It is absolutely crazy to me how this verse gets interpreted over and over.
The culture was that women “ought” to be silent: The Greek biographer, Plutarch, wrote that the voice of modest women ought to be kept from the public, and that they should feel as much shame over being heard as over being stripped (Fritz Reinecker, Linguistic Key To The Greek New Testament, 438). Also, throughout the pagan world, women were (quite wrongly) generally regarded as inferior to men (Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology, 774). It is a fact that women were not allowed to speak at all in the gatherings of the secular Greek city-state ekklesia (Piper and Gruden, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 153).
The verse is allowing married women who in their culture was shameful to speak in assemblies to have the right to be silent. NOT demanding women to be silent.
I think this verse can be applied directly today. Being a Christian in Saudi Arabia Paul might say:
Your women in the assemblies let them (Where a burqua), for it hath not been permitted to them to (Not where the burqua) , but to be subject, as also the (secular) law saith; 35and if they wish to (bare skin), at home their own husbands let them (be naked), for it is a shame to women to (bare skin) in an assembly.
See he is giving even the Christian women the freedom to honor their husbands with the culture they live in. This is not a demand on all women (he is only addressing married women) its saying that you should not demand your women to speak when it can be disrespectful to do so.
Women in scripture are expressly stated as possessing the title of prophetess: Old covenant
Miriam Exodus 15:20-21
Deborah Judges 4:4,
Huldah Kings 22:14,
Noadia Nehemiah 6:14
and obviously Isaiah’s wife Isaiah 8:3
Rachel (Gen. 30:24),
Hannah (1 Sam. 2:1-10)
Gospels:
Anna, Luke 2:36
Elisabeth Luke 1:41-45
Mary, the mother of Jesus Luke 1:46-55
Post Christ: Philip’s daughters Acts 21:8-9 four daughters who prophesied.
Evangelists: Philippians 4:2: Paul refers to two women, Euodia and Syntyche, as coworkers who were active evangelicals, spreading the gospel.
Romans 16:3: Paul refers to Priscilla as another of his “fellow workers in Christ Jesus” Priscilla and Aquila (married) where Pastor’s of a Church.
Deacon/Pastor: Romans 16:1: Paul refers to Phoebe as a minister (diakonos) of the church at Cenchrea. Some translations say deaconess
Apostle: Romans 16:7: Paul refers to a male apostle, Andronicus, and a female apostle, Junia, as “outstanding among the apostles”
So I would argue that Paul believed women could hold ANY position in the church. Including and not limited to Apostle (Leader of Churches). Paul also had no problem with women being over men in the church. Neither did anyone else of the day.
Where = wear … shees
Hi Former. Strong arguments can be made on either side, and the subject does not appear to be a major NT theology. I wouldn’t leave a church over it. As long as women are treated with respect, I’m good.
That said, being told they can’t speak or pray in public, and must obey their husbands like a good dog is not respect. It’s sharia law.
You can’t spell, and I change between plural and singular in the middle of a sentence. The school marm will be all over us. Oh, wait. I AM the school marm.
anna: I think it is a major NT theology, Paul addresses equality of men (and women) over and over. Jesus addressed that being a leader is a servant in the washing of feet.
I often address the women issue 1st because its a soft bias that allows for a foundation of spiritual hierarchy that Christ destroyed and God never intended. The slippery slope leads to Pastor’s who “rule over you” and think they know more about your life then you do.
I think Paul makes a strong case for all Christians living shoulder to shoulder and Christ as the leader of the church. It’s leaders are not CEO’s or Generals like in the world that yield power but are servants who gain favor with their disciples through example and service. Husbands and wives are equal and share a life under the submission of Christ and not each other.
If a church doesn’t have this right, I am not going to serve or attend.
Hi Former. You have a point. I especially like your insight about the role of pastors and leaders.
It is a difficult thing to balance the concepts of different but equal, subject but not lesser, servant while heir. It is uniquely Christian, and foreign to human nature.
I do not have a problem with roles assigned by gender if it’s done by the Lord. I know that He does not consider women in any way inferior to men. Indeed, He improved on the model when He created Eve (hehehe). (Just kidding.)
So when Paul tells wives to submit to their husbands, I have to see that as a directive from the Lord for a reason. If that is done in the context of a Christian marriage, with both parties in submission to Christ, it is a lovely picture of Christ and His church — a living example of love and cooperation.
If the concept is not carried out in the context of a true Christian marriage, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, it can be a horrendous thing. But we cannot throw out the directive because it has been corrupted by human sin.
Just like we don’t throw out all the pastors because some of them lord it over their flocks, and some of the sheep kiss their back-sides. No. We work to bring the relationship back to the biblical standard and under the obedience of Christ.
anna: Brilliant and well said. I would just add that Paul again preaching against the extremes as in 1 Corinth
1 Timothy 2:11-15 (American Standard Version) 11 Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection. 12 But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression: 15 but she shall be saved through her child-bearing, if they continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety.
Timothy is dealing with a culture that has a cult of women who dominate over men. These women are letting this dominatrix doctrines into the church. He is not saying women submit to your husbands in authority this is a bad translation he is saying to not take dominion over a man. He obviously allows women to teach see: Euodia and Syntyche who traveled and taught with Paul and Priscilla, Phoebe, Junia who Paul praises.
This verse is the opposite verse as Corinth (men subjecting women) in 1st Tim he is preaching that women should not dominate over men. I believe my studying of the greek and original texts supports both of these arguments … Also this understanding is not contradicting to the bible and the rest of Paul’s teaching on marriage unlike the “KJB NIV” translation that suggests a considerable contradiction in passage and Paul’s actions.
I just wanted to be the best husband God had for me, so in looking this up I wanted to know open minded what God would say about these things. This is the place the Holy Spirit took me and this is my current belief on these scriptures.
Also in 1st Corinth there is considerable talk that it was never in the original text but if Paul did write it he had it as a footnote in the margin and not in the order it was inserted into text.
Either way I do not think it contradicted with the translation and interpretation I argued for.
@Former: FYI, the verb “teach” in the I Tim. passage is a word used for discipling, ie. close mentoring. I think we would all agree that it’s a bad idea for anybody to be in a prolonged relationship with a person of the opposite gender.
So if a woman is “teaching” in our modern sense of the word, there is no restriction on that.
Good for you for trying to be the best husband! My hubby and i just celebrated our 31st.
Oh, also that word “quietness” in I Tim. has nothing to do with talking. It’s a state of spirit — calm, quiet, at rest. Not gender specific, and very compelling.
Thank you on the Teaching/Disciple thing. That puts the missing piece I had in context. It is even clearer now.
Yes of course a women should not Disciple a man and I would go further and say that a Man should not Disciple a woman he is not married to. This would create un-healthy relationships.
[Comment ID #38620 Will Be Quoted Here]
I agree. This is something CBC does well – keeping it strictly women counseling women and men counseling men. If a man does need to counsel a woman, the door is left open. If the conversation is particularly touchy or tricky, a woman is called in.