Ethics: Pastor Leaves for a More Prominent Church

Daniel,

I am aware of the details of Fuller's situation you mentioned. I intended to be a little simplistic about it, because finances were part of the issue and Fuller could have rightly stayed in Soham despite the opposition.

Nathan, now that would be an interesting approach to this situation. I imagine there are atleast a few pastors who have left one church for another where the congregation did not expect them to leave.

Perhaps starting the process of church discipline on the pastor would be in order? Hopefully there are other elders in the church.

Allen,

I'm not familiar with John Fawcett's decision process, but I do know a little bit about Andrew Fuller's situation. Fuller began pastoring the church in Soham as a Hyper-Calvinist but quickly became convinced that the Bible taught evangelical Calvinism. The church disagreed, and they were uncomfortable with his open invitations for sinners to believe the gospel. They also intentionally paid him so little that he had no choice but work other jobs, which prevented him from pursuing his desire to preach evangelistic sermons in the surrounding villages. Fuller did not want to leave the church at Soham, but the church's resistance to his proclamation of the gospel made it necessary. He did not leave for prominence but for the gospel.

It's also worth noting that after Fuller became famous around England, many influential people tried to convince him to move the headquarters of the Baptist Missionary Society from Kettering to London, but he refused.

I would listen to the Deacons, one must verify a calling through two or three witnesses, however, the Deacons might have a personal agenda for keeping the Pastor, so if I were he, I would go to neutral Christian of excellent repute to also ask them to pray for confirmation of my calling to the other church

Double Check so to speak

Alan

I've really been questioning the "bigger is better" method of grading churches. There is a danger in thinking that the pastor of a church of 2,000 people is more effective than a pastor with 50 people. The real question is what is behind the pastor's desire to take the larger church. I've been in big churches that have no body life but a great preacher. I've been in small churches with great body life with a mediocre but sincere preacher. I've grown more in the churches with better body life. Bigger isn't always better.

Allen, interesting bit of history. Hmm...is right.

mburatov, I get what you're saying, but the deacons and other leaders believed prior to knowing the pastor's plans to leave that the Holy Spirit was telling them their pastor should continue serving there. So, who is second guessing - the pastor or the deacons?

If the pastor is being led by the Holy Spirit, then he deserves my congratulations and prayers. If not, then he needs to be rebuked. As a member of the congregation, it is not by job to second-guess what the Holy Spirit is saying to the pastor. What is God saying to the church? Trust me. What should the pastor say? God has spoken and I must obey. Maybe I am naive, but it really seems that simple to me.

Brings to mind John Fawcett's invitation to pastor the Carter's Lane congregation in London after John Gill died, and in the end decided to stay at his congregation in Wainsgate instead. Although, it also brings to mind Andrew Fuller's decision to move from the little church in Soham to the larger more prominent church in Kettering. Hmm...