How did Ed rise to power? Why is the church the same size it was 30 years ago when the town has gone from 25,000 to over 90,000 in the same time?
When we first arrived, Sarah asked me if the shepherd and I were going to stay longer than five years. She was lamenting that senior pastors did not seem to stay long. At that point, I was only starting to get an understanding of Ed. My reply was an uncommitted thought of how long we stayed would depend on how the church takes care of us.
I am now beginning to understand so much more about this congregation. I have commented to Derrick several times that Ed was not so wrong about his ideas, just his methodology. For example, “once a decision is made everyone must stand behind it” is a solid principle of not undermining the others. It is infuriating for the shepherd to deal with a church member on an issue (as decided by the board), explain all rationale, and then communicate to the elders. A few days later, one of the elders will send an email questioning the decision. Now we have wasted hours of time and taught the people that the shepherd has no authority and does not represent the mindset of the elders. The elders will not stand behind him. We have seen this scenario play out at least half a dozen times.
Another of Ed’s ideas was to get rid of Tom. He thought Tom and Tom’s wife were gossipy and undermining of the eldership. Ed was right again. It would probably destroy what is left of the church for Tom to be fired or laid off, but Tom does not carry his weight. In fact, Tom and his wife can be a pretty heavy liability. The undermining Tom’s wife just did is a perfect example of where it would be more efficient to lay Tom off than dance the dance of being undermined.
Ed’s hatred of Steve was wrong. I can understand it though when realizing Ed’s son is married to Katies’s attacker’s sister. Steve’s presence would remind Ed of the embarrassment and shame so closely tied to the family.
I now understand why pastors have made this a ministry on the way to some place else. And I understand the dynamics much better. A picture is emerging.
I do think E had some pragmatic things right. He was/probably is a very, very bad guy.