I’m appealing to all our readers to be honest and forthright in the references we provide. What prompts this appeal? An unforgettable experience does. Some years ago our church called a new youth pastor. He applied for the position at our church, and he supplied several references from the church he was serving. After he arrived, everything went fine for several months; however, after he made a trip to scout out a summer mission project, our church’s financial secretary raised some questions about his spending. A CPA served on our church’s Finance Committee, and he performed an audit on the youth pastor’s financial reports. He discovered a number of anomalies, and the youth pastor was fired.
After all that transpired, our pastor called the person who gave the man a glowing reference. He explained our church’s experience. At that, the person exclaimed, “Oh, yes, he did the same thing here.” Our pastor asked, “If that is true, why did you give him such a positive recommendation?” To which the person replied, “Oh, that’s simple. We wanted to get rid of him.” On reflection that person’s actions were both dishonest and hurtful to a sister church. As Christians we have a duty to be honest in our statements and considerate of others. Surely, the Golden Rule applies here.
When I served at Southern Baptist Seminary, I participated in the orientation of the new students who were beginning their studies in the Billy Graham School of Missions and Evangelism. At every orientation I advised the students to do two things. First, I challenged them to maintain their daily devotions. It is easy to become spiritually dry while at seminary. Second, I advised them to make a good impression on their professors. During my time at Southern Seminary, I received a reference request from a church about once a week. So, I told the students: “Start making a good impression now because I won’t lie when a church calls me. If you want a positive reference, demonstrate admirable qualities.”
Now, it is easy to understand why we are reluctant to say negative things about someone; still, those seeking information deserve an honest assessment of the person. If you are hesitant about providing a reference, then just decline. I’ve found over the years that those requesting information are grateful for honesty. Once, I received a call from an IMB field leader. He was inquiring about a missionary applicant. I told him that the person under consideration was a really nice person, but he had not proven effective in his service. The field leader said, “Oh, thank you. We get so few new missionaries; we cannot afford to make a mistake.” What is true for mission agencies is true for churches as well. We cannot afford to make mistakes. We need accurate, trustworthy information.
To those who need to enlist people to provide a reference I make these suggestions. First, ask the person for permission to list their name and address. Second, ensure that the person knows you well enough to provide information. While at Southern Seminary, I received a call from a pastor search committee member. She informed me that a former student had listed me as a reference. That was news to me! I could not remember the student, so I asked her to call me back later that day. I looked up the student in our old student directories, and I checked with the registrar’s office. It turned out that the student took one class with me ten years before. When the lady called back, I answered candidly and said, “I can affirm that he studied here, but I can’t remember anything about him. I can’t help you.”
Now, over the years I’ve provided lots of positive references for former students and coworkers, and I was glad to do. I’ve also provided a few negative one. It grieved me to do so, but I believed the inquirers deserved the truth. What has been your experience? Have you and your church been “burned” by references that were less than candid?
This is a pblm of references is on both sides of the job search. First off, nobody wants to give a bad reference. So, if you cannot give a good reference, when asked simply say no and tell them why. Hopefully, that will lead to a helpful, though uncomfortable, conversation. But churches also need to assume those listed as references are going to be good references or they would not be listed. So, they should ask harder questions of references. AND they should also ask references for references. Talking with that second layer will be more helpful.
Of course. Should be unquestioned.
It’s no secret that the reason clergy adulterers, even child predators, move from church to church is that churches are loath to tell the truth. If there is a credible report of such, it should be disclosed to churches seeking to employ the guy. Legal advice may be needed but we can’t keep passing along people who ought to be put out of the ministry.
A pastor had more than one credible report of inappropriate contact with women not his wife – messages and pictures. When asked to see evidence, one recipient declined because they “didn’t want to destroy the man’s ministry.” Let it be destroyed, it is self-inflicted anyway, not reproduced in another church setting.
Primary references are eye candy. Secondary reference are gold.
I just had a similar situation with a church. We had to ask a music leader and later an associate pastor to resign borh due to inappropriate behavior. I told the ones calling for references, “I am just telling you what I know and you make the judgment call. Knowing what I know now, I would not hire……because mainly I have not seen any remorse or repentance.
There is an obvious, easy fix. After getting burned in the past, I’ve learned to do what the business world does–ask the references for references. Call the churches of the past where no references are listed. It works–it really works. You find out what you need to know.
Yes, taking the research deeper than what’s handed to you as a search committee is essential.
My dad was chair of the Foreign Mission Board’s personnel committee (candidate selection) a long time ago, he said they seldom paid any attention to what references said. They asked references to suggest other people who knew the candidate well and then called those folks. Secondary and tertiary references gave a much better picture than the selected references.
Dave, thanks for passing on what your dad said. This looks like a very wise approach. I’ve been getting some training in interviewing and I’ll remember this.
That is, secular job interviewing but it still sounds like a great principle.
“After getting burned in the past, I’ve learned to do what the business world does–ask the references for references.”
When I worked in corporate America, I was advised by our human resources group that when asked for a job reference to only confirm that the job candidate had worked for us – give them job title and years of employment but no other information. At the time, they were concerned about liability issues if you provided a bad reference and the person wasn’t hired as a result. I simply referred any inquiries back to the human resources department, since I was prevented from giving either a positive or negative reference. In the Kingdom of God, we need to know our church leaders – bad actors should never be passed through the system to be bad again someplace else.
1. Amen and amen! (https://sbcvoices.com/linkedin-lying/)
2. There’s an additional problem in this area. I find that the questions put to me as a reference are often not very helpful. If I, as a pastor, am a reference for another pastor, I can probably vouch for that man’s theology, standing among his peers, and service to the denomination. I might also be able to vouch for his preaching. It is, however, very unlikely that I can give you an evaluation of his administrative skills at his church or his skills in pastoral ministry. I do not attend his church. I do not interact with him in that way. It is likely that anything that I know about these aspects of his ministry comes from his one-sided accounts. I’d say that it is often the case that 50% of the questions I receive from a search committee address areas of a man’s ministry for which I am ill-equipped to give specific praise, even when praise is due.
When I get a reference request from a search committee about a potential pastor, I tell them to waterboard the guy and see what comes out. I have been hoping for years to get a reference request for Bart Barber and Dave Miller for years. Thus far I haven’t gotten one. Maybe someday.
“When I get a reference request from a search committee about a potential pastor, I tell them to waterboard the guy and see what comes out. ”
Good counsel, Brother Scott. I’ve sat under pastors who weren’t tortured sufficiently before they were hired.
When I was a supervisor/manager in the secular world, HR always told us we could not give a bad reference about someone because we would be sued for defamation. Even if the instances were well documented and proven, we were not allowed to mention or suggest any wrongdoing. The most we were allowed say was “I can verify this person worked for us from this date to this date.” We could not give any further report as to their work. I once had an employee back their truck up to our warehouse and steal thousands of dollars worth of equipment, all caught on video. He was arrested, confessed and plea bargained out. A year later, I get a phone call asking for a reference. All I could say was “I can verify he worked for us from this date to this date.” That phone call made me physically ill!
My mother was a human resources secretary for years who handled the “reference” question for a hospital. Only thing she could legally do was verify dates of employment and state whether the person was eligible for rehire.
Churches and ministerial references are most likely not held to the same legal standard as they are “personal” references, but ultimately references are a selection of the candidates cheerleading squad.
That actually is not the legal standard, but the advice of the HR department. Their job is not to be sure you win a lawsuit, but to give such guarded direction that you never get sued at all. The truth is an absolute defense in all matters before the court. The question is one of proof, and if you never say anything bad, you never have to prove anything. It’s a cowardly way of doing business, but a risk-free one, if you discount the risk of violating 9th Commandment.
I agree with William’s comment above. We absolutely must disclose moral failures. I remember a prominent pastor in years past who committed adultery at three consecutive churches. I would contend that a pattern of moral failure disqualifies a person from ministry. What about one who fails one time? Does that disqualify him forever? I would say that after a period of counseling and discipline such a person could return to ministry; however, the church should know his background. That way the church could put in place safeguards and accountability. I would make an exception for preying on a child. That should disqualify one forever.
Churches probably are held to the same legal standard.
However, what I do is that if I can’t give a positive eecommendation for a candidate, I politely decline to provide a reference. The person calling should be able to get the message.
Great post.
Good catch on the legal issues.
Most of the time, people will list those who will give them a positive reference. If you really want info, you may have to dig a bit and not simply rely on what is provided by the applicant.
Look for gaps in employment, in accurate dates, ask more questions of the applicant.
As an executive, I never outsource reference checking to other employees or HR. I do them myself. This applies to both giving and soliciting references. There is as much to learn from the tone of the reference as there is from the words chosen.
Should we expect honesty from church job references? Paul thought so:
“What I have written will show you the sort of character men of God’s household ought to have. It is, remember, the Church of the living God, the pillar and the foundation of the truth.” (1 Timothy 3:14-15 Phillips)
This goes for the character of both the job candidate and those providing a reference for him. I suspect that Paul was referring to not only Gospel Truth, but truths emanating from it for all believers.