A History Lesson: How NOT to run a Church

This nugget of wisdom also comes from Diarmaid MacCulloch's The Reformation but isn't one that very many people will know already.
In 1561 a Greek soldier of fortune named Heraklides found himself in the employ of an unpopular king in the small Eastern Orthodox Christian principality of Moldavia.  Heraklides had little love for the Orthodox tradition of his homeland and had rather become enamored with Protestant Christianity (his work as a soldier had taken him all over Europe to this point).  With the backing of the Hapsburgs and the Lithuanian nobility, Heraklides overthrew the king and took his place.  In and of itself, this wouldn't be much of a lesson for the Church, such coups we fairly common in Europe, but what happened next proves to be rather instructive.
Heraklides ordered Protestant worship in his court, appointed a Polish Reformer as his bishop, and generally annoyed the traditional Orthodox people he intended to rule.  To make matters much worse, Heraklides raided the Orthodox monasteries because of his zeal against sacred images (a huge matter of contention at the time in much of Europe struggling with the ideas of the Reformation) and took their golden crosses and the gilded frames of their icons (Orthodox two dimensional Christian paintings; Heraklides didn't destroy them, just took their valuable frames) which he proceeded to melt down and turn into coinage with, of course, his own image on it.  Forget for a moment the irony of having zeal against idolatry, but making coins with your own image on them, and just think about the choices that Heraklides was making.  As an outsider, he was imposing Reform ideas (whether right or wrong) on the local population of Christians without any regard for how they felt about it.  In other words, he was trying to lead a movement from the top; against the will of the people.
The story ends badly; his army deserted him and he was butchered without mercy, along with any who were suspected of being sympathizers with his cause.  The entire experiment of imposing a Reformation on an unwilling populace had lasted two years.  Similar problems were happening all over Europe (though not to this extent) as nobles and kings attempted to guide/direct/coerce their people toward their own chosen side in the Catholic/Protestant divide.  This certainly should enlighten us about the danger of governing against the will of the people, but it also teaches us about how church leadership, be it local or denominational, cannot simply force people to accept changes (good or bad, right or wrong) from the top down. 
For those of us who are church pastors, this lesson is helpful, though sadly easy to ignore when our own circumstances convince us otherwise.  We see a need, something that our heart tells us is what God wants, and we try to force our people to see it to.  The fault, typically, arises from not taking the time/effort to lay the groundwork properly or not allowing for the fact that change is difficult.  Rather than running around melting down our people's icons (a symbolic stand-in for anything they hold sacred), we should be asking ourselves WHY they feel that way about them?  Where does this passion come from, is it healthy or not?  Can it be utilized rather than attacked?
There are few easy answers for a pastor, elder, or lay leader in a church that is in need of reform or restoration.  The problems were not arrived at quickly or easily (in most cases) and they won't be solved that way either.  But do yourself a favor, don't aspire to be a Heraklides, it didn't end well for him.